[brich2929]

Personally, I'm pissed.

I am really pissed to see pictures of guys that carried long guns into Starbucks and posed with them. That was news to me. They took unfair and in-your-face advantage of Starbuck's attempt to stay out of the fray and follow local gun laws.

IMHO, Ordinary every-day carrying for personal protection in a civilian environment involves handguns, not long guns. To me that's intuitive, and no doubt intuitive to a lot of anti-gun people too. I understand that TX does not allow OC with handguns. But, if they thought that OCing a long gun in a TX Starbucks would promote their cause, they might soon regret the unintended consequences of their actions. It would not surprise me in the least if there are now laws being proposed to further restrict the carry rights of TX citizens.

One step forward and two steps back?

Or, just two steps back?!

Did you watch their YouTube video? They were engaging in polite conversation with customers OUTSIDE the store. Its a good thing they did have video to bqack up their account of the story. I expect their charges to be dropped.

[scampbell3]

Easy, Tiger.

The photo is of a serviceman off duty in Kuwait from 2005 if you read the Practical Tactical post.

_________________

I am not concerned about the where, when or who of the photo. The particulars of the original photo are irrelevant. The photo of a man holding a shotgun in a shop of some type makes the point articulated in the article.

Chip

[brich2929]

I am not concerned about the where, when or who of the photo. The particulars of the original photo are irrelevant. The photo of a man holding a shotgun in a shop of some type makes the point articulated in the article.

Chip

I disagree. The photo is disingenuous, as It was from another time, in another country, different situation entirely. Why not post a stick figure of a man with a rifle at Starbucks instead?

[scampbell3]

I am not concerned about the where, when or who of the photo. The particulars of the original photo are irrelevant. The photo of a man holding a shotgun in a shop of some type makes the point articulated in the article.

Chip

I disagree. The photo is disingenuous, as It was from another time, in another country, different situation entirely. Why not post a stick figure of a man with a rifle at Starbucks instead?

Then I suggest you take this issue up with the writer who published the article at Bearingarms.com using this graphic.


Chip

[brich2929]

Where else can the actions (misguided) of a few, be used to spoil the cause/reputation of an entire group? I'm quite shocked at how some of you in the gun community have pounced on this and continue to do so, driving a wedge between us at a time we need to come together.

I know some here hold viewpoints other than Conservative, religious--maybe not quite liberal but pretty close.

If this were any other subject or group of people that some of you champion and they had been excoriated for the actions of a relative few vs. the number of their population, you'd likely be crying foul.

[knohope]

This blog post seems to speak to the point that MCD, myopic and others have made. I have to agree.

http://www.pagunblog.com/2013/09/19/wha ... community/

[scampbell3]

http://themattwalshblog.com/2013/09/19/ ... ty-rights/

I’m a liberal because I think Starbucks has private property rights
Posted on September 19, 2013 by The Matt Walsh Blog
I remember when a fast food chicken sandwich restaurant became, out of nowhere, a hotly contested battle ground in the gay marriage debate. Everything was fine, everything was normal, everybody was eating chicken, until suddenly liberal activist organizations were encouraging gay men have heated make out sessions at their local Chick-fil-A, and Christians were countering with a Bible in one hand and waffle fries in the other. Boycotts, rallies, Appreciation Days, demonstrations, fundraisers — it was war. Personally, I have plenty of opinions on the topic of gay marriage, but on the topic of Chick-fil-A all I ever cared about was their chicken.

Millions of people cried out, “We must win Chick-fil-A to our side!”

And I courageously stood and shouted, “Can I get a number one with a Diet Coke?”

I didn’t think political discourse could get any more absurd than the Gays vs. Chicken War of 2012, but that was before the CEO of Starbucks said the word “gun” and the whole world exploded.

To read the rest of the article, go to:

http://themattwalshblog.com/2013/09/19/ ... ty-rights/

[mdak06]

Where else can the actions (misguided) of a few, be used to spoil the cause/reputation of an entire group?

This happens in politics all the time. It's sometimes easier and can be more effective to attack the "misguided actions of a few" than it is to attack an opposition group as a whole, because those misguided actions may be frowned upon by a larger portion of the population as compared to the majority viewpoint of a group.

As an example ... in 2012, a West Virginia GOP candidate compared smoking bans to the Nazi's forcing of Jews to wear Star of David symbols. That's an easy comment to target, since many people find it absurd. It's not something the vast majority of GOPers are going to say, but it's easy for Democrats to ridicule and is somewhat effective in convincing or reinforcing the idea that the GOP is full of folks out of touch with reality, supports bad politics, etc.

I'm quite shocked at how some of you in the gun community have pounced on this and continue to do so, driving a wedge between us at a time we need to come together.

I know some here hold viewpoints other than Conservative, religious--maybe not quite liberal but pretty close.

If this were any other subject or group of people that some of you champion and they had been excoriated for the actions of a relative few vs. the number of their population, you'd likely be crying foul.

I think, in some ways, we are coming together ... but we are also trying to get rid of a problem that is part of our group. Namely, we're trying to make the point that open carry is great, but unwarranted and unwelcome political activism is counterproductive.

Some gun rights supporters did something that was not only ineffective but created a backlash. We need to learn the correct lessons from this experience, some of us need to change our behavior, and then we move on. I think that's all that most of us are suggesting.

If the pro-gun folks that were out conducting political activism learn why what they did was not helpful, and behave better in the future, then the gun rights movement will be better off as a result.

On the other hand, the folks who are pissing me off right now (elsewhere, not on DELOC) are the pro-gun folks who are simply bashing open carry and not recognizing the difference between "normal open carry" and "political activism while displaying a gun."

[Taurus247]

Basically the antis won. End of story. It doesn't matter who did what and caused what they won. We are all here supporting the same thing (at least I hope we all are) so the little things we can bicker about later after the ultimate goal is achieved. So we need to regroup and stand up and do something not fight among our self's about who caused what.

[mdak06]

Basically the antis won. End of story. It doesn't matter who did what and caused what they won.

I'd say it absolutely does matter. We don't want to repeat the mistakes that caused them to win. It's not a matter of pointing at one or more people and saying YOU @#%ED UP ... it's a matter of looking at what happened, figuring out why it happened, and educating everyone so that it doesn't happen again.

We are all here supporting the same thing (at least I hope we all are) so the little things we can bicker about later after the ultimate goal is achieved. So we need to regroup and stand up and do something not fight among our self's about who caused what.

Yes, we're supporting the same thing - gun rights - but just because we have the same goal in mind doesn't mean that all of the tactics that we're using are effective. There's no shame in identifying an error and correcting the error.

As far as any of this specifically relates to DELOC folks, I think that many and probably most of us (based on my limited experience) are doing things "the right way" ... setting a good example out in public and attempting to be a polite ambassador for open carry. Thankfully, we're not in a situation like Texas, where since handgun OC is banned, some have decided that openly carrying an unloaded long gun is a reasonable plan (whereas I would suggest is not OC but is in fact political activism).

In summary, I'd say that unless we ensure that our tactics are correct, we won't achieve our ultimate goal, so talking about them now makes sense.