If you have received communication from specific stores, malls, towns and cities regarding their firearms policies, good or bad, post them here.
 #91088  by Mr.Skellington
 
Each of us has dominion over ourselves and how we conduct ourselves, beyond that nothing. The "gun community" as a whole can not legitimately be held accountable for the actions of a few people who do not represent anyone except themselves. SB's could have targeted those specific individuals who they deemed unfavorable but they instead chose to take a broad brush to a small 'problem'.

Open carry is a fringe of the greater gun community and those among us who choose to OC long guns are a fringe of our general OC fringe. That is why I earlier stated that this is so miniscule of a issue that its not even newsworthy nor is it productive to piss and moan about people who choose to OC long guns. Within every type of group is 'that guy', the ones you wish was on the other side but sadly their antics are part of your camp. And if they weren't in your camp then rest assured someone would false flag an asinine display in order to advance an agenda. This is why I wont waste my time worrying about crap like this or buy into the bunk of how its all our fault. It isn't and the blame doesn't lie even on those who's presentation was brash.

However lets entertain the thought process that casts the blame on all of us, as a whole. What are we to do in order to avoid a repeat? How about a CCW holder who commits a *gasp* crime? Because we all know based on this Starbucks event that if anyone with a CCW commits a crime then we should all be chastised. I'd go so far as to wager that the percentage of CCW holders who have been convicted of a crime are about par to the percent of people who went over the top in these 'appreciation days'. Have I made my point? I will not second guess my position based on the whims of starbuck's stockholders.
 #91090  by MrCoolDale
 
Skellington, what these guys did was done purely for attention. While they were a very small percentage, they placed themselves on the forefront of our movement/cause and spoke for us all with their misguided message. They decided our message was "We can do what we want." As opposed to our real message of "Hi, I'm your friendly neighbor protecting what's mine."
 #91091  by brich2929
 
Mr.Skellington wrote:Each of us has dominion over ourselves and how we conduct ourselves, beyond that nothing. The "gun community" as a whole can not legitimately be held accountable for the actions of a few people who do not represent anyone except themselves. SB's could have targeted those specific individuals who they deemed unfavorable but they instead chose to take a broad brush to a small 'problem'.

Open carry is a fringe of the greater gun community and those among us who choose to OC long guns are a fringe of our general OC fringe. That is why I earlier stated that this is so miniscule of a issue that its not even newsworthy nor is it productive to piss and moan about people who choose to OC long guns. Within every type of group is 'that guy', the ones you wish was on the other side but sadly their antics are part of your camp. And if they weren't in your camp then rest assured someone would false flag an asinine display in order to advance an agenda. This is why I wont waste my time worrying about crap like this or buy into the bunk of how its all our fault. It isn't and the blame doesn't lie even on those who's presentation was brash.

However lets entertain the thought process that casts the blame on all of us, as a whole. What are we to do in order to avoid a repeat? How about a CCW holder who commits a *gasp* crime? Because we all know based on this Starbucks event that if anyone with a CCW commits a crime then we should all be chastised. I'd go so far as to wager that the percentage of CCW holders who have been convicted of a crime are about par to the percent of people who went over the top in these 'appreciation days'. Have I made my point? I will not second guess my position based on the whims of starbuck's stockholders.
:applause:
 #91155  by Mr.Skellington
 
Churches aren’t vacant after the molestation scandals.
Toyota isn’t bankrupt over catastrophic brake failure problems.
Sporting logo wear is still sold despite many being ‘gang’ colors.
And, although some police officers are bad we have yet to disband all LEO agencies over their misdeeds.

The thing all of these have in common is that a small element was of each example was not used in a manner to tarnish their respective whole. Intelligence, integrity and honesty will not allow it. The other thing in common is that all of these things are, sadly, granted more respect than the right to self defense as described in our constitution by the general public.

Open carry, a constitutionally protected right mind you, has been the scapegoat reason for the policy change at a national coffee house. So now tell me, is it time to revisit all of the aforementioned examples with the current lynch mob or, is it time to stop blaming open carry’s warts for shifts in policies and laws?
 #91181  by stephpd
 
MrCoolDale wrote:Skellington, what these guys did was done purely for attention. While they were a very small percentage, they placed themselves on the forefront of our movement/cause and spoke for us all with their misguided message. They decided our message was "We can do what we want." As opposed to our real message of "Hi, I'm your friendly neighbor protecting what's mine."

You know, I heard the same thing, and continue to hear it in the supposedly pro 2A groups, about ALL open carry, including handguns. To many folks open carry is no different then walking around with your penis hanging out. To many in the 'gun community' it's all political activism and to be avoided at all costs and no good can come from it. Though a few states have change their laws to allow OC.

Remember that this Starbucks thing all started in CA where a few people were OCing unloaded handguns, since they can't carry them loaded. Are they in CA OCing unloaded handguns any more making a political statement then we are here with loaded handguns? Because in reality all OC is a political statement.

That a couple people in states that can't OC anything but long guns doesn't make it more of a political statement. In the eyes of the anti there's no difference between loaded or unloaded, handguns or long guns, OC or CC.

That folks in the pro 2A crowd agree with some of this is the problem. Different portions drawing the line at different points. Some only CC. Others OC, but only loaded handguns. Others, because of draconian laws only able to OC unloaded handguns. And ever more draconian is that the only guns you can OC are long guns. Except for CC it's all a political statement while abiding with whatever laws are in that state.

To me the only way you're going to normalize guns in the hands of the law abiding is by OC. CC does nothing about normalizing, it's all about hiding in the mist of sheeple. That some how it's OK for what you're doing but all other forms are bad. If we'd have listened to the CC crowd none of us would OC anything. If we'd listen to the anti's we'd carry nothing.

Here's Colion Noir and a great response. Remember he's in a state where you can't OC handguns. He's moved more towards supporting OC even though he originally wasn't for it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYnT6mjS ... 34N99ZbhzQ

AS far as Starbucks I've known for sometime they're not pro 2a. Even when they came out and said they abide by state law it was just corporate policy and not about supporting our rights.

But then I've NEVER had a cup of their coffee. To me it was a Gen y yuppie type thing to do. I find it overpriced and more about selling things that I can't even qualify as coffee.





Surprisingly MSNBC has a fairly balance and honest report of much of this though they got the title way wrong.
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/09/18/starbuck ... to-a-halt/

“It was prompted by the ongoing issues that our nation has been facing over time,” she said. “Recent activities by groups on both sides of the gun debate have politicized Starbucks for their own benefit and have essentially brought our stores into the middle of this uncivil debate.”

“To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores. Some anti-gun activists have also played a role in ratcheting up the rhetoric and friction, including soliciting and confronting our customers and partners,” he wrote in the letter.

“We’re thrilled. We believe that this is the beginning of the end for guns in public,” Shannon Watts

But the organization will continue to pressure Starbucks—as well as other companies—to ban weapons completely from stores and premises.

“We absolutely expect to see a full-fledged ban within the next 12 months,” Watts said. “This is just the beginning.”
 #91188  by spillanej
 
Ive always hated starbucks... their coffee sucks and theyre way too expensive.

This does not affect me at all. Ill keep not spending my money with starbucks.
 #91189  by brich2929
 
Stephd is right on, you probably said it better than I could.

I watched Coilion Noir's Starbucks response last night (for the 3rd time) and I'll agree with him. If SBUX was pissed about Open carrying in their stores, then why didn't they just ban that and leave CC alone?

Its because they are ANTI.
 #91191  by Owen
 
spillanej wrote:Ive always hated starbucks... their coffee sucks and theyre way too expensive.

This does not affect me at all. Ill keep not spending my money with starbucks.
+1

Now to convince my better half.

Full disclosure: I do have a big ass 20oz starbucks mug my kids bought me. But I only use it to drink Lipton tea at work.

EDIT: If I can find a replacement I may have a target candidate or two for the next Deloc gathering. :D
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7