On Friday, I shot this email off to Starbucks:
Dear Starbucks,
My name is [Linoge], and I have a small confession to make: despite serving in the US Navy for four years, I do not drink coffee. In fact, I do not even like coffee. However, even speaking as a non-coffee drinker, I wanted to write today and thank you for standing up for the rights of American citizens.
I understand that you have recently come under fire for allowing law-abiding citizens to carry firearms into your various establishments around the country (but specifically in California), and speaking as one of those citizens who routinely carries a firearm throughout my daily life, I am sincerely grateful that you have ignored the bullying tactics of those who have no respect for individual rights or personal safety. I hope you understand that, despite the prospect of petitions being drawn up against you, your pro-rights stance has created significant amounts of good will and positive press – after all, supporting rights is never the wrong position to take.
I wish I could promise to support you more in exchange for your decision to support Americans’ rights, but coffee just never grew on me… sorry. However, I do thank you once again, and sincerely hope you continue to stand by the rights all Americans have to keep themselves and their families safe by allowing those who so desire to bring their lawfully-carried firearms into your establishments.
Thank you for your time,
[Linoge].
I, personally, have not received a response from Starbucks yet, but they have said this concerning the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Ownership’s panty-wetting hysterics:
[NOTE: This blockquote has been redacted due to the questionable and unethical business practices of Righthaven LLC. Please contact MercuryNews.com to express your displeasure with their aligning themselves with that scumbag organization.]
Woot.
You can read more about the Brady Bunch’s idiocy towards Starbucks here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and countless other places.
Oh, and for any media representatives who might, somehow, be reading this post, please, for the love of all that is holy and good, learn the difference between “magazines” and “clips” – if you open carry in California, you have to have the loaded magazine removed from the firearm. If the firearm is using a “clip” (other than some variant of a moon clip), it is probably not categorized as a “handgun” [ETA] (and if they are handguns, they are probably antiques, and should be treated and handled accordingly) [/ETA].
great letter!
I can think of two handguns off the top of my head that used clips, not magazines.
One is the Mauser ‘Broomhandle’ C96. The other is a Steyr,(I think – might be Mannlicher. I know it was Austro-Hungarian), the model designator of which I can’t recall, of WWI vintage.
The toting of either one by OC advocates is possible, but highly unlikely.
Mike: Thanks. Little long-winded in places, but I hope it got the message across.
.
hearless Libertarian: There. Fixed it
FYI I talk with a Cali Gunnie who’s interested in open carry. He mentions a lot of Cali OC-Types like revolvers because speedloaders, clips, speed strips (which I consider “clips” themselves) because unlike magazines which are considered part of the gun, and therefore need to be worn openly, revolver loaders are not, and they can be carried how ever most convenient.
Still even the anti-gunners point out how stupid Cali’s OC laws are (of course they see it as justification of banning it…we look at the rest of America, and all the problems caused by people openly carrying, and make a more logical choice)
Makes sense – given that the firearm has to be unloaded to begin with, slapping a speed-loader in a revolver is about as fast as juicing up an auto-loader and racking the slide, assuming one practices enough. And not having to go with a Batman-belt is always a good thing in my book.
Personally, I am quite thankful I never really got into the carry movement in Kalifornistan… the no-carry-1000-feet-from-any-school thing would have given me enough heartache as it was, much less everything else!
[...] our customers do, so long as they do it within the bounds of whatever laws are applicable.” Freedom-loving folks like me promptly thanked them for their position, while anti-rights advocates around the country promptly wet their pants and engaged in a [...]
[...] on handful of shininessWeer'd Beard on what a facethis is not that hard | walls of the city on not letting rights be ground outDJ on not according to planLinoge on stickin’ it to the manLinoge on not according to [...]
[...] posts: this is not that hard | why we keep winning | not letting rights be ground out | Linoge | 13Mar10 1813 | things that go boom | buy my book Ads by Project Wonderful! [...]