The Starbucks people are about as addicted to their coffee as I am to midget porn. They just opened a Starbucks here and you would have though Jesus had come back from the reaction people had.

NGAC? Sounds like a bunch of gang bangers upset that another gang banger got the drop on them and now want guns banned.

I can't imagine that the demographics there overlap enough for it to matter. Now, over a decade ago there was rather large protest organized against Anheuser-Busch when they came out in support of mandatory gun locks. Those demographics do overlap, but I don't recall it putting a big enough dent in their bottom line for anyone to care.

If i cared a little bit more I would go to starbucks on that day.

IrateShadow: I can't imagine that the demographics there overlap enough for it to matter. Now, over a decade ago there was rather large protest organized against Anheuser-Busch when they came out in support of mandatory gun locks. Those demographics do overlap, but I don't recall it putting a big enough dent in their bottom line for anyone to care.

You'd be surprised... Particularly here in PACNW we have a lot of gun-owning hipsters.

/adjusts his lens-less glasses and checks his holster

Starbucks Appreciation Day, February 14th, 2012.

Dimensio: Giltric: NGAC? Sounds like a bunch of gang bangers upset that another gang banger got the drop on them and now want guns banned.

The organization does claim fourteen million members. Based upon their claimed membership makeup, the organization evidently utilizes a recruitment method similar to one employed by the Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints.

Breeding?

SgtKashim: IrateShadow: I can't imagine that the demographics there overlap enough for it to matter. Now, over a decade ago there was rather large protest organized against Anheuser-Busch when they came out in support of mandatory gun locks. Those demographics do overlap, but I don't recall it putting a big enough dent in their bottom line for anyone to care.

You'd be surprised... Particularly here in PACNW we have a lot of gun-owning hipsters.

/adjusts his lens-less glasses and checks his holster

Read again, this is an anti-gun group, not a pro-gun group. Plenty of crossover between anti-guns and hippies. Anyways I stopped reading the article at "To protect their customers and employees, all of the retail chains-except for Starbucks- banned guns from being carried in their stores."

You know, for some reason I doubt this.. Have you really checked with ALL retail chains?

MindStalker: To protect their customers and employees, all of the retail chains-except for Starbucks- banned guns from being carried in their stores."

Yeah, what about Cabelas, Bass Pro and Sportsman's Warehouse? Methinks that they would likely be OK with you bringing guns inside. Might have to check in at Customer Service, but that is more for shoplift protection.

Dimensio: Giltric: NGAC? Sounds like a bunch of gang bangers upset that another gang banger got the drop on them and now want guns banned.

The organization does claim fourteen million members. Based upon their claimed membership makeup, the organization evidently utilizes a recruitment method similar to one employed by the Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints.

Their facebook page has, as of right now, 122 'likes'. Meanwhile, the NRA page has almost 1.3 million 'likes'. Even the obscure "Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership" facebook page has 650 likes.

It's astroturf, and not even particularly clever astroturf.

To the Anti-Gun nuts and the Fetus Huggers. You're never going to get your way. Deal with it.

A guy I know was stabbed with a knife once, I want all knives outlawed. People can't be trusted with them. That person wants a knife to cut their steak, BULLshiat they just want to stab CHILDREN WITH KNIVES.

When is society going to wake up and realize that knives in the house are extreamly dangerous and almost all of knife accidents occur in the home to a family member.

So starbucks is progun because they do not enact antigun policies? You have got to love the dialog when it is sumed up as you are either with us or against us.

My Starbucks boycott's going on 2 years now. I'm boycotting the issue of not having a Starbucks within 100 miles of where I live.

/get your overpriced shiat to Williston! :)

Epicedion: Why do we freak out about letting licensed adults carry firearms but not about letting them wrangle multi-ton hunks of metal around at high speeds?

BECAUSE ZOMG GUNS ARE BAD AND ONLY HAVE ONE PURPOSE!!!!1!

Epicedion: Why do we freak out about letting licensed adults carry firearms but not about letting them wrangle multi-ton hunks of metal around at high speeds?

Because most of the time I'm in my own multi-tun hunk of metal with all sorts of fancy safety gear to keep me safe if we run into each other.

/should I start wearing a flak jacket?

The_Sponge: Gun grabbers have no sense of reality, as illustrated by the fact that they just has to mention so-called "assault weapons" in said article.

"Starbucks allowing guns to be carried in thousands of their stores significantly increases everyone's risk of being a victim of gun violence."

I'm certainly no gun nut, but this argument is idiotic.

Anybody with a gun who waltzes into Starbucks with ill intentions certainly isn't going to care if the place allows open carry or not.

I think I will go to Starbucks on Feb 14 with a cardboard rifle as a counterprotest.

If people aren't willing to boycott Starbucks for having shiatty, burnt coffee, I don't see how this will work.

Yes! Down with that evil corporation that practices fair trade, pays its employees well over minimum wage and offers health benefits to even its part-timers! Cause they're all CORPORATEY!!!!!

Epicedion: enry: Because most of the time I'm in my own multi-tun hunk of metal with all sorts of fancy safety gear to keep me safe if we run into each other.

/should I start wearing a flak jacket?

If you want. However your perception of risk is a little skewed.

Do you drive without wearing a seatbelt?

Dimensio: enry: Epicedion: Why do we freak out about letting licensed adults carry firearms but not about letting them wrangle multi-ton hunks of metal around at high speeds?

Because most of the time I'm in my own multi-tun hunk of metal with all sorts of fancy safety gear to keep me safe if we run into each other.

/should I start wearing a flak jacket?

How, exactly, are pedestrians and cyclists protected should you collide with them?

Bolded for those who can't read.

For every cup of coffee you don't drink...I'm gonna drink threeeeeeeeeEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE I AM CORNHOLIO I NEED TP FOR MY BUNGHOLE!!!

This group appears to be astroturf at best, but on the other had the protest is about open carry which is pretty much exclusively the domain of paranoids with tiny dicks.

So, both sides are teh bad?

I will be sure to visit on Valentine's Day in support of their policies.

Wow is this a dumb argument made dumbly.

It's also a frantic scream against a problem that doesn't really exist.

Tiny irrational voices broadcast loud across the intraweb PA system.

And come Valentine's day, no one will even remember this.

Dimensio: enry: Dimensio: enry: Epicedion: Why do we freak out about letting licensed adults carry firearms but not about letting them wrangle multi-ton hunks of metal around at high speeds?

Because most of the time I'm in my own multi-tun hunk of metal with all sorts of fancy safety gear to keep me safe if we run into each other.

/should I start wearing a flak jacket?

How, exactly, are pedestrians and cyclists protected should you collide with them?

Bolded for those who can't read.

You did not address my question.

Yes I did, by showing your statement for what it was: irrelevent

Moreover, you also did not address Epicedion's question: that you may be "protected" in a multi-ton vehicle does not explain why advocates of unreasonable restriction upon civilian firearm ownership "freak out" when civilians are licensed to carry firearms.

I did address that. Sorry if your reading comprehension is less than stellar.

/not sure where I said that I advocated unreasonable gun restrictions either
//so you can't read and you're putting words in my mouth. Good jorb!

JimmyFartpants: "Starbucks allowing guns to be carried in thousands of their stores significantly increases everyone's risk of being a victim of gun violence."

I'm certainly no gun nut, but this argument is idiotic.

Anybody with a gun who waltzes into Starbucks with ill intentions certainly isn't going to care if the place allows open carry or not.

Oh no just the presence of a gun increase the chance of getting shot to a 100% possibility. Why just last night one of my guns broke out of my gun safe and then went on to break into my other gun safe where the ammo is stored. Loaded itself and then promptly went on a shooting rampage killing my wifes cat. When it was all done I admonished it in the harshest terms possible and threatened to remove its firing pin if it does not behave better, all while telling it good job on the cat. God I hated that cat.

Epicedion: enry: Do you drive without wearing a seatbelt?

You're not addressing the actual concern here. Cars are dangerous. About as dangerous (if not more so, by the number of injuries/deaths relative to the number owned) as firearms. Yet most people casually disregard the actual risk imposed by allowing the population by large to operate cars, with minimal licensing. Most people go so far as to ignore the accepted (and legally enforced) safety practices of operating these vehicles whenever they can get away with it.

So, why are guns not okay if cars are okay?

I already addressed this, but you appear to have reading issues too.

Cars can be dangerous if used incorrectly. Thus, they have all sorts of safety gear (seat belts, air bags, crumple zones, etc) that minimize risk when collisions occur. So what safety features are involved during normal operation of a firearm?

Dimensio: enry: So what safety features are involved during normal operation of a firearm?

A trigger guard and a holster that adequately covers a trigger.

You use a trigger lock and a holster while you're firing? Doesn't that throw off your aim?

/there's that reading comprehension thing again

Dimensio: fringedmyotis: This group appears to be astroturf at best, but on the other had the protest is about open carry which is pretty much exclusively the domain of paranoids with tiny dicks.

Please substantiate your assertion. Additionally, the organization is requesting that the Starbucks corporation enact a policy prohibiting the carrying of firearms by civilians regardless of whether the firearm is openly displayed.

Reading comp fail on my part r/e the first part. You are correct - this applies to both open and concealed carry. Although to be honest I can't see how they have a hope in hell of enforcing the latter without having metal detectors at the front door.

R/e the second point, this is based purely on personal observation in my own area (near Sacramento). There are - as far as I know - no scientific studies correlating dick size to a desire to carry openly. In my defense, there is high anecdotal correlation around here (large belt buckles, idiotically lifted trucks, paranoid bumper stickers, etc.).

Just sayin...