The Gun debate sandbox

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 5661 - 5680 of total 5785 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:10am PT
http://www.starbucks.com/blog/an-open-letter-from-howard-schultz/1268

Dear Fellow Americans,

Few topics in America generate a more polarized and emotional debate than guns. In recent months, Starbucks stores and our partners (employees) who work in our stores have been thrust unwillingly into the middle of this debate. That’s why I am writing today with a respectful request that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas.

From the beginning, our vision at Starbucks has been to create a “third place” between home and work where people can come together to enjoy the peace and pleasure of coffee and community. Our values have always centered on building community rather than dividing people, and our stores exist to give every customer a safe and comfortable respite from the concerns of daily life.

We appreciate that there is a highly sensitive balance of rights and responsibilities surrounding America’s gun laws, and we recognize the deep passion for and against the “open carry” laws adopted by many states. (In the United States, “open carry” is the term used for openly carrying a firearm in public.) For years we have listened carefully to input from our customers, partners, community leaders and voices on both sides of this complicated, highly charged issue.

Our company’s longstanding approach to “open carry” has been to follow local laws: we permit it in states where allowed and we prohibit it in states where these laws don’t exist. We have chosen this approach because we believe our store partners should not be put in the uncomfortable position of requiring customers to disarm or leave our stores. We believe that gun policy should be addressed by government and law enforcement—not by Starbucks and our store partners.

Recently, however, we’ve seen the “open carry” debate become increasingly uncivil and, in some cases, even threatening. Pro-gun activists have used our stores as a political stage for media events misleadingly called “Starbucks Appreciation Days” that disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of “open carry.” To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores. Some anti-gun activists have also played a role in ratcheting up the rhetoric and friction, including soliciting and confronting our customers and partners.

For these reasons, today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas—even in states where “open carry” is permitted—unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.

I would like to clarify two points. First, this is a request and not an outright ban. Why? Because we want to give responsible gun owners the chance to respect our request—and also because enforcing a ban would potentially require our partners to confront armed customers, and that is not a role I am comfortable asking Starbucks partners to take on. Second, we know we cannot satisfy everyone. For those who oppose “open carry,” we believe the legislative and policy-making process is the proper arena for this debate, not our stores. For those who champion “open carry,” please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers.

I am proud of our country and our heritage of civil discourse and debate. It is in this spirit that we make today’s request. Whatever your view, I encourage you to be responsible and respectful of each other as citizens and neighbors.

Sincerely,

Howard Schultz
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:18am PT
hmmm, I was going to get coffee at Alpina where fat angry old men rant libertarian bullshit all day long... but now I think I will go to Starbucks instead.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:22am PT
OK,, with the Naval instalation shooting just the other day,, WHY hasnt this thread been tromped upon by the "caring" anti gunners???
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:25am PT
well Ron,

in the words of Sarah Palin, "Why bother"?

fact is that we have now become immune to mass shootings

it just does not shock any more

so, carry on!
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:28am PT
Norton, even the press ISNT playing it like other shootings. Dont you think this is ODD? I mean,, every other shooting,, even one on ones,, get major air time but a Naval installation shooting is "just another news report"..

I purposefully said nothing about here to see if here would be the same, and by golly, it was..
the Fet

climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:40am PT
Washington Navy Yard gunman Aaron Alexis tried to buy an AR-15 assault rifle at a Virginia gun store last week after test firing one, but the store wouldn't sell it to him right away, CBS News has learned.

The reason for the refusal isn't clear.

Alexis then purchased a shotgun he used in his rampage, sources tell CBS News.

The owners of two gun stores in Virginia told CBS News Alexis would have been able to buy an AR-15, he just wouldn't have gotten it right away.

How can you gun nuts live with yourselves being against background checks? The killer should have gotten an AR-15 right away right? Otherwise our 2nd amendment rights are being violated. But luckily he was still able to buy a shotgun despite a long record of mental illness?

Universal background checks should be a non-controversial, no-brainer basis of gun control that everyone can agree on. But the gun nuts won't even allow that, thanks a lot.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:43am PT
Maybe reasonable people are tired of playing your side's bullshit games Ron. It is clear to any reasonable person that access to machines designed specifically for killing should be restricted, regardless of the outdated and misinterpreted 2nd amendment. The dude had a history of misusing firearms and a history of mental illness... yet he was allowed to buy a shotgun and ammunition within weeks of the shooting.

Why keep hashing it out with the idiots who refuse to acknowledge the simple truth?
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:48am PT
well Ron,

you and I must be following completely different new sources for you to say that this
shooting did not generate major media coverage

From CNN to Fox to MSNBC to HLN to ABC, NBC, and CBS and every major newspaper,
they all had extensive coverage from the beginning and throughout the day and day after
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:52am PT
Ron gets his "news" from conservative blogs, townhall.com, hotair.com, etc.

They all report that an AR-15 was used... by the police to stop the shooter... you know, offering well-reasoned angles that help inform the "debate."
Binks

climber
Uranus
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:57am PT
Screw gun owner's rights. We are getting shot up every few months because of the stupidly easy access.
Jebus H Bomz

climber
Peavine Basecamp
Sep 18, 2013 - 11:03am PT
Ron, now you're complaining because you DON'T see a hue and cry for gun restrictions? Are you just a natural born whiner, or what?
Dr. F.

Ice climber
SoCal
Sep 18, 2013 - 11:09am PT
Are you Gun Nuts part of a Well Regulated Militia?

If not, then I guess your rights ARE NOT PROTECTED by the 2nd Amendment.
Have you read the 2nd Amendment?


What IS a well-regulated militia?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/25/1173770/-What-IS-a-well-regulated-militia

The strongest argument for gun control is found in the 2nd amendment itself, which reads:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Read it again:
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
What does "well regulated" mean? In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court stated that
the adjective 'well-regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training.
What is the mechanism by which "proper discipline and training" is provided to members of this militia? How well disciplined was Adam Lanza? James Holmes? Jared Loughner? Cho Seung Hui?
Until this so-called militia is being adequately regulated, the purported right of the people to keep and bear arms MUST be infringed. If it is not regulated (or infringed upon), such a militia actually undermines and threatens the security of the state.

.
jonnyrig

Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
Sep 18, 2013 - 08:07pm PT
How come reasonable people who own firearms and support background checks dont get any press?

Because then you would all have to STFU.
bit'er ol' guy

climber
the past
Sep 18, 2013 - 08:09pm PT


lame
jonnyrig

Trad climber
formerly known as hillrat
Sep 18, 2013 - 08:13pm PT
indeed.
as if the rest isnt.
fear

Ice climber
hartford, ct
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:02pm PT
5678 ... Holy Crap!

Keepin' the sheeple busy fighting each other and ignoring the real issues. And it's working great!
jghedge

climber
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:09pm PT


"How come reasonable people who own firearms and support background checks dont get any press? "


Because they're too cowed by the NRA to speak put
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:16pm PT
"...they're too cowed by the NRA to speak put"


Please explain the mechanics of this.
philo

Trad climber
Is that light the end of the tunnel or a train?
Sep 18, 2013 - 10:17pm PT
6-Year-Old Shoots 4-Year-Old Sister, Father Tells Him To Lie
AUTHOR: SHANNON ARGUETA SEPTEMBER 18, 2013 9:16 AM
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/09/18/6-year-old-shoots-4-year-old-sister-father-tells-him-to-lie/

The loony, gun obsessed, right-wing idiots of our beautifully screwed up country love to say that the gun problem we have is not their fault. The problem we have is that criminals buy stolen firearms and they are the ones who are causing all of the problems. Real gun-loving Americans are super-duper responsible and do everything right! They are properly trained, they practice gun safety, they are responsible and protecting their rights as ‘Muricans dammit! Yeppers….the problem lies solely at the feet of criminals. Except it doesn’t and Fred B. Maphis’ arrest in Wisconsin for telling his six-year-old son to lie about how he shot his little sister is more proof that their ‘scary criminal’ theory is total bullsh#t.

48-year-old Maphis was watching television in his Alma, Wisconsin home on August 30th when he heard a gunshot followed by screams. He ran into the other room to find his 6-year-old son trying to clean up blood and his 4-year-old daughter with a gunshot wound to the side of her head. He wrapped her wound in towels and rushed her to the local hospital. What a terrifying ordeal for this responsible gun owning father!



Maphis’ son told the Jackson County Sheriff’s deputies that he dropped the shotgun and it went off. Maphis explained that his firearms are usually unloaded and locked up but he forgot to put it away after shooting at birds the previous day. Instead, his shotgun was loaded and sitting on top of a dog kennel. The boy later admitted to police that he did not drop the gun at all, that’s what his father told him to say. He explained to officers that his sister asked him to point the gun at her and he did but got to close to her head. He actually meant to just shoot over her shoulder.

So, not only Mr. Responsible ‘forget’ to put his loaded shotgun away, and leave it in a place that is easily accessible to his two small children but he also told his child to lie. He definitely deserves an award for his stupidity. That’s not even the best part of the story!

The boy’s mother told the sheriff’s department the boy has been shooting firearms since he’s been 3 years old and he has a .22-caliber rifle he’s allowed to shoot with parental supervision, according to the complaint.

Yup the 6-year-old child has been shooting guns since he was three and owns a rifle!!! Are they for real? Why in the world does a three-year old need to shoot a gun? Was the mother saying that as if it somehow gets them off the hook because they tried to teach their child to respect guns?

Responsible gun owners would never, ever forget to lock up their firearms with children in the house. Conservatives will say that it is an isolated incident but it most certainly is not, here’s a short list of incidents this year:

January: A two-year old South Carolina boy was shot in the head by his older brother by accident.
February: Tennessee man accidentally shot in the chest by his brother.
March: A Michigan police officer’s 4-year-old son shot and killed himself at home.
April: A 4-year-old kills a women with a deputy’s loaded gun at a barbecue.
May: A 15-year-old Oklahoma girl dies after accidental gun discharge.
June: A 13-year-old Nevada girl is killed after another girl accidentally fires a weapon.
July: A 16-year-old Texas boy died after a gun he was handling discharged.
August: Wife accidentally shoots and kills her husband in their Arizona home.
September: NYPD officer accidentally shoots two women in Times Square.
That is just a tiny sample of a much larger list. So when gun maniacs say that is just a criminal problem, they are clearly mistaken. Accidental shootings happen ALL THE TIME and many times people die because of them. This little girl was very, very lucky; if her brother had been maybe an inch closer to her skull she’d probably be dead.

Maphis, the responsible gun loving father has been charged with two misdemeanors: leaving a loaded firearm near a child and obstructing an officer. Why he told his son to lie is beyond me, did he think he wouldn’t be in trouble? He left a loaded shotgun on a dog kennel! He just proved to not only be everything wrong with gun lovers USA but also a horrible parent.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Sep 19, 2013 - 06:31am PT
How come reasonable people who own firearms and support background checks dont get any press?

Because nobody is worried about us owning/using guns responsibly. It is the idiots who are shooting into the dark at 3am with people around that people are concerned about... and the ones who try to write their behavior off as just typical drunk hunters having fun, not meaning any harm... it reminds me of the "boys will be boys" defense so prevalent in rape culture... and the ones arguing that if everyone had a gun there would be less gun violence... and the ones that think everyone (except convicted felons) should be able to walk into a gun store and buy any gun they want, any time they want, with a cursory background check, no mental health evaluation, no mandatory safety training, and no insurance for their shiny new killing machine. Responsible gun owners wouldn't be inconvenienced by any of that.


It ain't right... THAT is why it gets press... duh.
Messages 5661 - 5680 of total 5785 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews