Squeak or Treat!

The raffle has ended, congratulations to the winners!

Thanks to everyone for their support through donations, both of items and monetary gifts. You are so appreciated!

Direct Donation


Lyme treatment is expensive. Thank you for your support!

The Armed Traveler


Click above to purchase!
Discount Code for $2 off: SQWTN2013

FUNdraiser Raffle!

Many thanks to Jennifer for spearheading this effort!

RAFFLE IS OVER - here are the results:

$5 tier winners!

$10 tier winners!

Gun Blog Black List

Want to Advertise?

Please email me for pricing and terms!

Need web design?

Check out Janet Lackey Design for all of your print and website design needs.

You broke it, you bought it.

So Starbucks has said that they would like for gun owners to NOT carry in stores, any more.  This is following one of the stupidest fights I’ve seen people get into in the 6-ish years I’ve been a part of the “gun owner” demographic.

From The Practical Tactical Podcast:

One internet poster said: “I never believed Starbucks was an ally anyway.” I would say he may be right. They weren’t. They are an outfit that sells coffee. Period. They just had a policy that wasn’t restrictive, and followed local law. They were unwillingly and unwittingly co-opted by the “rabid gun movement” people, and literally thrust on the national stage in the midst of a highly charged debate without their consultation on the matter.

This is why we can’t have nice things.

 

RTWT.

There are a couple of points I disagree on, but for the most part, this is how I feel about this situation.

I still think Starbucks either needs to shit or get off the pot (their “respectful request” is not legally binding, and they could choose to post if they REALLY wanted to get rid of gun owners; pick a side and stick with it, or continue being neutral while issuing a statement respectfully requesting that, as a public establishment under private ownership, Starbucks stores are not be used for political grand-standing), but GUN OWNERS PUT THEM THERE.

They stooped to calling people names using fancier language (and that…doesn’t count as ad hominem, which is something that many of you argue against all the time?  I must have missed that memo…), trolling a Facebook page that was supposed to be a gathering place for like-minded people (doesn’t matter who trolled it first – you don’t have to continue the trend), and walking into stores wearing unlicensed merchandise and carrying weapons that are too large to be useful in that small of a space, anyway.  They threw away logic and practicality in favor of being flashy, and who does that?  Think about it.

No, really.  THINK about it.

…still think you’re better than “them”?

____

I’ll add, as a note, that I was vehemently anti-gun about 8 years ago.  That turned into pro-gun over the next two years for two reasons, and the first one didn’t have nearly as much weight as the second:  1) I was raped and was being stalked by that rapist, and 2) The people having the conversations about guns, or at least the people I was exposed to, were articulate and awesome.

If I’d seen what was going on in public debates regarding Starbucks and guns back then, I would have stayed anti-gun.

This is NOT what I signed up for when I took on the responsibility.  We’re better than that.  If you disagree, then perhaps you should leave, because you’re making the rest of us look bad.

/rant

 

4 comments to You broke it, you bought it.

  • Khamosh

    I’d avoided looking up much on this but ran into it on another blog I check in on every so often. He showed a few photos of people openly carrying rifles in various Starbucks locations and posing for photos while doing so. The author squarely blames those people patronizing their local Starbucks with rifles slung over their shoulders for this current outcry and I have to agree with him. I understand that it may be legal but that does not necessarily make it wise, especially when there is a massive debate over the legality of “assault” rifles.

    Carry your handguns but don’t make a spectacle about it. If you choose to open carry where legal, fine, but don’t act like an ass. Go shopping, visit the coffee shop, run your errands while armed but there’s no need to draw attention unduly. Leave the long guns at home, in your car, at the range or hunting grounds. Choose your political battles over the 2nd amendment wisely.

    (I know you and I pretty much agree on this. I’m just venting a bit and making one of my rare public statements on these matters.)

    • And you know I agree with you.

      People have said stuff to me like, “We HAVE to be loud to push back!” I can see that, and I understand it, but at the same time, there are better ways to “be loud” than to carry an AK into a coffee shop, or call people rude names online. It sounds stupid to say “we’re better than that” in this situation, but…we should be. The only reason the world hasn’t gone to hell is because there are people willing to be logical and keep emotion out of a lot of stuff. I’m not always one of those people, and I’m certainly not one of those people when it comes to gun control, but there IS a line, and I know where it is, and I know better than to cross it. Toe it? Sure. Cross it? Nuh-uh. The line moves, and lately it’s been moving in a direction where some people who were neutral know there’s something wrong with how the world’s being presented to them. We, as a group, have to contribute to that without turning them off with tirades and extreme measures. Don’t we get pissy with the other side (no matter who they are – guns, religion, politics…) when they go over the top? Then how is it okay when we do it?

      Bleh. That’s how I feel about everything, right now…heh.

  • ASM826

    I agree that open carry of long guns looks like provocation.

    However, the idea that Starbucks or any other business that caters to the public can just post a sign and prevent a citizen from engaging in a Constitutionally protected activity needs more thought. If Starbucks had put out a letter that said, “We’re not making a rule, but we don’t like mixed race couples, so please, don’t come in our store together. Come in separately and purchase our products.”, the outcry would have been tremendous.

    They are doing the same thing with gun owners and if every gun owner in America refused to buy Starbucks, this would get revisited. A better letter would have addressed the issue, the provocative carry of long guns, leaving regular people to carry holstered pistols without comment.

    • In TN, anyone who posts an approved sign is within the law to refuse to allow someone who’s carrying into their place of business. No, it’s not Constitutionally-correct, but it IS legal, and I’m not about to get arrested to prove a point with a weapon…in that sense, it’s demonstrably different than nearly any other civil rights issue…even though it shouldn’t be.

      I agree with you on the implication of the request – it’s insulting. That’s why I’m so angry about people going into the store with long guns. You can prove a point without being ridiculously in-your-face about it. All you have to do is carry your gun like you normally would, don’t harass the employees (and technically, telling them you’re carrying is harassment, these days…I didn’t make the rules, I just follow most of them), get your coffee, and do what you would normally do. The only way people are going to see guns as “normal” is to see people acting “normally” with them. Making yourself stand out in the ways that several people have only serves to make matters worse.