Starbucks & guns
The other day, Starbucks CEO, Howard Schultz, asked his customers to refrain from bringing their guns into his shops, and of course, a furor immediately started. I respect Mr Schultz’ property rights and admit that it’s his prerogative whether he wants to let armed people into his places of business or not. The same way I respect Denny’s gun ban – I just don’t go to Denny’s anymore. But, you know that us pro-gun people share some of the blame for Schultz’ decision. While it was fine to support their open-carry policy before this week, some pro-gun people would use Starbucks as a rally point for our cause, and I’m sure that wasn’t especially good for business. And I could hardly keep up with whether I was supposed to support or boycott Starbucks on a given day because conservatives attacked Schultz when he said he supported gay marriage recently.
I’m not a big fan of open carry, anyway – yeah, I know it’s your constitutional right to carry your gun outside your pants for the world to see, but it’s also my right to feel uncomfortable around someone who hasn’t bothered to go through the background checks for a concealed weapons permit. And mostly, anymore, people who open carry are just trying to make a political statement, and it has nothing to do with personal protection.
To his credit, Mr Schultz just asked customers to stop, so he could remove his business from the center of the controversy. I respect that. I mean, I don’t know how much my respect will impact his decisions or his business since the nearest Starbucks is 60 miles from my house, and I have, you know, a coffeepot in my kitchen. But, I don’t fault him for the decision at all.
The extremes of both sides of the gun discussion can be equally assholish. If you have a CCW permit, no one is going to know whether you have a gun or not – you know, if your intention is really protection.
Category: Guns
I stay away from Starbucks because I refuse to pay 10 bucks for a cup of cappucini delatti frappi whatevers, not because of anything to do with guns…
It shouldn’t surprise me that you are the voice of reason. Thank you for posting this and for expressing your point of view. Not that it will affect anything but I TOTALLY agree with you on this. I am totally against all of this knee jerk reaction to more gun control/laws but I am equally (maybe more against) random people strolling around in public with their weapons just to make their point.
I do not believe he should be able to as a business to prohibit law abiding citizens who are acting within the law from doing so in his establishment. One thing if it was his private residence, but an establishment that is open to the general public to enter and do business? No.
Do not forget the right to bear arsm is constitutionally protected, just as he cannot deny access to his business based on religious beliefs, race, gender, etc….
Depending on State Laws there are only a few places you are prohibited from carrying. Otherwise, if you carry within the limits of the law I do not see where anyone could bar you from entering their place of busienss based on you carrying. I guess someone could challenge it in the courts if they are asked to leave.
Unless I am missing something somwhere, that says a business can infringe on the constitution.
I’m happy that it’s open season on iced chai tea lattes. Really, I am- and I’d like to bag as many as I possibly can, frankly. But doesn’t revealing your firearm to them kind of diminish the element of surprise?
Bobert- he wasn’t and isn’t prohibiting anything. He only said he didn’t like it. I’m not real fond of some jackwagon who feels the need to assert his 2A freedoms through intimidation tactics -and make no mistake, these actions very much are intimidation tactics, undertaken to prove that “hey, I have rights and you can’t keep me from carrying openly…and the bigger and more flagrant the better”.
I carry 60-70% of the time, and the only reason I say that here is because the majority who’ll read this don’t know who I am. I don’t know if the idiot with the pretty pink USP next to me is proficient in firearm safety. And do we really want the government to know exactly who’s carrying and what? I’d rather them not have that knowledge.
AMEN ROS
Private property. If you don’t like it, don’t buy the man’s shitty coffee. Move along. The only thing these open carry attention whores did was create something the anti-gun whack-jobs could use as a club to beat you with.
Personally, I have a lot of respect for how he handled it. “I’m not going to tell you not to, but I’d appreciate if you didn’t.”
Nor am I really a fan of open carry either. When I see someone open carrying, my first thought is, invariably ‘I wonder if they just couldn’t get through a CCW course?’ followed by ‘or maybe they’re just trying to make a statement.’ At the end of the day, I think there’s a lot of difference between CCW and Open Carry on a lot of levels, one of the big ones being a difference between the ‘look at me’ logic of a man open carrying a USP vs. the ‘I’m just another face in the crowd’ idea behind me carrying a 1911 concealed. (Not to say I wouldn’t ccw a USP if I was bigger and richer).
Depending on where you are, having a gun openly displayed on your hip can make you a target for someone trying to get their hands on a firearm quickly for whatever reason.
Also, people ‘open carrying’ ARs and Aks? You’re stupid. Knock it the fuck off. Yes, it is your right. But even I get uncomfortable when I walk into a place and there’s a guy with an AR slung across his back.
I like Starbucks coffee and occasionally stop for a cup, although I can’t get it often. I appreciate that they tried to stay neutral and let their customers sort it out, and let’s face it — that type of lightening-rod, PC-fraught squabbling is usually bad for a business. It doesn’t make me happy, but I do understand why they did what they did.
And I have always disagreed with carrying weapons to prove a point.
@4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wv2DQkWfWq0
I find this relevant to your comment. And I agree with it.
The only time that I ever open carry is when I am salmon fishing in Alaska. But that is in the great outdoors, not someplace like Home Depot.
From what I have read he just asked people not to carry, but he wasn’t going to forbid it. So basicaly he is saying “leave us out of the gun debate”.
well said
Yes, because taking advantage of your rights is “intimidating” people. Don’t like it, tough. If it was legal here, I’d open carry every day. A CCW does nothing for me because everyone knows I carry and even ask me about what gun to get, how to train with it and general tips.
I prefer concealed carry and I’ll take Tully’s or Seattle’s Best any day over Starbucks!
Being what I call a “grey man” by nature, I’m not an open carry kind of guy (but do CC extensively). I have no problem with folks that do however-it might fit them better than myself and in some cases, it’s legal where other means are not (VA’s old no CCW in a bar but open carry was fine rule as a silly example).
That said, I find the Starbucks CEO request reasonable considering that has a business, he has a fine line to manage here. He didn’t mandate, he requested.
Now if he decided to corporately ban them all in any circumstances, we’d be having a different conversation.
OK. So Howie Schumtzbergerwitz (or whatever) says I can’t buy a coffee at Starbucks. Well that is fine with me. I suggest that everyone concerned about this issue … Boycott Starbucks. I might add that Starbucks is typically a high end lefty shop anyway. This ban won’t have any major effect on middle America coffee consumption data as compared to say NYC, San Franfreako, or Seaingdouble (Seattle … Best I could do for now). Middle American can hit the local shops, DD, or the new start ups that are popping up everywhere. Leave Starbucks for the French and German tourist, lefties who don’t care about safety, and those who prefer to grab a cup of coffee (that tastes like it was filtered through an old smelly sock) in a shop that now has a higher chance of being robbed by a non-tax paying hood rat who is toating a gun. .
One other thing. On September 11th 2001 shortly after Tower 2 fell, as tens of thousands of people fled the advancing debris cloud, a manager of a Starbucks reportedly closed and locked his doors on people choking to death. The same Starbucks employee as told refused to give water to those who needed immediate first aid to open clogged breathing passages. Starbucks apologized in a whimpy press release citing the actions of a junior employee or some crap like that … Nice! So you can imagine the urgency of that day to compare it to Starbucks actions … Before I made my way downtown from my apartment, I stopped at CVS (15th St. and 1st Avenue) looked an employee in the eyes and told them that I needed basic first aid supplies. Three employees helped stuff my 3 day pack full.
Starbucks … Not yesterday, not today, never!
Howie … KMRIA!
@5 ROS, I understand he was not outright banning them, just requesting that they not be openly carried… hey, some folks on the Right made it real easy for him to do so walking in armed to the teeth think they were “supporting” him when the far left went bonkers on him for refusing to sign onto some pledge.
My point is, that I do not think that he can ban them outright and to the point of it being “private property”, that argument has already failed numerous times when it comes to busiensses infringing on the constitutional rights of its customers. Speech cannot be restricted, you cannot discriminate on who you serve…
last I checked the 2A was still a part of the Bill of Rights, and the only caveat to the 2A is the additonal wording that no other Ammnedment has…. “shall not be infringed”.
ROS, totally there with you on safetey issues, which is why I am a staunch supporter of mandatory safetey courses for anyone wishing to own and carry a firearm. It just makes sense.
We can open carry here, but it is strongly reccomended you carry concealed. Reason being is too people freak when they see a gun, even on the hip of a cop… Well in New York City I could see why they would I guess.
rb325th; State law in West Virginia warns us that it is indeed legal for a business to restrict firearms in their establishments and we’re required to abide by owners’ wishes. A gun shop that I used to frequent required that we unload our guns before entering. Needless to say, I don’t go there anymore either. WV is an “open carry” state, but I prefer concealed carry because I’m not trying to make a point or call attention to myself. And since I’m always armed, I don’t go to Maryland or DC to spend my money.
@17: Nope. His property, his rules, period. There is a very limited exception to that rule and that has to do with racial discrimination (the Civil Rights act) but other than that a private property owner is 100% within his rights to restrict any and all of your constitutional rights and if you don’t like it you can leave.
What people don’t understand about open carry is that the only reason it’s not against the law in many parts of the country is because people are smart enough not to do it.
But these open carry idiots are going to take care of that.
Sooner or later we can expect that most jurisdictions where open carry is allowed will probably pass laws prohibiting the practice, and when they do, we can thank the open carriers for making it happen.
A gun is for self defense, it’s not a freaking decoration. Most of the open carry idiots I’ve seen in California look like they eat boogers in their spare time. They were so good about “establishing their rights to carry” that they got open carry outlawed here. I CCW at all times, in almost 30 years no one has noticed. I like it that way.
Actually, most CC laws limit the places which can prohibit lawfully carrying individuals to very few – typically only government buildings. Was looking at a list of those laws recently, and WV was among those which specifically prohibits a business owner from enforcing a request to disarm or unload prior to entry into the business establishment. (Will forward an appropriate link when I recreate that research, Jonn. It will be a couple of days – we have had a death in the family here.)
All that said, I support a business owner’s absolute right to restrict with whom they conduct business. If they make a stupid decision, they will have to pay the price with a loss of business. Meanwhile, I get to decide with my feet whether his restrictions are appropriate.
We all have a Constitutionally protected right to protest, but that doesn’t mean that we can march through Wal-Mart’s parking lot carrying signs without the corporation’s consent. Our Constitutional protections are meant to protect us from our rights being usurped by the government, but private actors are allowed much greater latitude in what they can restrict. Starbucks was perfectly within their rights here, even though I disagree with them.
@23, I do not agree as they cannot restrict who they allow to enter their establishment based on other constitutional protections. I would say they are far less able to regulate whom they allow into their establishments, except where a law states that they can.(As Jonn pointed out above)
Our rights are there to guarantee us that no one takes them away… Which is why we no longer see “Whites Only” signs anywhere in this country. The Constitutional Protections apply to us not just in dealing with the government but in our lives in general.
Starbucks is a business which sells to all parts of the political spectrum, and as such is trying to strike a non-confrontational stance. Bluntly, the only way to object to his request is from an extremist position, from either left or right. Yes, he CAN restrict your ‘right’ to open carry – many states (including TX) have codified the format of what a business is required to do – and if you carry concealed or openly despite those notices, you are breaking the law. Personally? I carry concealed, have a CHL, and find the open carry folks discomforting – anyone who tells possible assailants “see, here is where you have to disarm me” like that is giving up a huge tactical advantage and probably too stupid to be allowed to carry a projectile weapon.
@17: Last I checked, there was nothing about safety in the Second Amendment. Only one that says “Shall not be infringed” actually.
Demand I take some “safety” course and I’ll refuse, demand I “register” my guns and I’ll refuse. Attempt to outlaw them and I’ll refuse to turn them over. Try to take them, bring some body bags. But hey, what Do I know about the world. I’ve only been harassed by NAPS and SCTP for refusing to give up my rights in a traffic stop resulting in a gun to the back of the head with a cop saying quote: “So much as fucking flinch boy and I’ll splatter your brains on the parking lot” for refusing to stop in the middle of the street so he could write a ticket for 1/2 mile over the limit. I’ve been threatened with arrest for “DUI” because a empty beer bottle that was thrown in my yard was in the back of my truck.
Sorry, if you think that the above is off point. It goes to show WHY I will not submit to government oversight of what and how I own and carry. As the man said, “An armed society is a polite society”.
I also apologize for the language, just quoting the cop word for word. I also apologize if anyone thinks I am yelling or arguing with them. Only stating my point of view from dealing with crime and law enforcement crime in the state of SC.
@3 I can absolutely prohibit you and ban you for life of entering my business if you choose to carry a weapon in NC as long as it is clearly stated you cannot within 5′ of the entrance to my establishment. A majority of the states have similar laws.
@7 Claymore
…open carry attention whores…
Exactly! I can’t see why you would do it for any reason other than to make a point or what Twist said. I too, open carry in the woods when I’m bowhunting because where I hunt there are critters meaner than me and I can’t reload a bow that damn fast…
Stopped buying Starbucks a while ago. I just didn’t like a) getting Pikes Blend pushed at me at every opportunity, b) they did a taste test of ground coffee and Via, and I picked out the Via every time. They said it tastes the same, I said No it doesn’t. c) They are not very kind to the little guy when it comes time for a takeover. Corporate cannibals. d) Finally, they are all glitz and marketing. And I am sure the grower and the drinker are who pay for it.
Other than that, if he wants open carry to stop, as a business owner it is his right. I’ll just never see it.
rb325th-there is case law that says that private actors may restrict what would otherwise be Constitutionally protected activities on their own property
http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/faq/frequently-asked-questions-assembly
In 1976, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case Hudgens v. National Labor Relations Board. This case involved a group of labor union members who were picketing inside a privately owned mall. The union members filed suit claiming, in part, that their First Amendment free-speech rights had been violated after they were asked to leave the premises or be arrested for criminal trespass. The court looked at past cases and found that the First Amendment does not prevent a property owner from restricting the exercise of free speech on private property, in this instance the shopping mall. So, for example, if a mall shopper were asked to cover a shirt that the mall owners found to be offensive, the shopper would have to comply or leave.
There are exemptions to this to a certain degree based on how state constitutions frame the question of speech, but as to the larger issue, Starbucks was still within its rights. You can not assert your right to freely assemble on someone else’s property, otherwise you could-for instance-hold a protest on my front yard without my permission. The state and private actors are in different categories on these issues.
I agree with you Jonn. When I see people “supporting” Starbucks by bringing in long guns I just want to slap them silly. There is absolutely no need to walk around with a long gun in an urban environment if you are not a LEO. Seeing someone doing this makes me VERY nervouse and would make me leave the comfort of Starbucks’ fee WiFi quickly.
It is the idiots that go to these extremes that mean the rest of us can’t have nice things.
ok, so that should be free WiFi.
A polite society is a polite society. A firearm only increases your ability to compel adhesion to decorum when someone would breach it.
Axioms are fun, but they’re not truths.
My brother, a nice guy, don’t get me wrong, but never has served, was not raised or schooled in firearms in any kind of setting, has turned into a quasi-prepper in recent years. He spends all his fun money on firearms, as is his right. My objection is that he jumps on this soapbox as a defender of liberty, as he obnoxiously open carries just about everywhere. My sense is that if he loves our Constitution so very much, he could shed 200 pounds and join the National Guard. It’s not a requisite for firearm ownership, of course, but at times, I wish it would be, as certainly militia vs. standing army was what framed the debate over the 2nd Amendment as it was drafted. He at least did a CCW, but in PA, all he really had to do was fog a mirror.
A lot of the guys “making the statements” about firearms with the open carry bit at Starbucks remind me of Adam Kokesh. Please. Stop. Helping. In trying to build consensus and bring people into an understanding of what responsible gun ownership truly looks like, fatties flouting hip holsters really, really makes it difficult.
When my unit deployed for OIF in 2008-2009, a local Starbucks sent boxes and boxes of whole bean coffee. Individual franchises may vary, I suppose.
I don’t see why this is such a huge deal, I really don’t. Most businesses that I’ve seen have a small sign at the door asking that their customers not carry guns into their store, and that doesn’t make the national news. Maybe that’s because we’re open carry here. Walmart here has one, and they *sell* guns. Figure that one out.
@31: I guess that’s why the Second is in the Bill of Rights, not Bill of Needs.
@30 beat me to it.
I think what RB may be referring to is Title II of the Civil Rights act which prohibits private businesses that serve the public from discriminating on the basis of race, religion or ethnicity. This is not a “constitutional” provision but rather an exercise of Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause (and which is why it only applies to businesses that operate in some form of interstate commerce. Initially it was restricted to the likes of motels and restaurants that were on or adjacent to highways, railways, airports, etc.)
Many states now have similar laws which are applicable to all businesses under the State’s General Police Power.
But, again, this is not a Constitutional issue. If you believe a business is violating the law, you would sue them in court but you wouldn’t cite the Constitution, you would cite the Civil Rights Act or its state equivalent.
@Lando, I strongly disagree with you on the safetey issue. it is bad enough that you have cops who when involved in shootings miss their intended target 70% of the time, but to then add untrained indivduals who just because they have no criminal history walk out with a gun slung to their hip and not a clue how to operate it…
Everyone remmember the recent vanity fair article discussed here? The dimwitted columnist who was writing a series on guns, based around her going in and purchasing a handgun that she had no idea how to operate it safely?
WTF is wrong with requiring a simple 1/2 day safety course? It only makes sense! not everyone who owns a gun was brought up around them and trained by their dad, or was in the military where they learned gun safety first before they were ever given a round to put down range (regardless of if they had been shooting since they wer in diapers.)
I do not see gun safety being a hinderance to the 2A. Your right is not being infringed upon, you are just being required to know what the hell you are doing with something that if improperly stored or handled can cause death or grievous injury to the operator or people in the vicinity of them.
By the way #31, you nailed it…. while I support the right of the gun owner, those people were being purposely over the top and it actually hurt their own position.
@33: I am a fatty as you call us. Couldn’t join the military after I graduated like I planned. Won’t take you with a broken neck or back and I’ve had both. I guess I could have committed felonies and forged the paperwork but decided not to. Some of us you insult can’t work out like others. I would like to know how many fatties could pick up an engine or transmission by themselves, or torque a lug nut to the point a impact socket shattered trying to loosen it. So, try not to judge all of us at one time. It’s a stupid thing.
rb325th: I wasn’t aware people could be forced to attend a so called “safety” course to exercise their rights. I mean, I’ve never seen a “safety course” to exercise free speech, or to plead the fifth, or well any other right. I guess I’m just too American to stand for rights being subject to authorization by another.
The author of that article was a Brady Campaign board member who survived Columbine and is as a result using ignorance to push her agenda. Kind of what open carriers here are being accused of isn’t it?
And, by the way the cops shooting everyone but the target could have something to do with the 12 pound trigger pull and police in general being incompetent.
I cannot even remember the last time I went into a Starbucks.
They used to sell coffee; now its damn near impossible to order just regular, black coffee.
Sure you can get a donut, a cheeseburger, pizza, make a call and just about everything else under the sun, but ordering coffee? They look at you like you are from another world.
I just make mine. Easier. Or go somewhere else. Much easier.
I hate to play parrot, but a gun is a machine, not a guardian angel. If you can’t figure out how to switch tracks and carry some form of protection other than a gun into a business that restricts them, then you have problems that the gun you carry may or may not be able to fix.
In the horse world, it’s put this way. If all you know how to do when you ride a horse is pull on the reins, you’re not a rider — you’re a passenger. There’s a whole lot more to self defense than the front end of a gun.
PintoNag: Maybe, but the gun makes self defense easier when you have 3 armed robbers storm your store like happened where my sister worked a few years ago. Owners wife grabber her .38 and they fled when she returned fire. Made it easier when I grabbed my rifle and called 911 reporting people shooting as they were driving down the street. Even with the shots in the background it still took the sheriffs office over 40 minutes to respond. I will admit, I have been shot. 12 gauge at 20 feet. My brothers been shot. .45 at point blank range. Both were accidents from well trained shooters who forgot what a gun can do to people.
I do offer friends and family shooting lessons if they ask. However I make them learn the rules of shooting and of my range before they touch a gun. I show them the pictures of what happened to me and my brother and let them see guns are not toys. I have yet to have someone I trained mess up like these government and police trained shooters did.
38, you are also a retard, as some people would call you. Just say in’…
Hell, half of the businesses out there won’t accept a bill larger than a fifty, and they get away with that. If they can do that legally then firearms are a piece of cake. Open carry just attracts the wrong kind of attention. The man doesn’t want his business to suffer, I can see his point of view.
“Both were accidents from well trained shooters who forgot what a gun can do to people.”
Then they were not well trained were they?
I think Nicki’s post at the Liberty Zone is spot on:
http://thelibertyzone.wordpress.com/2013/09/18/want-to-open-carry-at-starbucks/
Totally agree with the points she makes. I also visit some Legion Posts that have ‘no weapon’ signs posted. I respect it, it’s their call. Probably not going to impact whether or not I do business with them.
Now, if a business fights for gun control legislation; well that’s a different conversation.
I think Lando is full of crap.
‘Pick up an engine by ourselves’ but couldn’t get in the military? You can’t work out but can lift a 240 pound engine (and that’s giving you the benefit of the doubt, as that’s the lightest car engine I have ever seen, and was a nissan 4 cylinder)?
Bullshit. When I was younger I worked at UPS to help pay for college. It took 2 to 4 grown men in great shape to get an engine into the back of a truck (depending on the engine). And these are people who spend 6 hours of their day moving packages weighing 70ish pounds on average.
@33
I know a LOT of Starbucks that sent coffee overseas. One near me was taking donations for a few weeks so they could send more, and every dollar went toward the shipping of coffee or the purchase of coffee to be shipped. Starbucks, having a weirdly liberal background and being from an oddly liberal area, and frequented by extremely liberal people (fucking hipsters), and yet, the company itself maintains a fairly middleground stance while being supportive of the troops and individual rights. I can’t imagine how hard that must have been to pull off.
@41
Exactly. The handgun is just the most preferable means of self defense- not the ONLY means.
@37
What about requiring that the people who carry a firearm understand the basic legal issues surrounding use of force and self defense in their area? That just seems like common sense.
Ok, now I’m certain Lando is full of shit.
@42 Lando, first let me say that you have my deepest sympathy in regards to your gunshot injury. There’s no such thing as a free lunch with those, no matter what kind of weapon is used to make them. You’re lucky to be alive.
While I am a CCW holder, and have been for 28 years, my point of view is slightly different from the others here, in that I’ve worked in the medical field for nearly half my life, and most of that in hospitals. I don’t know of any hospital that allows weapons on the property unless they are part of a security guard’s uniform. I don’t bend or break the rules, because I like my job. So my only recourse was to research and learn alternate, safe methods of self-defense that I could carry with me to work. I’ve never darkened the door of a martial art studio — I’m not the kung-fu kid. I’m a amiddle-aged, overweight female. But there are other methods available.
And while your experience is a classic example of the “gun against gun” scenario, (and is the optimal response), my point and question is this: what do you do IF YOU DON’T HAVE A GUN? What if you have family with you, and you can’t run? What do you do then? Just figure that because they have a gun and you don’t, you’re going to die? You might, of course…but IS that the only option? The answer to that is NO. Learn as much about the weapon you are as the weapon you carry — that’s the challenge I’m putting out there.
Well, while I do not personally own a gun, I can understand Howard’s point.
And I will also add that the only reason I can see for carrying a gun in sight of everyone around you is if you ride into town on a buckskin horse and tie the horse to the hitchin’ post outside the General Store, because you’ve just come in from that ridge up there where a rattlesnake took a swipe at you… and missed.
If you don’t get that part, the only reason to wear a gun openly is if you’re after poisonous snakes or feral hogs. Then it makes sense. Otherwise, you just look like a troublemaker out to make trouble.
The last wild west shootout (not counting Bonnie and Clyde) was actually a Prohibition-era event on July 17, 1932. in an ice cream parlor in Madill, OK.
http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~okmurray/stories/last_shootout.htm
Both men were carrying guns in leg holsters and drew on each other, and several bystanders were wounded in this gun battle.
So I can understand Howard’s concern, and I think he went about it the right way, but the reaction to it was overdone. I can’t imagine why anyone would need to show off a gun nowadays. I think it’s asking for trouble, and not from the cops.
Business owners oddly enough are concerned about things that affect their business. A bunch of yahoos parading around their pistols and long guns tend to make the clientele nervous and apt to go somewhere else. Simple economics. If a business can get away with taking only bills smaller than a fifty then they can easily restrict anything on their property. The guy asked, not demanded.