Open letter from Starbucks CEO

[eddiebx]

Why do you say that? There are plenty right here on this forum who need a gun to feel safe in the normal course of their daily lives and it has nothing to do with gangstas or coffee.

Rich folks who legally carry guns must be high on your list to die, isn't it?



Does trouble only occur in bad places?

Did the Navy Yard victims know that they will have to defend themselves that morning when they woke up? Did any victims of a mall shooting know that they will be shot at? Did the Colorado movie theater victims know that a heavily armed wacko would enter their Batman premier?

Were all those places filled with gangsta?

"Man, these must be some seriously straight gangsta Colorado movie theaters people are going if they need a gun to feel safe while watching a movie and eating popcorn!"

There....i re-worded your comment above...is it still funny to you? Are you still confused about the need to carry a gun legally in places that are not gangsta filled?

I don't consider carrying a gun (with license) to be all that horrible of a thing. It is rather comfy. So, i am not going out of my way to carry a gun legally. But, at the same time, i will have something to defend myself and my family against if terrible things were to happen around me.

No one can guess or predict the future where they will need a gun...as has been shown in recent tragedies.

I rather have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

I truly didn't mean to derail this thread into another gun debate or stir things up, and in hindsight I see how my post was not the brightest idea, and for that I apologize.

Like I've said in the past and I will say it again, I'm pretty neutral on this subject and enjoy hearing rational opinions from both views, since most of you guys make some pretty good points that I can definitely relate to.

Please people don't get carried away arguing, I'll feel bad, lolol.

 

[RunninInGA]

Please people don't get carried away arguing, I'll feel bad, lolol.

Oh man, the topic of discussion did more to start the debate than your post.

 

[KCcarguy]

Why do you say that? There are plenty right here on this forum who need a gun to feel safe in the normal course of their daily lives and it has nothing to do with gangstas or coffee.

I think this is a bit harsh. In my personal opinion carrying (in my case, CC) every day is not necessary, but it all depends on where you live and what your daily life is like. Sure, some guys might over-do it, but I say if you can do it safely and responsibly, go for it. And I'll admit, I think some guys open carry just to show-off or make a statement.....I think a lot of us have seen "that guy".

As far as owning a gun in general. I think not having any means of protection...especially one's home and family...is irresponsible. The fact is police cannot respond fast enough to protect you from harm. I think everyone should have some way to protect their home and loved-ones, but only if trained in proper/ safe use and storage. Otherwise, you're just relying on statistics and chance for your family's safety. Just my $.02.

 

[RunninInGA]

I think this is a bit harsh. In my personal opinion carrying (in my case, CC) every day is not necessary, but it all depends on where you live and what your daily life is like. Sure, some guys might over-do it, but I say if you can do it safely and responsibly, go for it. And I'll admit, I think some guys open carry just to show-off or make a statement.....I think a lot of us have seen "that guy".

As far as owning a gun in general. I think not having any means of protection...especially one's home and family...is irresponsible. The fact is police cannot respond fast enough to protect you from harm. I think everyone should have some way to protect their home and loved-ones, but only if trained in proper/ safe use and storage. Otherwise, you're just relying on statistics and chance for your family's safety. Just my $.02.

You're feeding the troll - it validates his responses in his own mind, which, most often in political discussions, are intended to incite a response from somebody else and to start a pissing match - most often with [MENTION=2]Thai[/MENTION]. Pay attention to his posts and tell me I'm wrong.

I agree with you on the irresponsibility of not having a means of defense / protection but I would like to clarify that it is NOT the police officer's responsibility to keep any individual safe or protected. They are there to serve the public, not the individual - a distinction that must be recognized in all of this.....and in MY opinion, all the more reason to be prepared to protect or defend yourself or family. It is simply YOUR responsibility and nobody else's....certainly not the government's job as we see what they've done with the postal service, Amtrack, healthcare, etc.....

 

[hikenbike]

I think this is a bit harsh. In my personal opinion carrying (in my case, CC) every day is not necessary, but it all depends on where you live and what your daily life is like. Sure, some guys might over-do it, but I say if you can do it safely and responsibly, go for it. And I'll admit, I think some guys open carry just to show-off or make a statement.....I think a lot of us have seen "that guy".

As far as owning a gun in general. I think not having any means of protection...especially one's home and family...is irresponsible. The fact is police cannot respond fast enough to protect you from harm. I think everyone should have some way to protect their home and loved-ones, but only if trained in proper/ safe use and storage. Otherwise, you're just relying on statistics and chance for your family's safety. Just my $.02.

I totally agree. All good points.

 

[LandCruiser]

As far as owning a gun in general. I think not having any means of protection...especially one's home and family...is irresponsible. The fact is police cannot respond fast enough to protect you from harm. I think everyone should have some way to protect their home and loved-ones, but only if trained in proper/ safe use and storage. Otherwise, you're just relying on statistics and chance for your family's safety. Just my $.02.

I'm of the same mindset.

Saying that you don't need a firearm because there's police is like saying you don't need a fire extinguisher/smoke alarm because there's a fire department.

 

[KCcarguy]

You're feeding the troll - it validates his responses in his own mind, which, most often in political discussions, are intended to incite a response from somebody else and to start a pissing match - most often with [MENTION=2]Thai[/MENTION]. Pay attention to his posts and tell me I'm wrong.

I agree with you on the irresponsibility of not having a means of defense / protection but I would like to clarify that it is NOT the police officer's responsibility to keep any individual safe or protected. They are there to serve the public, not the individual - a distinction that must be recognized in all of this.....and in MY opinion, all the more reason to be prepared to protect or defend yourself or family. It is simply YOUR responsibility and nobody else's....certainly not the government's job as we see what they've done with the postal service, Amtrack, healthcare, etc.....

I see what you're saying regarding police....that's probably why about every cop I've ever known was a big 2A advocate. They know the reality of the situation. But I'm just trying to address the general assumption that gun ownership for protection is not necessary. I think a lot of people really do think the police can be there to protect them 24/7.

As far as [MENTION=96581]hikenbike[/MENTION] goes. I like the guy, and I think he'll see the light, someday :hiding: I honestly think some guys just haven't had enough positive experience with good responsible gun owners and I hope I/ we can be a good example.

 

[soj1057]

pistol-training.com » Blog Archive » Thanks, Idiots

This article has a very very valid point. I agree with it.

 

[hikenbike]

I'm of the same mindset.

Saying that you don't need a firearm because there's police is like saying you don't need a fire extinguisher/smoke alarm because there's a fire department.

Last I checked I never heard of a toddler killing another toddler with a fire extinguisher.

 

[soj1057]

Last I checked I never heard of a toddler killing another toddler with a fire extinguisher.

Plenty of children have died / been seriously injured because of lighters and matches though right? Should we ban those too? Or should we continue to teach children not to play with matches?

 

[bofa]

Last I checked I never heard of a toddler killing another toddler with a fire extinguisher.

Yes, lets justify taking away gun rights because of piss poor parenting. Not all people should pro-create but you don't see me trying to get them all sterilized.

 

[RunninInGA]

plenty of children have died / been seriously injured because of lighters and matches though right? Should we ban those too? Or should we continue to teach children not to play with matches?

yes, lets justify taking away gun rights because of piss poor parenting. Not all people should pro-create but you don't see me trying to get them all sterilized.

Does this sound familiar?

you're feeding the troll - it validates his responses in his own mind, which, most often in political discussions, are intended to incite a response from somebody else and to start a pissing match - most often with [mention=2]thai[/mention]. Pay attention to his posts and tell me i'm wrong.

 

[soj1057]

Does this sound familiar?

Ahhh, ha ha:bolt: he got me. Ill leave my troll food at home next time lol.

 

[KCcarguy]

Last I checked I never heard of a toddler killing another toddler with a fire extinguisher.

Why are the standards different when it comes to guns? Should we outlaw casinos because parents leave children unattended in cars? Should we outlaw alcohol because parents pass out and leave children to their own devices? What about drunk driving? I've personally witnessed a DD accident that killed a 13month old toddler. Did I blame the car or the booze? No. I blamed the ******* that decided to drink and drive. What about second hand smoke....50,000 deaths each year? ....we don't need alcohol, cigarettes, tobacco, casinos....the list goes on and on. People are stupid. There will always be a portion of the population that isn't responsible. It's unfortunate kids are caught in the middle, but that's just a consequence of a free society.

Here's what it comes down to: You are asking me to give up my rights when I have done nothing wrong for a law or policy that will do nothing meaningful to prevent mass shootings. Even proponents of gun control legislation say it "will make it harder" not that it will prevent them. Why would I support it then? So we can all feel a little better until the next one happens? *rant finished*

 

[hikenbike]

Quite simply, guns for home protection, hunting, competition, and the like are all well and good, I guess. Have at it if you're comfortable and confident having weapons around (and obviously all the training, locking, practicing, blah, blah, blah....)

To carry around though, you will find trouble or trouble will find you IMO. You're just as likely to embolden and challenge those without one than deter anything. Where there was perhaps no gun, there is now that you brought one. Where they have a gun and want to do you harm, they have the lopsided advantage anyway. Just my opinion.

 

[Viper45]

Here's what it comes down to: You are asking me to give up my rights when I have done nothing wrong for a law or policy that will do nothing meaningful to prevent mass killings. Even proponents of gun control legislation say it "will make it harder" not that it will prevent them. Why would I support it then? So we can all feel a little better until the next one happens? *rant finished*

I agree with what you said, but I just wanted to correct one word. I'm not speaking at you below either, just generalizing...

But this is my problem with the whole gun "debate" going on in the U.S.A. right now. Everyone cares about the fraction of a percent of deaths caused by firearms, which is mostly by suicide; and it seems that no one cares about the other death related incidents. Why is one life more valuable if it's taken prematurely by a firearm, but in a different fashion, like a drunk driving, it's "the cost of living in a free society"? I guess to me, it doesn't take much to realize that it's only because the later is caused by vices that many people enjoy on a daily basis and they don't think of the long term ramifications that more gun control will add.

...I'm going to quit there before I get myself all worked up.

 

[LINY4Runner]

I've got no love for Starbucks, but he's just trying to keep his company apolitical.

Here's what happened - back in 2010, the Brady Campaign decided it needed some publicity and targeted Starbucks for a boycott because Starbucks wouldn't come out and ban firearms in its stores. Starbucks responded by saying that they comply with local gun laws, and where local laws allow open carry, Starbucks doesn't prohibit it. So a bunch of Second Amendment supporters and open-carry extremists started a "Starbucks Appreciation" campaign, and made a point of going to Starbucks with weapons on their hips and conducting pro-gun rallies outside Starbucks stores, etc. This caused several other anti-gun activist organizations to call for more boycotts, and some extremists started going to stores and confronting the open-carry cowboys, and now Starbucks is caught in the middle of a fight it never wanted to be in.

Don't blame Starbucks for any of this. Starbucks has been unfairly targeted and wrongly represented by both sides. Starbucks is not anti-gun. Starbucks is not pro-gun. Starbucks just wants to sell crappy overpriced coffee to douchebag hipsters and wanna-be yuppies, and it wants both sides to leave it alone so it can do that. The only way it can make that happen now is by prohibiting open carry in its stores and waiting until the cowboys go away and take the anti-gun nuts with them.

every. word.

 

[LINY4Runner]

so many gun threads, we're gonna need our own sub-forum lol

 

[KCcarguy]

Quite simply, guns for home protection, hunting, competition, and the like are all well and good, I guess. Have at it if you're comfortable and confident having weapons around (and obviously all the training, locking, practicing, blah, blah, blah....)

To carry around though, you will find trouble or trouble will find you IMO. You're just as likely to embolden and challenge those without one than deter anything. Where there was perhaps no gun, there is now that you brought one. Where they have a gun and want to do you harm, they have the lopsided advantage anyway. Just my opinion.

This is a typical assumption. Anti-gunners warned us there would be shootouts and blood in the streets if people were allowed to legally carry. But statistics since CC laws have been enacted show otherwise.

 

[dorton]

Last I checked I never heard of a toddler killing another toddler with a fire extinguisher.

Many people have been killed with diesel fuel and gasoline. Both intentionally, and by accident. Do we need to implement bans, and background checks on the purchases? Keep in mind, petrol is in no way shape or form a "God Given" right.

We, the USA are a violent bunch. If we snapped our fingers tomorrow, and all guns just disappeared, would those that prey on the innocent, and weak change professions, or just pick up a different tool to implement their will?

I will respect Starbucks wishes to have no firearms on their property, as I, nor any of my family members will never grace their door until they change their minds.