-Proverb
Our saviour: The soldier, whose gun is circled, helps two women to safety. His identity has been protected for security reasons
I love coffee. But I don’t drink it everyday. Nor do I need the caffeine-fix. I simply like the taste. When I was growing up, I used to love going to Japan and having bottled coffee milk. It was like chocolate milk; but coffee flavored, and sweet. They no longer sell those. Just watered down iced coffee beverages.
Starbucks Frappuccinos are somewhat reminiscent of my favorite childhood drink in Japan. But it leaves a bad aftertaste in my mouth. And frankly, I prefer Coffee Bean’s pure vanilla ice-blended.
Well, 6 days ago Starbucks left another bad taste in my mouth:
Our company’s longstanding approach to “open carry” has been to follow local laws: we permit it in states where allowed and we prohibit it in states where these laws don’t exist. We have chosen this approach because we believe our store partners should not be put in the uncomfortable position of requiring customers to disarm or leave our stores. We believe that gun policy should be addressed by government and law enforcement—not by Starbucks and our store partners.
Recently, however, we’ve seen the “open carry” debate become increasingly uncivil and, in some cases, even threatening. Pro-gun activists have used our stores as a political stage for media events misleadingly called “Starbucks Appreciation Days” that disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of “open carry.” 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.
For these reasons, today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas—even in states where “open carry” is permitted—unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.
I would like to clarify two points. First, this is a request and not an outright ban. Why? Because we want to give responsible gun owners the chance to respect our request—and also because enforcing a ban would potentially require our partners to confront armed customers, and that is not a role I am comfortable asking Starbucks partners to take on. Second, we know we cannot satisfy everyone. For those who oppose “open carry,” we believe the legislative and policy-making process is the proper arena for this debate, not our stores. For those who champion “open carry,” please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers.
I am proud of our country and our heritage of civil discourse and debate. It is in this spirit that we make today’s request. Whatever your view, I encourage you to be responsible and respectful of each other as citizens and neighbors.
Starbucks is free to not only make such a request of its patrons; but to ban firearms on its own premises, if so desired.
Peggy Noonan in an interview with the CEO:
The company, which has some 10,000 stores and 160,000 employees in the U.S., is asking customers who carry handguns in open-carry states to please not bring their guns into the store. It’s hard to believe this will be taken as controversial or as anything other than reasonable, fair and sane, but we are an interesting country.
I spoke to Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz this afternoon, by phone.
Why did you do this? Why does Starbucks have to have a position on people bringing guns in for coffee?“We are not a policy maker and we’re not on any level anti-gun. But over the past four months there’s been episodes in and around our stores that alarmed us. Advocates on both sides [of the gun debate] began to stage events in and around Starbucks stores that mischaracterized Starbucks’ brand and position. That was not in the interests of our company, our shareholders and employees. So open-carry comes, and we abide by the law. But it began to disturb us, the number of customers and children who became alarmed at seeing people in the store carrying guns. . . . We had a couple situations the past few weeks where some people walked in with rifles! [Some local Starbucks stores] became a staging area for the argument over Second Amendment rights. We’re not pro-gun or anti-gun, and we decided to respectfully ask gun owners to leave their guns out of Starbucks.”
And yet by this request not to bring firearms on their premises is indeed taking a position; one on the side of the anti-gun advocates. They are not taking a neutral position. Think of the reverse reasoning if it read: ….it began to disturb us, the number of customers and children who became alarmed at seeing people in the store not carrying guns. . . . We had a couple situations the past few weeks where some people walked in without rifles!
Why did Starbucks become a theater of the gun debate?
“Our stores are a meeting place, coffee’s been part of conversation for hundreds of years” he said. This fact “became a natural opportunity for people to use us as a staging ground.”
How do you imagine this working—how do people who carry guns in open-carry states disarm themselves to get a cup of coffee?
“This decision was made through the lens of our values. . . . It’s not a ban. We’ll serve customers and not ask them to leave. . . . I personally have spent endless hours on this issue. I’ve spoken to passionate advocates on both sides.” He notes that two members of the Starbucks board are former Defense Secretary Bob Gates and former Sen. Bill Bradley. The board voted in support of the request. “We viewed this through the lens of bipartisanship.”
~~~Everyone probably asks you if you have guns. Do you have guns?
“I’m not gonna answer it because I don’t think it’s about me.”
Frankly, I feel safer when good citizens are trained and armed.
And in light of the Nairobi Mall terror attack, there is heightened concerns about the possibility of our own malls being staging grounds for future terror attacks.
Would you rather be among sheep or among sheepdog when the wolves come to play?
The Daily Mail has a possible answer:
A former marine emerged as a hero of the Nairobi siege yesterday after he was credited with saving up to 100 lives.
The ex soldier was having coffee at the Westgate mall when it was attacked by Islamists on Saturday.
With a gun tucked into his waistband, he was pictured helping two women from the complex.
His story emerged as sporadic gunfire continued to ring out from inside the mall early today as Kenyan security forces battled Al Qaeda-linked terrorists into a fourth day.
The former soldier is said to have returned to the building on a dozen occasions, despite intense gunfire.
A friend in Nairobi said: ‘What he did was so heroic. He was having coffee with friends when it happened.
‘He went back in 12 times and saved 100 people. Imagine going back in when you knew what was going on inside.’
I wonder what coffee shop he was hanging out in? [/snicker]
Homegrown Islamic terror is a problem. How many radicalized youths come from Somali descent? In the Nairobi attack, 3 of the terrorists might be Americans, with one a British female:
The attacker from Britain was a woman who has ‘done this many times before,’ Mohamed said which lends weight to speculation that the so-called ‘White Widow’, Samantha Lewhwaite may have taken part in the raid.
U.S. officials said they were looking into whether any Americans were involved. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Monday that the department had ‘no definitive evidence of the nationalities or the identities’ of the attackers.
A former fetus, the “wordsmith from nantucket” was born in Phoenix, Arizona in 1968. Adopted at birth, wordsmith grew up a military brat. He achieved his B.A. in English from the University of California, Los Angeles (graduating in the top 97% of his class), where he also competed rings for the UCLA mens gymnastics team. The events of 9/11 woke him from his political slumber and malaise. Currently a personal trainer and gymnastics coach.
The wordsmith has never been to Nantucket.
The report I read stated that the soldier was a serving SAS troop. Not a former Royal Marine.
Thanks. Do you have a link?
Another story:
Not monsters?
Outstanding! Whether he was a Royal Marine or soldier is insignificant. We rely on news organizations like our own government propaganda bureaus to give us the news under the blatant guise of political opportunism. Such mistakes are accepted in the name of high quality propaganda, but perhaps this was an effort to protect his identity by confusing the enemy. What a novel idea, a news service who actually tries to confuse the enemy rather than abetting them.
Well done, soldier/Marine, I’d like to buy you a cup of coffee someday.
Perhaps Starbucks should simple declare itself a “Gun Free Zone,” just like the theater in Aurora, Colo., the elementary school in Newton, Ct, the Navy Yard in D.C. You know, like a sign over the front door, twice the size of the branding sign so you can see it from the Interstate Highway, “GUN FREE COFFEE and CRITICAL CHIT-CHAT.” Kinda makes me think that any store that would reply on hope and hide to defend it’s customers, just ain’t a place where I want to gather and sip coffee.
I love your proverb, Word.
Very apt to this.
As to Starbucks, I keep getting given gift cards for the place and I can’t stand their coffees!
Now that I’m in Utah and got a CCR for taking a $35 class I can and will be armed, like the rest of the 1 in 5 are here who have that permit.
Starbucks wants to be the only one in a position to rob people….their coffees are TOO HIGH PRICED.
But the reality is that Starbucks rule will not prevent a criminal from coming in with a gun.
After all, robbers go where the money is…..and Starbucks rakes it in all day.
And robbers ignore all laws, even the ”no gun zone” law.
So how does this work? We bring the Somalis into our country, feed them until they are grow big, strong, and stupid. Then a terrorist recruiter sends them back to Africa to commit murder and mayhem. Hmm… when will they realize, we have bigger malls in North America, with fewer Muslims. Fewer Muslims means a greater number of targets of opportunity, is that why we call America the land of opportunity?
Hey Jihadists, is Starbucks fast becoming a safe target of opportunism? Nothing like a cup of coffee just before a massacre. There won’t be any Royal Marines with weapons at Starbucks. Servicemen can’t even carry on base these days.
Easy with the Starbucks-kicking. CEO Howard Schultz just said that he would PREFER that people did not open-carry in the stores. The problem was he did not sign up Starbucks to be the front line of the 2nd Amendment battle. Even Chick-fil-A was a one-day only affair.
Too many pro-gun Meetups were being held in Starbucks, with people toting longarms and such. It was getting to be a bit much. He’s just asking armed customers to please keep it covered. He did NOT banish gun owners.
@Doramin:
I have lived many years near a gang front line with different gang.
I got used to driving miles to eat out or shop.
NOTHING was safe anywhere near my home.
But on occasion an armed off-duty police officer would dine locally and then that place was a safe place to eat.
Only then.
When the Chick-fil-A issue was big news we went to our local (15 miles away) Chick-fil-A.
Weirdos were there trying to prevent business-as-usual.
But it was our fist time at a Chick-fil-A.
And we LOVED it!
We went back many times in CA.
Now, in Utah, we go to one often.
They are extremely busy everyday.
But they are organized far better than other fast food places.
A worker runs up to your car with the menu when you drive up, takes your order and radios it in.
Later, as your car is inching up in line toward the squawk box, a worker runs out and gives you a receipt and takes your money, making change on the spot.
Next, you get to the window where your order is already there for you.
Faster than anywhere else.
1 in 5 Utah residents has a CCR, more than that own guns.
It is a really safe place to live.
Women walk all over at night, to the gym, to get ice cream, to visit neighbors.
Yeah, they have a gun in their purse.
@Doramin: You are correct.
Actually, carrying a rifle into a coffee shop is overkill, in my opinion. Weapons should be understated not overstated. Making a statement by openly brandishing a weapon harms the image of the Second Amendment, and does nothing but intimidate people. That is not what carry laws are about.
If someone carried a rifle into a coffee shop, while I was there, I’d gather my tack and leave.
Everyone knows, Starbucks has been a Liberal haven for a long time. The decor, the music, the New York Times for sale, all advertise a strong Liberal presence; we should reassure these people not rub their noses in our right to carry. (I live in a non-carry state) Responsible gun carrying and ownership, means you don’t need to touch that weapon during the day, unless you intend to use it and then you better be damn sure of what you are doing.
As a former guide and trapper, who had to carry a rifle all day, it was a great relief to unsling that rifle during a meal. Carrying a rifle into a coffee shop may prove a point, but you will win no friends.
If I could carry, I would not want any bad actors knowing I was armed or where my weapon was hidden.
what happen with the citizen’s free choice?
they get their gun where the bad people may hurt them or other human being,
STARBUCK IS NOT PROTECTING HIS CUSTOMER FROM THE CRIMINALS WHO ALSO LIKE COFFEE,
HE WILL LOSE HIS CUSTOMERS BECAUSE THE TREND IS NOW ON THE SIDE OF PROTECTORS OF THE PUBLIC, MORE THAN THE COFFEE DRINKER IN A DANGER ZONE,
THAT MILITARY IS A HERO, I would have like to see his face,
the glowing soul shining through the face of that hero is a priviledge to see by other humans. one never forget it,
Exactly. Duh. You don’t want all and sundry to know you are packing. ESPECIALLY not those close to you.
“Oh yeah?! Well my daddy carries a gun and if your daddy makes any trouble for us…”
“Now honey! Don’t pull your gun! They’re stealing the bank’s money not ours…”
“Wilson’s been one of our best employees, officer. He does carry a gun, however…”
“Great CV! He interviewed well and the background check is spotless. There are rumors however, that he carries a gun everywhere…”
Enough said?
Interesting choice of words.
Maybe not, I am not the one who carried a rifle into Starbucks, and the only times it has been legal for me to pack a pistol was on the trapline and in the service, so being an ass with me will accomplish nothing.
they
they’re not asking to conceal their gun,
they demand to not bring their gun,
that is completly different,
remember that mother died in front of her daughter
who left her gun in the car, because it was
in a gun free restaurant,
Excuse me, I was agreeing with you. Albeit flippantly.
Every business has the right to regulate their business as they see fit, as long as they don’t break any laws. If you come on my property, you should follow my rules, if I have any. The news media has been reporting that Starbucks is banning weapons. Since they are only asking that guns not be displayed, I can go along with that, but I still won’t pay as much as they want for coffee.
Idaho has open carry, even in your car, as long as it is visible, concealed carry, you can buy almost any kind of ammo you want, and the only restrictions on guns are the federal regulations. I’m guessing that there will be a lot of Colt SSAR-15s sent to Idaho.
@Doramin #7: Yes, I get all that. The post was pieced together hastily, but I thought I was careful in how I presented my point(s).
@Nan G:
I think I first came across it through martial arts training two decades ago.
The full quote is:
Frankly, I can’t stand the taste of any of that ridiculously over priced “coffee” in Starbucks, or most of the similar-such pretentious coffee houses. Give me a thermos of regular truck stop coffee any day over that “crappachino”.
I’ll sip happily, knowing that it hasn’t ever passed through the intestinal tract of some obscure marsupial, monkey, giant feral rodent (or body pierced and tattooed minimum wage worker,) before being ground and brewed.
Ditto
that was funny
Wordsmith
yes, it’s a good one, does it come from CONFUSIOUS?
I use to learn his proverbs,
@Ditto: There is one distinct advantage to Starbucks; they usually have a good internet connection, even in the middle of nowhere, and the kicker, it’s free. The truck stops usually charge for internet, but if the crew is serious about working and the coffee is hot, it is usually superior to Starbucks. I drink while driving, at least two large plastic cups a day, and consider myself a coffee gourmet of the humble coffees found in various truck stops and convenience stores.
A curious side note: a cup of java and a Snickers chocolate bar will get you home at 3 AM, or to drive that last hundred miles, but then you lay in your bed, unable to sleep for four more hours. Life can be exasperating.
@Skook: #21
I’ve always preferred the Pilot house brand, myself. A cup of that and a pack of Hostess cupcakes has gotten me home on many a night.
Side note on Chick Filet:
A homosexual (CB handle “Sweet Cheeks”) of my acquaintance supported Chick Filet with this very wise observation:
“If liberals can shut down the Christians, they can shut down the Gays, once they don’t need us any longer.”
Petercat
yes they set an example to the WORLD including the MUSLIMS HATERS,
on supressing the public display of CHRISTIANITY,
it’s the first time in AMERICA the WARRIORS are being told to hide their PRAYERS , and some CHAPLAIN, are replace by civilian non CHRISTIAN,
and the 10 COMMANDS are being ask to be demolish and now dessecrated in public,
and a first time the DNC ASSEMBLE CROWD, on election time, is ask if they want GOD in or out of the discussion,
it has shown to the WORLD the public encouragement of negating CHRISTIANITY,
and not being objected by leadership, in this USA, which again was a first time of the history of the USA, and look what happened since then on the CHRISTIANS AROUND THE MIDDLE EAST, being massacre,
evil is among USA and strong
Smart friend, Peter. The Nazis made use of their gays while they were in the political minority. We know what happened later.
The Russian commies attracted a whole galaxy of various marxists, anarchists, freethinkers, suffragettes and all manner of radical political minorities while they were in exile and then through the revolution and civil war. Later all these “Old Comrades” were systematically shot or driven into exile (those who had not already drifted away in disillusion).
Castro’s revolution followed the same script. All of Cuba’s intelligentsia at first embraced his cause as he mouthed the proper freedom and dignity rhetoric. I stumbled across a recently published book in the library about a wayward American, William Alexander Morgan, the “Gringo Commandante” (a classic ADHD, rebel-without-a-cause, soldier-of-fortune idealist) who initially stumbled into the Cuban crusade by way of gun-running and became one of Castro’s most talented, self-taught, jungle fighters. He was later arrested and shot a few years after the victory as the paranoid Castro became convinced he was surreptitiously aiding his enemies (the book grew out of a series of interviews his wife gave in 2002…in FL of course).
As a teenager, I saw the Iranian revolution follow the same basic pattern (filtered through the MSM, of course). Khomeini in Paris attracted all manner of Iranian exiles, academics and Beautiful People to his cause. He said all the right things while it was necessary, then systematically shot or drove into exile successive crops of leaders over the next few years until he was left with his hard-core bearded fanatics. Marjane Satrapi’s comic-book styled memoir “Persepolis” describes the Iranian feminists who found themselves suppressed, disenfranchised and stuffed into chadors after the revolution.
Jonah Goldberg’s instant classic “Liberal Fascism” hammers the point that the vast majority of “liberals” know next to nothing about the hundred-year history of Progressivism in America; its leading thinkers and its real motives and objectives. They mostly just have a vague idea that Liberalism is for truth and social justice, for the cool and the hip, and of a warm and fuzzy future where everybody is taken care of, with rainbows and skittles for all and where those who dare to disagree with them won’t have the right to breathe air, let alone have an opinion. The harder-core among them genuinely believe in a Cloward-Piven fantasy where, after the collapse, a beautiful socialist utopia will arise, phoenixlike, from the ashes of the Old Order. Every government-approved minority is anticipating that they will be in charge, with Whitey and everyone else, subservient to them. All the welfare classes have been sold on an easy future.
In my heart of hearts I really believe the Obama/Ayers crowd looks forward to a “Hunger Games” scenario, where they hold absolute power and live it up in the Imperial City and the rubes shiver and starve in District 12. Then again, imagining detailed blueprints in their file drawers may be giving them too much credit. It probably boils down to a ruthless will to power-by-any-means and a generalized hatred of the masses who refuse to acknowledge their glory.
The blacks, Azatlanos, greens, muslims, feminazis, gays, polyamorites, vegans, furrys, etc. may all think they will be among the favored few in the Brave New World but they are really ALL on the menu.
And if Cruz and the real conservatives out there want to hammer wedges into the liberal coalition they might elaborate on Ronaldus Magnus’ classic question: “Are you better off than you were five years ago?”, sketch out the current grim reality and where it is inexorably leading to. Besides the usual interviews and live shots they should hit the speaking circuit and directly target the liberal sacred cows in their dens and ask them directly if they really think they will be eating caviar and farting through silk* in Obamaworld?
*Classic Russian saying.
Since I was an over-the-road trucker for 14 years, and went to what I call the “connected 48 states”, I’m sure I have eaten in some of the truck stops you have, and maybe even at the same time. I never have been a coffee drinker. I call myself a social coffee drinker. What else can you have to drink on a cold day that is hot and you get free refills? In case you didn’t know it, the body builds up a resistance to the caffeine in coffee, so that you keep needing more to get the effect it gives the first time a person starts drinking it. My father-in-law would get massive headaches if he didn’t get his coffee.
I am reminded of the new trucker who was walking into a truck stop and saw another trucker walking out and holding something in his hand. The conversation went something like this:
NEW TRUCKER
What’s that?
VETERAN TRUCKER
They call this a Thermos.
NEW
What does it do?
VET
It keeps hot things hot and cold things cold. You aught to get you one for driving down the highway.
NEW
That’s amazing. I’m going to get me one.
The new trucker did the things he needed to do while he was at the truck stop, and also got himself a Thermos. As he was leaving the truck stop, another rookie trucker was walking in.
ROOKIE
What’s that?
NEW
They call this a Thermos.
ROOKIE
What does it do?
NEW
It keeps hot things hot and cold things cold for driving down the highway. You aught to get yourself one. I just bought this one, filled it up, and am ready to head down the highway.
NEW
What did you put in it?
ROOKIE
I put chili and iced tea in mine.
Smorgasbord
that’s a good story,
bye
@Skook: Marine to Marine I found your take here absolutely on target. There is no need for a civilian to ever openly carry a weapon into a place of business, restaurant or coffee shop. For what purpose? Macho posturing?
Starbucks has only asked. Certainly their right.
@Richard Wheeler: #27
Since I found out that Starbucks has only asked people not to open carry, I have crossed them off of my do not buy from list.
@Smorgasbord: @Smorgasbord: @Smorgasbord: They won’t miss your low caf. business Smorg. I’m with Skooks on this.
@Richard Wheeler:
I don’t know if you (nor how many other FA readers) are aware, but our own CJ has been embroiled in a battle with the Temple Police Dept. over an incident where he was illegally disarmed by a Temple police officer while out for a hike with his son:
There’s a couple of photos of CJ open-carrying into Starbucks a while back, without any apparent alarmism from patrons or workers.
Hmm….
I wonder if any of this has been in response to CJ’s story?
In any event, I doubt CJ’s desire to walk into a place like Starbucks with his rifle in open view has anything to do with a desire for “macho posturing”.
Updated the post with the following 2 photos of CJ patronizing Starbucks in Texas as law-abiding citizen:
Would you feel safe or less safe by his presence there (and the presence of his weapon)?
If he was a complete stranger to you, would you be alarmed?
Sorry I’ve been out of pocket for so long. I’ll write an update for everyone about my case and my newly formed non-profit, OpenCarryTexas.org.
@Wordsmith: What would you call it? Making a point? IMO unnecessary. But then I don’t live in or plan to visit Texas. Should make Reto5 happy.
A few August days in Dallas set me straight + too much barbeque.
If he was a complete stranger to me? I wouldn’t be alarmed but I’d feel less safe and more vigilent.
Well, hey, it depends on the neighborhood. I don’t see any goatees, dreadlocks or birkenstocks so I’ll assume this isn’t that sort of Starbucks.
@Wordsmith: #30
When CJ wrote that article in FA, I responded to it something like this:
This is one of the usual answers cops get from people who don’t like cops, or from crooks. If CJ would have just explained why he had the rifle, the incident probably wouldn’t have happened. It’s possible someone called the cops. The officer didn’t know what to expect, and when CJ wouldn’t answer his question, that was a red flag to him.
@Wordsmith: @Wordsmith: #31
With all of the mass shooting that have happened, I would feel very uncomfortable if someone walked in with an AR-15 that has the magazine in it. Why would someone who intends no harm go in a business with a loaded AR-15? He should have at least taken the magazine out.
We have open carry in Idaho, but I can’t say I have ever seen or heard of anyone carry a rifle into a business.
@Smorgasbord: Concur.
@Richard Wheeler:
Would you feel safer in the “not knowing”? In someone you don’t know who is conceal-carrying? I think it says more about the person who feels unease than it does about the person who is “causing” the unease.
In wake of CJ’s incident, he and others might be “making a point”. Is the point not one worth making?
@Smorgasbord: I think CJ himself regrets some of what he said (he’ll correct me if I’m wrong), out of frustration at the officer, who I think mishandled the situation. In situations like this, we sometimes lose our cool.
Based upon CJ’s description of what happened that led up to the moment the camera was turned on, I find it difficult to fault CJ for reacting to the officer not asking for his weapon but reaching out and trying to take it from him. The officer apparently did not communicate in a manner that could have avoided escalating a confrontation with a good man.
@Smorgasbord:
Or from someone who understands his citizen rights and won’t be intimidated by a law enforcement officer who is overreaching his authority.
I don’t think the officer gave CJ a chance to explain why he had the rifle. It didn’t get to that stage of inquiry before the officer grabbed for his weapon (which CJ was attached to, because of the sling).
I’m sure CJ would have answered all relevant questions if the officer had used a different approach.
@Smorgasbord:
Oh, is there an epidemic of mass shootings? Really?!
Really?!?
And if so, I’d rather have an armed CJ around than a disarmed one to give me and others a snowball’s chance of surviving a mass shooter’s attack.
@Wordsmith, #31:
If I noticed this idiot as I was approaching the store entrance, I would promptly turn around and go elsewhere. I assume a majority of even marginally alert potential customers would do exactly the same. He might think he’s making some point. I’d make mine by promptly calling the cops and reporting a man in Starbucks with an assault rifle.
Given the frequency of high profile mass shootings in the nation, a compulsion to openly display a firearm in public like this suggests like this strongly suggests the presence of a few loose screws.
@Greg: Oh Greg, you sad, scared little man. I’m perfectly in charge of my faculties. In fact, in the more 200 times I’ve openly carried my rifle, not a single person was threatened, injured, shot, robbed, gunned down, murdered, assaulted, raped, pillaged, beaten, oppressed, or otherwise violated. Weird how that works, isn’t it?
The fact that you would call an armed police officer at the mere sight of a semi-automatic rifle (I don’t own any assault rifles by the way) speaks volumes about you. Does the sight of a gun on my BACK while paying for a drink really scream “CRIMINAL! CRIMINAL! DERANGED LUNATIC MASS SHOOTER!”? Maybe what we need to start prosecuting are people that wet their pants at the sight of a lawfully carried firearm and waste valuable law enforcement resources by call calling 911 to report a non-crime.
But, don’t worry, Greg. There are some of us willing to exercise our rights to ensure yours are safely protected.
@CJ, #42:
I’m sure the sight of a stranger entering the front door of a coffee shop with an assault rifle slung over his shoulder relaxes other customers, brightens up their day, and makes them feel safer about any children they might happen to have there with them.
I’m perfectly capable of protecting my own person and rights, Batman. I don’t need strangers carrying assault rifles into restaurants, movie theaters, coffee shops, the kid’s school plays, or other public places to make me feel safer about my environment. Maybe it’s my background, but I instantly view any random civilian openly displaying a weapon in such an inappropriate public setting as a provocation and a potential threat. If people want to responsibly carry concealed weapons into public settings, they should at least keep the damn things properly concealed. I shouldn’t be forced into having to make an evaluation of their possible intentions and mental state while I’m trying to enjoy my coffee or dinner.
CJ
HI,
the smart CONSERVATIVES, have their gut’s feeling telling them if this guy is safe,
but the other think the gun will shoot by itself,
@Greg: are you illiterate? I said I don’t own any assault rifles. All my rifles are semi-automatic, just like my pistols. And apparently you do need someone to protect your rights if you have to call the police when you see a gun in public. But again, don’t worry about your cowardice; yhere are sheepdogs willing to keep your grazing pasture green and safe.
@Wordsmith: #38
You said:
In the article you copied, the officer let CJ answer the question.
I don’t know what kind of an attitude the officer had when he asked CJ the question. I know if I am asked a question with the wrong attitude, it can turn my attitude the wrong way.
@Wordsmith: #40
As I have mentioned many times, I am glad I live in a state that if something should happen to me, there will probably be several people with guns on them ready to help me. What is ironic is that when we did a pro-gun rally at the Capital Building in Boise, guns were allowed inside, but the PVC pipe I used to make my signs wasn’t, because it could be used to harm someone. I’m guessing that the ban was put in place before the law to allow guns was passed. Our Capital Building allows open carry in it, even AR-15s.
@CJ, #45:
The term assault rifle is a useful generic descriptive, having something to do with both function and appearance. I would call what I’m seeing in the photograph an assault rife. That would give most people a fair idea what broad category of firearm I’m speaking of. The term is common parlance, and it’s not going away.
Calling the police is sometimes a useful way to transmit a message concerning what is inappropriate public behavior. Carrying around a weapon such as that shown in the photo is inappropriate. At least it would be deemed to be so in the town where I live. Walk down the sidewalk here carrying that, legally or no, and there would be cops on the scene in a matter of minutes, responding to multiple cell phone calls.
I apologize if my response was too personal. Let’s try to forget the politics for a minute. Seriously, how the hell am I or is anyone else supposed to know what a perfect stranger’s intentions or mental state are? At the very least, the sudden presence of such a weapon forces everyone who sees it into the stressful consideration of all sorts of possibilities. Depending upon a person’s background, it may also force consideration of all manner of possible aggressive responses. There’s also the possibility—or likelihood, depending on where a person lives—that a number of the people making such an evaluation are also armed, with their weapons handy but properly concealed.
I strongly disapprove of routine open carry by civilians in public settings. If person is going to carry, there are a number of very good reasons why the weapon should be concealed. I honestly can’t think of many good reasons for a person to draw attention to the fact that they’re armed.
the OBAMA PLAN WORK, they are trying to freak up the public with those law abiding citizens
having WEAPON, they could very well save lives or suport a police officer being overwhem by a criminal
it’s their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO CARRY IT
but it’s so demonize that anyone carrying a weapon must stand his ground or they all will loose it,
Greg, are you kidding? THE AMERICANS have seen weapon
since the last 2 plus centuries, they are use to see it,
except those like you so endoctrinated they follow the wrong path like that police officer could have been shot
by grabing CJ’S WEAPON, WHO WOULD HAVE BEEN IN HIS RIGHT TO KILL HIM FOR THAT STUPID ACTION.
he is too scare to be a officer of the law,
@Greg:
So you are using a term even you don’t understand. An assault rifle is a fully automatic rifle, typically used by the military and police. The common citizen may own an assault rifle if they pay the ATF for the ability to own one. Most gun owners don’t.
And you’d be wrong. It’s a semi-automatic rifle, no different than any other rifle used for hunting, target shooting, competition, etc.
Drinking and driving is common. Should we accept that too?
Says who? If it’s legal, it’s obviously appropriate. Your opinion means nothing as long as we live in a Constitutional Republic. Our rights are not dependent on what you – or others in your town – deem appropriate. I think it’s inappropriate that you disagree with me. Does that mean I should force you to stop arguing and demand that you accept my argument? No. It’s just as absurd as you telling me what is appropriate about how I legally carry my firearms.
This is such an easy question to answer I can’t believe you even asked it. Look at those pictures above. Does it LOOK like the guy has ill-intent? Here’s some free education for you: the bad guy will be pointing his gun at people, not slinging it innocently on his back with his wife next to him. If you also did your research you’d find that over 99.9% of gunowners have never committed a crime. So the probability that the guy carrying the gun openly is a criminal is extremely low. In fact, in Texas, only .18% of CHL holders have committed ANY crimes. This includes everything from murder to highway racing to vandalism, with or without guns (overwhelming without).
So, you have nothing to worry about then. If someone carrying a semi-automatic rifle walks in will ill-intent, you can rest assured that there is probably (hopefully) someone in there that can respond to it. Of course, as long as it’s not a gun-free zone. Then, you’re screwed.
You’re a statist. You believe that only the government should be armed and if just the government were armed they wouldn’t abuse that power. Ask Cubans, Venezuelans, Chinese, Britons, Australians, and other nationals living in countries where only the government can have firearms. The violent crime rates shot through the roof. Would you feel threatened if a man walked in with a hammer? Why not? Four times more people are killed with hammers than semi-automatic rifles. Your fears are unfounded and irrational on their face. You are a product of your television. You are a product of the media. You are a product of statists.
I can too and this is why you should support it more than ever. Here’s a couple of reasons that instantly come to mind:
1. If a criminal walks into a place and sees people like me openly carrying a rifle or pistol, the likelihood he would turn around and walk out is greater than had he walked in and thought he could get away with his intentions, regardless of whether or not there were actually people armed. You see, when you have a concealed weapon, you will have to REACT to a crime already in progress because criminal look for “soft” targets – those that are easy. If he doesn’t see guns, he is likely to assume he can get away with it. However, when you carry openly, you DETER that crime to begin with. Why do you think people don’t commit crimes in the presence of police officers or try to rob them? Why don’t more police officers have their weapons stolen by these criminals? Your logic is flawed.
2. Let’s assume that me carrying a weapon openly draws attention to me. GOOD! For someone like yourself that wets his pants at the sight of a gun, you should WANT people like me near you so that I’m the one shot and not you. My presence will give you an opportunity to run and dial your precious 911 (that is, if you haven’t already called 911 to have the law-abiding citizen removed that would have protected you).