http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/02/28/state/n105757S94.DTL&tsp=1
Check out the link and read up. What the F^&K?
Guns at Starbucks?
(28 posts) (14 voices)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
I literally was just reading that article before I came here! How hilarious that you saw it too!!! :) -->Sarcasm: 'Good thing Starbucks is so respectful of laws...cough cough*** <--
Posted 3 years ago # -
The Brady Campaign is a joke, but SB doesn't care about our Constitution, they just wouldn't refuse service to anyone as long as they can make money...except homeless people. They seem to be the exception for some reason.
Posted 3 years ago # -
"Welch, a 71-year-old retired property manager who lives in Richmond, Va., doesn't see any reason why he shouldn't bear arms while he gets caffeinated.
"I don't know of anybody who would provide me with defense other than myself, so I routinely as a way of life carry a weapon — and that extends to my coffee shops," he said."
I think I would be somewhat terrified with retirees coming into a coffee shop with firearms. Heck, I see someone that age driving a car and I get worried.
The only people I ever saw with guns in the coffee shop I worked at were police officers. I think if I ever saw a normal customer bringing a handgun into my workplace, I would call the police just to warn them, because in general I know of only two groups of people that carry around handguns, cops and murderers...
Posted 3 years ago # -
What about the ppl with concealed carry permits? I have one and I'm not a murderer.
I assure you "murderers" don't carry their guns out in the open. Nor do they have permits lol.
I'm glad I have a gun. If I ever have to use it to defend my life or someone elses I shoot to kill.Posted 3 years ago # -
I'm just saying, the majority of people I hear about carrying guns everywhere are cops and people that use them to commit crimes...
Posted 3 years ago # -
its_only_coffee,regarding old people; guns are much easier to use than cars. Also, if a criminal wants to rob a Starbucks do you think they are going to stop because they see a "no guns" sign on the door?
It's amazing what types of issues Starbucks gets itself into. I guess a company just can't win these days! IMO they should just keep their mouths shut and wait for this to blow over - changing the policy or making a statement about it won't get them out of trouble.
Posted 3 years ago # -
As said alreaday, murderers conceal their weapons illegaly (and obtain them illegally as well...no fees, fingerprinting, applications, etc. for them), they don't carry them out in the open. Judging from your opinion on the subject, I'd say there's a good liklihood you live in either NJ, NY, MA, or CA, to name a few.
In the US, there are 38 "Shall Issue" states, meaning normal people can get a permit to either open or conceal carry (some states you don't need a permit at all), and of the rest, and 10 "may issue" meaning though you can apply, they make it very tough to get one, or only give it to retired police.
The majority of people you hear about carrying are cops or criminals because in your state, the law-abiding citizens are denied the right and means to defend themselves, so not only have you never seen it before, you've never heard of it either. I'd rather have a .45 on me than a cell phone with 911 on speed dial if I were being mugged. (And yes, I'm from a state where our freedoms are restricted)
Posted 3 years ago # -
Perfectionist is right. How many criminals do you know follow the rules? lol
it's only the ppl whoget punished by following the rules and scum bags just bypassing them:( stupid.
Posted 3 years ago # -
there is a policy against using your camera in starbucks, but you can carry a gun into the store. AWESOME!
wtf.
there is no reason to carry a gun unless you have incentive to use it. i'm sorry, but if i were to see someone with a gun in the store i would call the police. they may feel entitled to do so, but i am also entitled to feel safe.
Posted 3 years ago # -
The police would come, say "he can carry a gun if he wants" and you would be embarassed.
Some people feel safer carrying a gun - by disallowing it you are depriving them of their safe feeling. See the hypocrisy? And that's why all of these arguments are pointless and why Starbucks shouldn't be involved in any of it...
Posted 3 years ago # -
"They may feel entitled to do so..."
If the law is you're allowed to carry, then you're allowed to, however on private property, it's up to the owner whether you can or not. Some businesses allow it, some don't. It's Starbucks' policy that you can carry a gun, because unless you plan on shooting up the place, merely having the pistol holstered is not hurting anyone. You might not like it, but it's not up to you to decide, therefore you can either choose to not patron there/don't work there.
Taking pictures inside, however, can violate people's privacy, and there are perverts who take young girls photos inside places like this.There are many reasons to carry a gun. Number one, the 2nd amendment states "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The right to self defense is inalienable. The right is given by God, not the government. If you're curious if carrying has ever saved anyone, then check out these:
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2007/07/marine_subway_robbery_070702/
http://www.theheraldbulletin.com/local/local_story_358172439.html
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/local/crime/article/SHOT121_20090711-230802/279571
http://www.wgal.com/news/22598680/detail.html
and there are many others if you just search CCW and robberyBetter to have and not need than to need and not have. Despite the false claims and statistics of the Brady campaign, owning and carrying a weapon does not make a person dangerous. A gun is a tool, an inanimate object that cannot get up and start shooting by itself. It does not control people's minds either, so if you pick up a gun, you won't suddenly feel like shooting someone. If you are that distrusting of your fellow man, then I suggest you don't leave your house. A person does not need a gun to kill. In fact, over 40,000 people *die* each year in car accidents across the country. Perhaps cars are too dangerous and should be banned. If you can walk or ride a bike, then what's to say you *need* a car? What's to say the government should be able to limit your ability to choose for yourself or say what is necessary and what is not?
As much as I am happy to see Starbucks is not refusing service to law-abiding citizens, I am sure it has a lot more to do with them wanting other people's money than them respecting people's rights.
Posted 3 years ago # -
**round of applause for decaf4u***
Posted 3 years ago # -
I'd refuse to serve someone carrying gun. Sorry.
Posted 3 years ago # -
ill just give them decaf lol
Posted 3 years ago # -
Maybe I'd be generous and give them decaf but my point is that there is no reason to be carrying around a deadly weapon just for the rare chance that you'd actually would need to use it. It's my opinion (opinion, not the truth) that no one other than trained law enforcement should be able to carry guns and use them as an absolute last resort. And spare telling me to work somewhere else if I don't like it. I'm not gonna compromise my values just for some stranger's cup of crappy coffee. Sorry.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Your values? If you don't value Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, then you're working at the Starbucks in the wrong country. Furthermore, you think police are actually that trained with guns? They qualify usually once a year on the range, shooting maybe 30 rounds. Most police never fire their weapons in defense either, only about 3% do.
Amadou Diallo ring a bell?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/nation/specials/aroundthenation/nypd/How about Sean Bell?
http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/b/sean_bell/index.htmlI don't think I have to continue to list unfortunate incidences such as these but 911 is great if you want the police to come and take pictures of your body. They can't be everywhere at once, which is why you can't sue the city or state if they fail to protect you. If you want to be unprotected and forfeit your right to self-defense, then by all means go ahead, but this *is* a free country (in most states at least), and many people do exercise their rights. I encourage you to watch an episode of John Stossel about the myth that gun control prevents crime and see if it at least opens your eyes a bit more to the issue, if not changes your mind: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_YTM_eAWnQ
Posted 3 years ago # -
It's not just the criminal that have guns and kll people. It is the nuthead out there as well. Most of shootings lately have been by the mentally ill or a husband killing in domestic disputes or other incidents. I don't trust the average person out there. Had three problems with neighbors and two were noise and half the people I talk to no matter where they live have had a problem with a neighbors rudeness so why trust them with a gun. Even my rude neighbors son shot himself to death in a apartment. A lot of people aren't so law abiding. You might as well live in a third world country to carry a gun around with people you live with. The bum politicians are big troublemakers and wouldn't allow concealed or open weapons in government buildings or their offices. Most of them could care less who gets a gun and guns from the US even made it down to the drug cartels in Mexico. This society is violent and that is why this is one of the few societies where a kid comes to school with a gun or someone goes to a church or workplace with one. Seems to be me a 100,000 shootings a year in the United States shows how violent it is and 16,000 are suicides.
Posted 3 years ago # -
What will happen if a Starbucks is held up. They will come in with a number of people and look around to see who has a gun first and do harm to that person. I live in a city where the convenient store clerks are armed and still get killed because the robbers come in with a number of people and do it suddenly. I guess the system in America just doesn't work. Go to Asia some of there countries have more respect for human life than here and don't have a gun problem like here.
Posted 3 years ago # -
get a life decaff4u
Posted 3 years ago # -
by the way in response to your post before, the constitution that you talk about and think is like some kind of bible or divine document that we should all adhere to, dont forget that, that document permits slavery.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Not anymore coffeesoldier - amendment #13 abolished slavery.
Posted 3 years ago # -
And don't forget Amendment 14 was written after the civil war so that states could not abridge any privileges or immunities of US citizens, nor deny them of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... The Equal protection clause in this amendment was used in Brown v. Board of Ed to strike down segregated schools. This was to protect citizens not only from the federal government, but from the state governments as well.
I get it, people like you coffeesoldier think that it's up to judges to completely ignore the Constitution and make their own laws as they go. China has a constitution too that guarantees them the right of free speech, religion, and other things we have in ours. Gee, I wonder why people are thrown in jail for it then. Maybe it's because they not only ignore the "document", but also because the people are denied the right to keep and bear arms to keep such a government in check.
Also, gobulls, that's why with concealed carry, the pistol is not seen. Some people choose to open carry like police do, and unfortunately 4 police were recently executed in a coffee shop before they started their shift by some crazy person. If they are going to be targeted, then it's a risk they themselves take, however if a criminal were to walk into a store and saw most people had guns, he'd probably not get into a shoot out with them.
Guns were banned in England in 1995 and since then gun crime has increased 350%. A pregnant woman was recently raped while 1 criminal held a shotgun to her boyfriends head and 3 criminals stole her car. Go gun control.
Posted 3 years ago # -
im well aware of the 13th and 14th amendments but my argument was that originally the constitution included slavery, my point being that the constitution is outdated and we cant fall back on it for everything or use it for arguments sake like you did with the gun issue.
Posted 3 years ago # -
"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
Thomas JeffersonOR
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin
Posted 1 year ago # -
If I was a thief, I wouldn't rob any random person or store for fear that the grandma I think is sweet and innocent could be packin some serious heat. I know my great grandmother did (but we're Puerto Rican, so that's okay LOL) and it served her when she was almost raped as a younger woman. She didn't even have to use it, just having it subdued her attacker.
Ever see that movie Death Proof?
Lee: Did you know Kim carried a gun?
Abernathy: Yes. Now, do I approve? No. Do I know? Yes?
Kim: Look, I don't know what futuristic utopia you live in, but the world I live in, a bxtch need a gun.
Abernathy: You can't get around the fact that people who carry guns, tend to get shot more than people who don't.
Kim: And you can't get around the fact that if I go down to the laundry room in my building at midnight enough times, I might get my azz raped.
Lee: Don't do your laundry at midnight.
Kim: Fxck that! I wanna do my laundry whenever the fxck I wanna do my laundry.
Abernathy: There are other things you can carry other than a gun. Pepper spray.
Kim: Uh, motherfxcker tryna rape me? I don't wanna give him skin rash! I wanna shut that nxgga down!
Abernathy: How about a knife at least?
Kim: Yeah, you know what happens to motherfuckers who carry knives? They get shot! Look, if I ever become a famous actress, I wont carry a gun. I'll hire me a do-dirt nxgga, and he'll carry the gun. And when shxt goes down, I'll sit back and laugh, but until that day, it's Wild West motherfxcker!Posted 1 year ago # -
Hey @MobilizedPartner I think that @coffeesoldigers argument is the best on the page...
"by the way in response to your post before, the constitution that you talk about and think is like some kind of bible or divine document that we should all adhere to, dont forget that, that document permits slavery."
Well actually, my coffee-slinging friend, you are talking about the Holy Bible. The Bible also asked for sacrifices and actually lays out how to buy and sell slaves. I use that argument whenever some southern baptist comes to convert me: "Do you believe in slavery? Because the bible supports it. How about people being able to be free and do as they like? Why can't two men be married then. Think about what I have just said and you can come back with a nonreligious argument when you feel ready."
Posted 1 year ago # -
1st. I think the point coffeesoldier was trying to make was that the document is finite, and the principals are more what we as a society (and country) should adhere to.
2nd. If you were to actually study the Bible more closely, you would find that the laws concerning sacrifices, feast and fasting days, slave trade, and marriage are particular letters or official documents telling the faithful who read said documents how to conduct themselves within a country which abides things like slavery, and multiple marriage. Also you will find that most of these laws are in the Old Testament which is a documentation of the old law, which Christ being born, martyred and ressurected, freed us from.Another thing, the bible never condones slavery, or multiple marriage so much as tells the faithful that they can still be righteous while living in a situation where they were forced to be the 3rd wife of some dude, or they were sold into slavery. Just because it records an (or many) incident(s) where slavery happened doesn't mean it was sanctioned, or a postivie thing any more than the author of a history book about the Holocaust condones killing millions of people.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.