« The tip of a tail of a very, very large dinosaur skeleton, | Main | "The Syrian crisis over the past few weeks has thrust President Obama into a role in which at times he has seemed uneasy: that of commander in chief." »

September 19, 2013

I’m a liberal because I think Starbucks has private property rights

Some gun rights activists and gun owners (note, I said “some”) responded by marching into their neighborhood Starbucks toting ARs, AKs, and shotguns.
They gathered in large groups, all packing heat as openly and visibly as possible, and took pictures to post on Twitter and Facebook..... This is like if I permit you to wear shoes in my house, so you, rejoicing my leniency, celebrate by jumping into a mud puddle, stomping on my carpet and putting your feet up on my coffee table. Congratulations, I’ve just amended my shoe policy, and it’s all your fault. | The Matt Walsh Blog

Posted by gerardvanderleun at September 19, 2013 3:12 PM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.

Your Say

I think most of us agree with this. I can make lots of coffee, and better coffee, for five bucks anyway.

Posted by: Lorne at September 19, 2013 4:21 PM

Yeah, meh. I don't care if a private business makes some silly statement. Starbucks coffee isn't all that great anyway. Especially here in the northwest there are 5 better coffee shops within a mile of any Starbucks anyway.

Freedom means free to say and do stupid stuff, even with your business.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 19, 2013 5:52 PM

Except as private business open to the public they have to follow just a few more rules, regulations and laws than the dude inviting over friends to his living room.

But playing the analogy game is fun, what if Starbucks said “Hey, we understand you enjoy your free speech and all, but when you visit us could you maybe not exercise it so much?” Yea, fuck you…or wipe my muddy feet…either one.

BTW, NOT going to Starbucks would be a better way to "protest" IMHO.

Posted by: tim at September 20, 2013 5:26 AM

Starbucks refuses certain customers (gun folks) and the Libs endorse that. A bakery recently refused to make a wedding cake for certain folks (gay couple) and the law came down on them, IIRC the bakery shut its doors. The libs also endorsed that. Libs have selective vision, no surprise there.

I don't go where I am not welcome and I think Starbucks sucks. Anyway, thank Starbucks for making another gun-free zone. I call them shooting galleries and so do the idiots that wanna go somewhere and kill people. Any people with concealed carry licenses avoid danger zones or act as their conscience and sense of safety dictates.

Posted by: chasmatic at September 20, 2013 6:18 AM

Reading comprehension is your friend.

Starbucks said nothing about banning concealed carriers, nothing about gun free zones.

They just ASKED people to not open carry in their establishments even though it is legal. A not unreasonable request.

You do not have a right to free speech on someone else's property. The First Amendment applies only to the government.

I do agree about the hypocrisy of the left concerning the gay mafia strong arming bakers et al. concerning their right to decline to provide services for gay weddings.

Posted by: butch at September 20, 2013 6:41 AM

Well you have the right to free speech everywhere, no matter what anyone says. What you don't have is the free expression of that right without limits in all situations and places. You can't say everything and anything you want without fear of reprisal or legal action, for instance.

All businesses already limit expression of free speech, they'll throw you out on your ear for saying some things or becoming too obnoxious.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 20, 2013 8:36 AM

“Well you have the right to free speech everywhere, no matter what anyone says.”

“All businesses already limit expression of free speech”

OK then…

Why oh why must every discussion about free speech ALWAYS goes into the obvious - “Well you can’t say (insert mind numbing analogy)? Yeah, we get it already.

As for my analogy regarding Starbucks/original post in respect to them asking customers to not open carry is not akin to them asking customers not to be rude, blah, blah blah…but rather them asking customers not to say something that is perfectly legal but just something they would rather you not. Say, a certain subject or what not.

BTW, why did Starbucks even come out and say this? They seem to want it both ways. They don’t have the balls to say “We’re banning open carry” but at the same time saying “We’d rather you didn’t”. Seems slightly chicken shit.

“You do not have a right to free speech on someone else's property.”

Sure you do, you just don’t have the right to be heard…or NOT thrown off property. But your damn sure have the right to say whatever you want. Big difference to “You do not have a right…”.

Posted by: tim at September 20, 2013 9:33 AM

Absolutely correct Butch, if I read you right. No sense looking for inferences or implications.

I personally think open carry is not wise. Not good tactically.

"In yer face" behavior is not appropriate and makes a lot of people nervous. It seems that many liberals do not like their strategies displayed by others. It is freedom-fighting if they do it but anti-social borderline terrorist behavior if others do it. Alinsky venerated hypocrisy, made an art form out of it.

Posted by: chasmatic at September 20, 2013 9:46 AM

Starbucks is in it for the money. Ideology and moral stance do not sell product.

"You want pacifist vegans that hug trees and save whales? Sure. You want captains of free market enterprise that hunt and own cabins and beemers? No problem. We are a mirror to your very unique values. Just buy our product. Buy lots of our product. We'll recycle the cups and give a percent or two to your favorite conscience-salving charity. Don't forget to buy lotsa coffee."
I reckon they'd rub shit on other heads if that's what it took, sell coffee.

Posted by: chasmatic at September 20, 2013 10:07 AM

Its a weak, meaningless, stupid policy. But like I said up top, they're free to be stupid. I think businesses should be able to restrict their customers however they want. You don't want any blondes in your shop? Good luck staying open, but knock yourself out.

Don't like it? Don't drink Starbucks Coffee, its not that great and it costs too much anyway. But this reaction just strikes me as silly.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at September 20, 2013 10:39 AM

As I've posted before, here or elsewhere: the gun rights folks who decided to "thank" Starbucks publicly for their policy of following a state's gun laws made a HUGE AND STUPID BLUNDER by openly publicizing this. What were they thinking? I knew this would happen. How did they expect Starbucks to react to being so openly "embraced" by 2nd Amendment types (which includes me, by the way) at a time of great controversy?

Posted by: Don Rodrigo at September 20, 2013 11:25 AM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)