Starbucks becomes latest "gun free zone"

NavyDoc

AndyMayhew
Silly question, but do Americans really feel the need to carry a gun when buying an overpriced coffee? Is it really that dangerous?

Glad I live in England.

Nothing wrong with being prepared. I have a fire extinguisher and a first aid kit in my car as well.

When people ask questions like that it reminds me of the CHL lady who went to Luby's to have a simple lunch with her mother and father only to see them shot by a sicko... She spoke before congress in a very rational and moving testimony. The anti's only want to hear anti lies and disregard all statistics which disagree with their rhetoric.

20/20 report on guns... a little facts

I can't help but wondering if the anti-gun crowd is pro choice as well. I'd love to hear from those who are against people owning or carrying firearms if you are also pro choice. I have a sneaking suspicion that as liberals they will be pro choice. So, it's ok for a woman to kill her unborn child, but it's not ok to be able choose to stop someone from killing you or your child?

Just curious because it points to another cognitive dissonance issue.

reply to post by beezzer


I guess it depends on the state, as here in GA my husband carry his conceal weapon every where including Starbucks with not problems.

But NY is NY and we all know how the gun control is been pushed in that state thanks to Mayor Boombug, He is a champion for anti gun and anti 2nd Amendment and he got a lot of corporate goons under his belt.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


I had a thread about that very question.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

But not to many rose to the bait. From personal experience, I have found that most anti-gun people are also pro-murder when it comes to a baby not yet born.

And yet they will tell you right to your face that it different. Sheesh!

reply to post by TDawgRex


Interesting.

Pro-gun crowd (generally speaking) is pro-death penalty, anti-abortion.
-In other words, responsible for one's actions.

Anti-gun crowd (generally speaking) is anti-death penalty, pro-abortion.
-In other words, absolution for one's actions.

reply to post by beezzer


I don't know about that, I am all for gun rights, I am all for death penalty but I am very much pro choice.

Of course the gun humping crowd are disgruntled over this...

I mean what are they going to do next time the barista puts too much nutmeg in their coffee? Don't people have a right to stand their ground anymore?

But if you need a gun to get a cup of joe, please go somewhere else where I'm not. Next time I'm at starbucks all make sure to let them know they made the common sense decision.

reply to post by marg6043


I did say "generally speaking". I think the folks here are more critical thinkers than the rest of the folks who still look to their nighty news for their information.

reply to post by muse7


So I'm guessing you didnt actually read the letter or the policy? Nothing changes. People with guns wont be asked to leave nor will they be refused service.

If Starbucks decides to refrain from trying to cater to both sides and actually goes "gun free" then they should also paint a big red target on the doors of their cafes. Gun free zones are where people are getting shot by these nutjobs. Schools, universities and places of employment that are gun free zones are just barrels full of fish for the crazies to take lives. Our last 3 major mass shooting all happened in gun free zones... when will people realize that guns are not going to go away and having these gun free zones are just creating potential victims.

reply to post by crazyewok


You're right, they should be able to refuse business to black people, or fat people, or red heads as well, right?
If I get refused business because of my Constitutional right, than it's ok to refuse other people business regardless of their rights.

What if Dunkin Donuts said "Only Guns Allowed" and would ask you to leave if you did not have a gun?

The fact is, it's discrimination!

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


You're wrong, the fact that they're asking you not to bring a gun into their store, makes it illega for you to carry there. Now I'm not saying that is for all states, I'm only speaking about Connecticut because this is were it all started.

Several top Democrats in Connecticut have teamed up with a local pro-gun control organization urging the coffee chain Starbucks to ban firearms from its stores nationwide. Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, along with Rep. Elizabeth Esty and Gov. Dannel Malloy, all signed on to a letter sent to Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz by the Newtown Action Alliance,

The rumor is, Blumenthal put some money in the CEO's pocket, while Gov. Dan "Molly" Malloy gave him special tax breaks and other perks here in CT. (but that is all just rumor right now)

reply to post by GunzCoty


Read the letter. It plainly states the policy will not be enforced.

Maybe CT has some crazy reg that applies (wouldnt surprise me) but the policy itself states they will not enforce this.

Some snot nosed kid.with a stupid hat on may say "we dont want guns in Starbucks" but as per.the policy they will not ask you to leave or refuse you service.

GunzCoty


What if Dunkin Donuts said "Only Guns Allowed" and would ask you to leave if you did not have a gun?

The fact is, it's discrimination!

Yeah fair enough. I would take my business elsewere!


And its a big diffrence from denying service for a human trait you cant change and a metel tool you can leave at home. And if you dont want to leave it at home? Well go elsewere.

And this is the root of all the mass shooting!

Its not the lack of gun control or the need for more regulation. Its the attitude toward them!
Its not just a usefull tool but a love and obession. In the USA they seem to have become a Icon and scared and glorified artifact! It thrown down you throats in movies and magazines and touted as a way to end even non violent disbutes.

Go back to it being a tool and just a object then you may get less shooting.
No gun control requred.

crazyewok

Go back to it being a tool and just a object then you may get less shooting.
No gun control requred.

Well now there's a thought. A thought that is routinely cast aside as "extremist."

The push to re-normalize the gun as in school rifle teams, open carry and publicizing firearm sports as a method to de-mystify the gun and reduce its status as some ghetto power icon is one method to reset the hyper-violent attitudes in this country.

But that gets countered with more fear and misinformation by the very people who need to experience this re-normalization.

Go tell the lunatics over at "Moms Demand" that they should sign their kids onto the local rifle team to learn responsible use and respect and what you get in return are hysterical shrieks of terror.

You cant teach someone who is willfully and proudly ignorant.

thisguyrighthere
reply to post by GunzCoty

 

Maybe CT has some crazy reg that applies (wouldnt surprise me) but the policy itself states they will not enforce this.

Yes, GunzCoty is correct. In Connecticut, a private business can legally enforce a ban on firearms by simply posting a sign. That's not true in many other states where corporate rules cannot trump local laws.

Specific to Connecticut:

Sec. 29-38. ...Permit to Carry Pistol or Revolver...
(e) The issuance of any permit to carry a pistol or revolver does not thereby authorize the possession or carrying of a pistol or revolver in any premises where the possession or carrying of a pistol or revolver is otherwise prohibited by law or is prohibited by the person who owns or exercises control over such premises.

reply to post by Tripnman


So does there have to be signage posted at the entrances?

I've been reading through the Ct statutes and info on the Board of Examiners site and cannot find any penalty for carrying into an establishment where the owner doesnt want firearms. I also cannot find anything related to signage or posting of not allowing firearms.

The Board of Examiners treats it as a "suggestion" and not a law.

From this info, or lack of info, I gather if you are asked to leave then you must but if you do not leave you face charges of tresspass.

So, to me at least, it still looks like this policy has absolutely no teeth to it and the original letter describing the policy still holds at not enforcing the policy, even in CT.

I'll keep looking though.

thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Tripnman

 

So does there have to be signage posted at the entrances? I've been reading through the Ct statutes and info on the Board of Examiners site and cannot find any penalty for carrying into an establishment where the owner doesnt want firearms.

I am not readily finding any supporting documentation about requirements for the size/location of the signage. For what it's worth, in several carry forums I read that there unfortunately is no statute spelling out requirements for posting and some say that a verbal warning is sufficient.

There are legal penalties however that are spelled out in the link I posted to the CT.gov site:

Sec. 29-37. Penalties. (a) Any person violating any provision of section 29-28 or 29-31 shall be fined not more than five hundred dollars or imprisoned not more than three years or both, and any pistol or revolver found in the possession of any person in violation of any of said provisions shall be forfeited.

In my home state signs such as these have no force of law behind them unless it is a place that is specifically prohibited in the code (mostly limited to municipal, state and federal government facilities such as courthouses, the capitol, Post Office and the secure area of airports). We may do a lot of things wrong here in California but at least in this case we have disallowed corporate rules from trumping constitutional rights. As I mentioned earlier in this thread though - if a representative of a business establishment (or any other private property) asks you to leave, regardless of the reason, you can be cited for trespassing.

reply to post by Tripnman


I saw those penalties but without a signage requirement attached there's no way to apply them.

Unless you are explicitly asked to leave. Something that is forbidden by Starbucks own policy. Says right in the letter that patrons will not be asked to leave.

thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Tripnman

 

I saw those penalties but without a signage requirement attached there's no way to apply them.

That's something that would need to be tested in the courts. Are you willing to OC in an CT shopping mall that has insufficient signage and get the ball rolling for the rest of us?

We're in agreement that the new policy as stated by Starbucks really changes nothing from the standpoint of legal enforceability but I will continue my long standing personal policy of not patronizing any establishment that feels the need to strip rights in exchange for entrance. No Guns = No Money.