Open your own coffee shop. Your business, your call. You want to deal with protests by anti-gun folks, God bless you. You want to risk driving away customers who (for better or worse) are nervous around guns, that's what being an entrepreneurial risk taker is all about.
Heck, you could even make your employees carry rifles. Just show a little class and make sure they're Garands. Because then your M1s will do your (political) talking for you.
You take the risk, you decide. Starbucks is taking the risk in their stores, so I don't see what the problem is with them deciding.
Frankly, I never liked Starbucks coffee. It always tasted over-roasted, dark, and burned. And the pastry selection includes stale scones and other pretty awful stuff. The draw used to be free wi-fi, but that's everywhere now: even in the local supermarkets.
ReplyDeleteThe talk about the Starbucks announcement is all over the gun blogs (well, the ones that I visit, anyhow) and the general consensus is to find a better cup of coffee at a local establishment. It's an object lesson in how to show your support for local business and disdain for liberal ideology *simultaneously*.
There's a couple of very good coffee shops near me (no, not Dunkin) where their pastries are baked in-house, their coffee is from a local roaster, the prices are very competitive, and the patrons are not colored blue. I'd rather spend my time - and money - there.
Actually, there's an even easier solution. Look for the gunbuster sign.
ReplyDeleteIf there isn't one, carry on.
If there is, take your business elsewhere.
The Starbucks CEO is trying to walk down the middle of the road here. He doesn't want to alienate a fairly large number of carriers since he can read the dailies of the buycott day perfectly fine. But he really feels the need to say something to the other leftists that he hangs with because they are all in his face about his tolerance.
So he puts out a wishy-washy internal memo to his employees that has them tell customers to please leave their icky guns outside. Not to ask them to leave, not to post signs, just to shame people into giving up their right to carry.
Someone needs to remind him that the middle of the road is where you find roadkill.
You have exactly zero "right" to do a damn thing on private property if the owner says otherwise.
ReplyDeleteYour only "rights" pertaining to Starbucks property is to not go on it if you so choose, knotebane. Don't go making up rights that don't exist. That's what leftists do.
Actually Goober, I have every right to do any damn thing I please right up to where it impacts another's rights.
ReplyDeleteDo note that the Starbucks CEO is *NOT* going to post his establishments. That is certainly his right to do so.
He's just going to have his employees whine at open carriers. Which is also his right to do so.
And my right to ignore.
Knitebane, I agree that the Starbucks CEO just wants this problem to go away. He's actually taking what seems to be a reasonable approach - as you point out, he won't post the stores because he wants people's business.
ReplyDeleteThat's reasonable.
He's asked people to stop open carrying, because he doesn't want to lose business from the other side.
That's also reasonable.
Knitebane, I agree that the Starbucks CEO just wants this problem to go away. He's actually taking what seems to be a reasonable approach - as you point out, he won't post the stores because he wants people's business.
ReplyDeleteThat's reasonable.
He's asked people to stop open carrying, because he doesn't want to lose business from the other side.
That's also reasonable.
Anybody else notice all the free publicity the company is getting?
ReplyDeletePersonally, it means little to me. I spend money with that company less often than I open carry, and I hardly ever open carry.
Now I'll be spending even less money with them. I'm not boycotting them, I'm just choosing to shop where my worth as a customer is appreciated.
A little caution about all this. If a business owner has some sort of absolute right to prevent you from exercising Constitutional freedoms on their property, the Constitution is meaningless.
ReplyDeleteThink about other rights than the one described in the 2nd and it becomes clearer.
Let's say the CEO of Starbucks decided he wasn't going to serve mixed race couples and made the same announcement....
His property. His call. He wants to exclude based on racial preferences then go for it. Watch his business tank three days later.
DeleteThe question is: does private property mean something or doesn't it?
Starbucks has every right to tell you that YOU AREN'T ALLOWED AT ALL on their property. Given that, they certainly have the right to set conditions of entry and then ask ypu to leave if you dont
I do believe that a private property owner does voluntarily surrender some of his private property rights, when running an establishment open to the general public.
ReplyDeleteIf Starbucks was a member's-only club (like, say, Costco), different story. If it is the home of teh Starbucks CEO, even fewer restrictions on what he can set as rules.
The question is where to draw the line on what infringements on the private property rights of the owner of an "open to the general public" business versus what rights he can demand be surrendered by the general public who visit his establishment.
Private or not, I don't think Costco could make a "whites-only" policy and get away with it. I also don't think that the very clear wording of the 2nd Amendment allows for business owners to infringe on legal carry.
ReplyDeletePrivate property folks. They can legally exclude you from entry if they want. They sure as hell can set conditions of entry.
ReplyDeleteAs for serving mixed race couples, if private property means a damn thing they should be able to. Of course it would be a stupid move and they'd go out of business shortly thereafter due to n one going there.
As for Starbucks if they don't want my business I'll oblige them. It's that simple.
As for first amendment rights on private property, guess what? You don't have those either. Do some research. The constitution constrains government not private actors. My living room, my rules. That simple.
I like the coffee and free wifi at McDonalds. The little fruit pies leave a bit to be desired, though...
ReplyDeleteI've open carried in the local Starbucks (several of them) with no issue. I intend to continue to open carry in those Starbucks', and expect no issue. Perhaps it's because I'm in there to get something to drink and not to make a political point - I dunno.
ReplyDelete