It is patriotic to express our rights. You want to bring a gun to a coffee shop? Go ahead, man. God bless America.
Guns and Starbucks: why?
- Thread starter brodie21
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That sounds great in theory, but if a robber is also armed and perhaps nuts/desperate enough (and he might assume that no one inside this particular Starbucks is packing), then I reeeeaaaalllly don't want to be standing in the middle of a face off between him and the local NRA members when I'm buying my hot chocolate. I don't see how robberies will decrease to be honest and I suspect that wasn't Starbucks intention when they did this.The Singularity said:
In my humble (and likely to be soon criticised) opinion, this is more likely to scare away some of Starbucks "Clientel" rather than roobers, who will be horrified of the possibility of someone sitting next to them with a Glock in their underpants while trying to enjoy expensive coffee.
But I'm a bleeding-heart commie liberal whiney ass limey brit, so what do I know?
A stereotype is a mostly untrue believe perpetuated by ignorance, so no I have never, or would ever label someone with one. But to your credit, you stuck with simple race-baiting in lieu of springing Godwin's law on this thread...manaman said:I lived in Texas for seven years. It's a stereotype.thethingthatlurks said:Dude, I reside in Texas. If that doesn't warrant my hatred for gun toting rednecks in your view, I suggest you spend a few days down here. Besides, how can it be a stereotype if it's true?manaman said:That is just rude. Bet you wouldn't be so quick to shout out a stereotype as rude and unfounded as that if you where talking about something race related.thethingthatlurks said:Why would gun owners carry their little toys into a coffee shop? They are polar opposites really. I mean, people buy guns to compensate for, uhm, various bodily deficiencies (don't deny it, you know it's true), whereas coffee shops target the more elite, educated, and sophisticated segment of the population. Ok, maybe not Starbucks, with their laughable mix of beverage names that don't mean anything when translated into english (btw, did you know that a latte is just steamed milk in non-starbucksese?).
Maybe I was wrong and you would be just as quick to shout out a stereotype as rude as that one in a discussion about race.
Or maybe you just need to get out more and away from whatever town you live in down there in Texas and experience life how it might be elsewhere. I am going to guess that you are not well traveled as the thought that I might have actually been to or lived in Texas never seemed to cross your mind when you made your above statement.
Now let me explain basic psychology: a weapon is used to project power. The wielder feels a sense of inadequacy, lack of control, or weakness, and attempts to overcome it by clinging to an object that enhances their (or his most likely) strength. It is of course little more than an compensation, but that doesn't matter. We all use coping like that in some way, of course. It's just that buying expensive cars is less likely to result deaths...
Fine, I had no idea that you might reside here as well, so I'll concede that point. Texas is large, and not every place is like Austin or Dallas. But I am rather well traveled, and gun loving mentality of (the gun owning populace of the south) is frankly pathetic...
I don't get it.
Are they worried that someone will hold the place up and that they're customers should be armed for that event?
Are they worried that someone will hold the place up and that they're customers should be armed for that event?
As far as I can tell, all the company has done with this decision is set up a nice little loophole for themselves. They've "banned" guns from within their stores, which can only mean that there have been previous...issues. By banning the guns, they thereby allow themselves the legal right to keep anyone, legally licensed or not, from entering their store.
I see it more as a "we have this rule, so you can't come in" choice than anything else. It gives them a basis of banning people from their stores that might cause problems, along with those that have.
Not the greatest idea, especially with the potential for abuse and loss of customers. And I see no need for such a strange rule in the first place (responsible gun owners = reasonably intelligent people)
I see it more as a "we have this rule, so you can't come in" choice than anything else. It gives them a basis of banning people from their stores that might cause problems, along with those that have.
Not the greatest idea, especially with the potential for abuse and loss of customers. And I see no need for such a strange rule in the first place (responsible gun owners = reasonably intelligent people)
A stereotype is a simplified and standardized conception or image invested with special meaning and held in common by members of a group.thethingthatlurks said:
Untruth does not actually enter into it.
This is both a stereotype and untrue. What you are falling prey to is confirmation bias and listening to an outspoken subgroup.
You want to believe that there is something wrong with the gun nuts. You remember, and process information that confirms your own preconceptions with a higher priority. Selectively ignoring conflicting information, or processing that information in a way that confirms your preexisting viewpoint.
Each and every person I know who happens to enjoy firearms as a hobby, carries, and or enjoys precision target shooting as a sport does not in any way fit in to the stereotype you perpetuate. Myself included.
You formed the above idea not through scientific study, and a deep understanding of the human psyche. You formed it the opposite way, you started with the hypothesis that all people that favor guns where compensating for something, and then filled it in through deduction as you understood things to work.
Well, constitutional rights don't necessarily apply to private property. For example, you have no free speech in private schools. Starbucks can ban pretty much ban whatever is protected by the constitution because it's their property. I'm not saying that's good or bad, that's just the way the law works.MercenaryCanary said:
Not impressed. Take a sword into starbucks and pretend you might be attacked by ninjas at any moment.
Some dude who is so jittery off coffee that he can't shoot for shit, at least thats the picture that comes to my mind.Alpha Reaper757 said:
Well... erm... it's Starbuck's call. There's no law that says they can or can't allow guns on their property.
I suppose the security argument is that robbers are less likely to pick on Starbucks when they know there's a significant chance of the other customers being armed as well. But that has to be balanced against the chance of an armed customer shooting someone by mistake or even on purpose.
It's all swings and roundabouts.
People don't want guns in the shops because they think of the worst case scenaroi, they don't want to get shot and that's fair enough. But from a pragmatic viewpoint banning guns from anywhere in the US seems impractical.
Someone out to rob you probably isn't bothered whether you 'allow' guns in the store or not. With the prevalence of hand guns in America there's no practical way of stopping people bringing concealed fire arms into the store anyway. What are they supposed to do, install metal detectors and X-rays in every store?
Even though I'm (mostly) pro gun control, I think this is an over reaction. It sounds to me like Starbuck's are just being pragmatic.
I suppose the security argument is that robbers are less likely to pick on Starbucks when they know there's a significant chance of the other customers being armed as well. But that has to be balanced against the chance of an armed customer shooting someone by mistake or even on purpose.
It's all swings and roundabouts.
People don't want guns in the shops because they think of the worst case scenaroi, they don't want to get shot and that's fair enough. But from a pragmatic viewpoint banning guns from anywhere in the US seems impractical.
Someone out to rob you probably isn't bothered whether you 'allow' guns in the store or not. With the prevalence of hand guns in America there's no practical way of stopping people bringing concealed fire arms into the store anyway. What are they supposed to do, install metal detectors and X-rays in every store?
Even though I'm (mostly) pro gun control, I think this is an over reaction. It sounds to me like Starbuck's are just being pragmatic.
Besides the staff?Alpha Reaper757 said:
Apparently people are less likely to use guns if the guns are in plain sight for everyone to see.
SIDE NOTE: I would protest making kids under 12 protest.
SIDE NOTE: I would protest making kids under 12 protest.
Well, I AM one of those 'elites' you spout on about, yet even with my college education and sophistication I am still an avid deer hunter and gun enthusiast. I don't have guns b/c my cock is too small, I have them for hunting and would get a carry pistol (likely a .380 or .45 small frame) if I could afford it.thethingthatlurks said:Dude, I reside in Texas. If that doesn't warrant my hatred for gun toting rednecks in your view, I suggest you spend a few days down here. Besides, how can it be a stereotype if it's true?manaman said:That is just rude. Bet you wouldn't be so quick to shout out a stereotype as rude and unfounded as that if you where talking about something race related.thethingthatlurks said:Why would gun owners carry their little toys into a coffee shop? They are polar opposites really. I mean, people buy guns to compensate for, uhm, various bodily deficiencies (don't deny it, you know it's true
Playing the stereotype game: you sound like the standard limp-wristed liberal socialist that just wants to completely hand us over to a dictatorship that promises 'safety'.
Oya, p.s., you can judge adequacy issues much better by the car someone drives. The flashier/more overpowered the car, the smaller the cock. I drive an old, underpowered (and faded to pink) 94 corolla. Most the "sophisticates" drive either the conspicuously trendy (big words for 'flashy') Prius or some overpriced luxo-cruiser. Who's got the adequacy issues again?
I guess I should reply, just because I find this so damn amusing...nabilus13 said:Well, I AM one of those 'elites' you spout on about, yet even with my college education and sophistication I am still an avid deer hunter and gun enthusiast. I don't have guns b/c my cock is too small, I have them for hunting and would get a carry pistol (likely a .380 or .45 small frame) if I could afford it.thethingthatlurks said:Dude, I reside in Texas. If that doesn't warrant my hatred for gun toting rednecks in your view, I suggest you spend a few days down here. Besides, how can it be a stereotype if it's true?manaman said:That is just rude. Bet you wouldn't be so quick to shout out a stereotype as rude and unfounded as that if you where talking about something race related.thethingthatlurks said:Why would gun owners carry their little toys into a coffee shop? They are polar opposites really. I mean, people buy guns to compensate for, uhm, various bodily deficiencies (don't deny it, you know it's true
Playing the stereotype game: you sound like the standard limp-wristed liberal socialist that just wants to completely hand us over to a dictatorship that promises 'safety'.
Oya, p.s., you can judge adequacy issues much better by the car someone drives. The flashier/more overpowered the car, the smaller the cock. I drive an old, underpowered (and faded to pink) 94 corolla. Most the "sophisticates" drive either the conspicuously trendy (big words for 'flashy') Prius or some overpriced luxo-cruiser. Who's got the adequacy issues again?
Kindly spend ten seconds and think exactly about why you find this so offensive. Next, ask yourself why you find weapons so fascinating (and "because it's fun" isn't a valid answer). Maybe, just maybe, you'll realize that what you enjoy most of all is the display of power.
I almost wish I could say something about cars, but I don't even own one, as my financial resources are stretched a bit thin after 3 years of college. Still, at least you seem to recognize the pattern when it comes to cars. Projection of power/wealth...
I find the lumping together of all gun owners with the lunatic fringe offensive.
I find them 'fascinating' because they get me cheap food. A deer puts out about 30-40+lbs. of meat each, for an investment of $24 for the tag, $1(approx.) per bullet. Or about $1.20/lb. or less for meat that is far superior to what you buy in the store (even the "organic" stores). It becomes even cheaper if you get more than 1 b/c the tag is good for at one buck and one or more does depending on area.
As for a carry pistol, it takes time to call the cops. It takes time for them to respond. If someone is threatening lethal force on me, I feel fully justified returning the sentiment. A carry pistol is an absolute, no question, out-of-options, LAST RESORT.
They aren't 'fascinating', they're functional.
I find them 'fascinating' because they get me cheap food. A deer puts out about 30-40+lbs. of meat each, for an investment of $24 for the tag, $1(approx.) per bullet. Or about $1.20/lb. or less for meat that is far superior to what you buy in the store (even the "organic" stores). It becomes even cheaper if you get more than 1 b/c the tag is good for at one buck and one or more does depending on area.
As for a carry pistol, it takes time to call the cops. It takes time for them to respond. If someone is threatening lethal force on me, I feel fully justified returning the sentiment. A carry pistol is an absolute, no question, out-of-options, LAST RESORT.
They aren't 'fascinating', they're functional.
Starbucks are packed with yuppies who are known to have money to spend freely. More importantly, much of the customer base would fall into the "unarmed" category. You have targets with plenty of cash and a low probability of them being armed. Seems like a good place to rob to me.Alpha Reaper757 said: