Re: Starbucks or "Slapping an Ally in the Face"

[uncle money bags]

That's what this whole thread has been about, If you carry a certain way you're "retarded"
If you open carry for reasons that I don't approve of, you're in the wrong.
If you carry this way, something bad may happen
No one needs to open carry, hell no one but law enforcement needs a firearm or at least anything but a double barreled shotgun.

this whole thread was about asshats who happen to open carry, and how that may be harmful to the cause.
It has been intentionally and unintentionally misinterpreted to be a slight against any one who open carries.
Open carry as a political statement, rather than as a method to carry based on the perceived threat has pitfalls, as has been pointed out.

However, your last sentence seems to take the situation to the absurd. Drawing that kind of parallel seems unwarranted.

 

[Coded-Dude]

to be fair, there are some in here that certainly feel open carry is unnecessary and should just be banned(again), so that it doesn't cause any trouble with the sheep, the politicians, or our standing with the community(gun buster signs, etc.)......

 

[caojyn]

However, your last sentence seems to take the situation to the absurd. Drawing that kind of parallel seems unwarranted.

you're right, that was the point, when we start arguing "needs" vs "desire" in relation to rights/privileges it can get absurd.

 

[uncle money bags]

to be fair, there are some in here that certainly feel open carry is unnecessary and should just be banned(again), so that it doesn't cause any trouble with the sheep, the politicians, or our standing with the community(gun buster signs, etc.)......

I would have to strongly disagree with those members.

you're right, that was the point, when we start arguing "needs" vs "desire" in relation to rights/privileges it can get absurd.

I got that point, and I agree with what your saying.
Look, I am about as anti political as anyone you may meet, but I do realize there are certain realities that cannot be overcome by being the thorn.

 

[caojyn]

but I do realize there are certain realities that cannot be overcome by being the thorn.

I can agree with that

On a side note: When you say "anti political" are you meaning that abstaining from Overt Open Carry (so as not to cause any waves) is PC? That's a good point, I honestly never thought of it like that. l

 

[uncle money bags]

I can agree with that

On a side note: When you say "anti political" are you meaning that abstaining from Overt Open Carry (so as not to cause any waves) is PC? That's a good point, I honestly never thought of it like that. l

while I agree with that assessment, I was actually just stating my disdain for politics in general. But, I will take accidentally making a good point over intentionally making a bad point any day!

 

[caojyn]

while I agree with that assessment, I was actually just stating my disdain for politics in general. But, I will take accidentally making a good point over intentionally making a bad point any day!

 

[Arin Morris]

Anti-OC people aren't anti-gun. Just anti-stupidity. That's what the whole flap is about. Just because it's legal doesn't mean someone needs to do it when it isn't necessary. Open Carry as practiced by most of the people that are doing it is about nothing more then inflating their deflated and damaged ego's.

I wasn't trying to imply that Anti-OC people are anti-gun, just both are anti-OC. I know where your opinion is on OC from your other posts. What I was specifically asking is why all the attention to this particular business that just so happens to abide by state law instead of banning carry outright in their stores. Wal-Mart is just one example, I'm sure there are several others. What's special about Starbucks?

 

[caojyn]

What's special about Starbucks?

Starbucks officially may be neutral, but the whole "hip coffee shop" angle is would (at least on the surface) seem to be aimed at the people with more liberal leanings. More so than walmart anyway. If they had OC mobbed a gun shop or other place that is mainly advertises to people with conservative leanings it wouldn't have been a big deal.

 

[Coded-Dude]

I wasn't trying to imply that Anti-OC people are anti-gun, just both are anti-OC. I know where your opinion is on OC from your other posts. What I was specifically asking is why all the attention to this particular business that just so happens to abide by state law instead of banning carry outright in their stores. Wal-Mart is just one example, I'm sure there are several others. What's special about Starbucks?

It could just be that they were picked by OCers in CA and the trend continued. It's used as a social gathering by many, so it makes a little more sense than wal-mart(who in most states sells firearms). When UOC got popular in CA, most stores where throwing up gun buster signs(not just one or two here and there like out here, they were everywhere), except for a few giant corporate stores, whose position is to merely follow state law. StarBucks is merely a victim of trying to remain neutral, and being a reasonable place to gather socially(to some....not me).