Starbucks Gets Dragged Into Gun Control Debate

"GIRL WITH FLAG AND GUN, 1952" by SEATTLE MUNICIPAL ARCHIVES.

One would hope that jittery dudes and prominently displayed firearms would not go together, as there are few things in the world that could be less safe than a guy walking around a public place wielding a loaded pistol in one hand and a ludicrously large caffeinated beverage in the other. But Starbucks locations around the United States have become the latest unlikely battleground in the gun control debate.

Giddy at the fact that open carry laws in 43 states allow them to demonstrate what badasses they are by wearing a gun at all times, packs of gun owners are descending on Starbucks around the nation, firearms strapped to their sides, proudly displaying the fact that they could murder anyone in the room if they wanted to. But they won’t, probably, because they are responsible gun owners. This is exactly what the framers had in mind when they spoke of a "well-regulated militia." It is also not at all like carrying around the security blanket you clutched when you were a toddler, screaming and wetting yourself at the very notion of anyone trying to take it away or even asking you to leave it at home. We repeat, it is nothing like this, for reasons that will come to us.

Unlike other establishments that have decided to flex their muscle as private businesses and added 'No Handguns' to 'No Shirt, No Shoes No Service' signs, Seattle’s own Starbucks has as yet refused to make any rules that prohibit firearms inside their stores, instead deferring to pertinent state laws. Which, to be fair, is understandable - any company policy that requires a barista to try and disarm NRA members on a regular basis is asking a lot from a class of employees that are already typically underpaid and overworked.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@seattlest.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Ian Chant in News on March 8, 2010 8:00 AM

Comments [rss]

Regis Lacher

I'm closing comments on this thread. Thanks for your input. It's been taken into consideration, but I think we're done here.

Stealthcupcake

Ian,

What, were my comments too truthful for your blog?

Or was it the use of the word 'fat'? Whatever it was, it's BS and you know it.

You know you are wrong and you cannot refute what I wrote, so you simply removed it.

From the perspective of someone in the "middle" I will tell you that there are "crazies"

that are pro second amendment and there are "crazies" that are afraid of guns (which,

by the way are inanimate objects). The difference is the NRA 'nuts' are actually right on this

issue; the constitution is on their side. I am so sick of this 'right' vs. 'left' BS. If you stop

and think about what you are doing, you are NO different than the conservative nutjobs

that want to outlaw abortion. You are the SAME as the right wing nut jobs.

They want to take away a woman's right to choose to have an abortion.

People like you want to take away a person's right to defend themselves.

Those two things are THE SAME. Some group always wants to take away rights from other

people and they always have SOME RIGHTEOUS excuse as to why it is OK. When the simple

fact is it is NEVER OK.

Like I said in my post that you removed, I do not own a gun because I could not live with myself

if I took another person's life. But I support people who are willing to stand up for themselves and

other people.

I also would like to say that while I do not agree with what you wrote in your little blog,

I WOULD NEVER SILENCE YOUR OPINION SIMPLY BECAUSE I DO NOT AGREE WITH IT.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Stealthcupcake

There are so few comments because if you disagree with the author, your comments get REMOVED.

I commented on this article and now it is gone. I did not even get an email telling me.

Moral of the story; don't dissent or you'll be silenced.

NewHCE

I check in seattlest from DCist from time to time. This was the first I read, however, stupid enough to merit a comment.

BTW-of those 30K deaths-more than half were suicides. The homicide rate for 2009 is the lowest it has been in 30 years.

MonkeyPilot

While I'm mostly agnostic on the issue of gun rights, it's fairly amazing how quickly the pro-gun lobby comes out of the woodwork, especially given that the average number of comments on a given post here is zero.

And I would hardly call 30,000 gun deaths per year "hopolophobia" [sic]. I'm sure the reference here won't be appreciated so feel free to post your own source for an estimate of gun-related deaths.

jfh

your leaps of association and logic are refutable, MonkeyPilot. Cite me one source by that demonstrates any relationship of the topic at hand to "gun deaths" and demonstrate correct use of the term "hopolophbia" and you may have first prize: a kiss-and-tell date with Mr. Chant.

If you can't do this, then you will win second prize: two kiss-and-tell dates with Mr. Chant.

bpm2000

Funny you say that monkey since, oh, your comment history has ZERO comments other than this one. I read this site every day (even with terrible shit like this). Chew on that.

MonkeyPilot

I've been reading and commenting here for several years. You missed the point that most posts get NO comments. This one got attention in under an hour. Predictably from users with no other comments. Hmmm.

Chew on what?

bpm2000

Well stop changing your username then. :P

jfh

Having read this article, I understand why I have never heard of Ian Chant or seattlest before Google brought it up

What Freud said about hopolophobia, Mr. Chant, is relevant here.

marz

Personally I don't mind open carry, however, I do think that those who are allowed to carry in this fashion should be limited. I see nothing wrong with allowing police officers to carry guns in stores or any other building.

What good are the police if they are not allowed to protect you or themselves not matter where they are?

bpm2000

I guess I should comment with the same substance this story is written from: hurr what a shitty article!

NewHCE

Gimme a break.."proudly displaying the fact that they could murder anyone in the room if they wanted to."

"jittery dudes and prominently displayed firearms."

Tell me, do you walk in fear every time you step outside in Seattle? Are you saying you are okay with concealed carry but wet your pants every if you see a gun? Open carry men and women are potential mass murderers but concealed carry folks are not?

Don't get me started on "well regulated," you don't even know what it means in the vernacular of the time.

For the record, I don't think open carry is a good idea because of people like yourself who react so irrationally.