Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

The KKK Took My Latte Away?

Posted by on Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 8:30 AM

coffee-and-guns-500.jpg

So there's been this lone guy protesting in front of the Starbucks at 1st and Pike, by the Pike Place Market. He's really into it. Won't break to talk, but will pose for pictures. He's trying to hand anyone and everyone his flyer, some of which says:

open-carry-letter.jpg
Starbucks Corporation refuses to excluded open carry right wing gun extremists from there stores, presenting an imminent danger to all patrons of Starbucks...

...Open carry advocates are dangerously wielding weapons just like criminial youth gangs, terrorist minded militias or the KKK. They are one sided organizations who are de facto intolerant of opposing points of view. There exists the possibilities that there weapons will be used in Starbucks on political opponents and that innocent third parties will also be hurt...

...For your own health and safety it may be advisable not to patronize Starbucks until they put up no guns allowed signs...

All typos [sic], click flyer to enlarge to read the rest.

 

Comments (28) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
SchmuckyTheCat 1
So for 40 years Starbucks has not had a gun policy.

Why is this suddenly an issue now?
Posted by SchmuckyTheCat on March 10, 2010 at 8:44 AM
2
People have the right to keep and BEAR arms, so our genius founding fathers must have meant that it would be a good thing to actually carry your arms around town.

Just like speech is good, that's why we have free speech.

I intend to bring my nuclear weapon to Starbucks and my tank and my bazooka, too, these are clearly arms and no gun nuts have ever been able to tell me how in the world we can ban those if we have the right to keep, and bear, arms.

Similarly, my numchuks and anthrax. [Note to NSC: um, this e mail is a joke pls. don't arrest me in the middle of the night but if you do I am ready to oppose that form of governmental tyranny with my bazooka, tank, nukes, glock, rocket launcher, grenades and other arms I now have a right to keep just like Tom Jefferson intended).

I sincerely hope all those with guns DO strart carrying them around maybe then they'd actually do something about the rampant crime in some neighborhoods and the open air drug dealing. The local sheriff really seems incapable of enforceing law and order. And if you think it's bad here, try Hilltop or Harlem, we really need some of the NRA posses to hit the streets there, maybe escort the little tykes to school and intimidate the drug crews into going away.
Posted by Literalist on March 10, 2010 at 8:47 AM
noirony 3
He's exercising free speech without the benefit of cool clothes or a liberal arts degree . . . . Quick, let's sneer at him in front of an audience of hundreds!
Posted by noirony on March 10, 2010 at 8:48 AM
Renton Mike 4
So.... allowing people with guns in is equivilent to not allowing black people in? FAIL.
Posted by Renton Mike on March 10, 2010 at 8:48 AM
the duster 5
Starbucks will make or break the second amendment.
Posted by the duster on March 10, 2010 at 8:57 AM
Timmytee 6
Next time I'm in Starbuck's, I'm going to be extra careful when I order an "extra shot" in my mocha.
Posted by Timmytee on March 10, 2010 at 8:57 AM
Fifty-Two-Eighty 7
Proof positive that you can be a kook even if you don't own a gun.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on March 10, 2010 at 9:00 AM
Mahtli69 8
Well, he's right. Guns and coffee don't mix. Those caffeine jitters will put you off target every time.
Posted by Mahtli69 on March 10, 2010 at 9:00 AM
9
Gotta say as a Sbux barista I'm glad that the company is refusing to put me in the position of telling folks that they can't carry into my store - right or wrong it's legal right now and I'm glad that we're just gonna stick to the law. If you're upset about people packing heat on the street call your representatives, sign a petition, donate; don't complain about a big corporation actually trying to do less to control things.
Posted by QuakeRugger on March 10, 2010 at 9:01 AM
Banna 10
I'll have a large calibre, extra shot, double-pump militia latte, please.
Posted by Banna http://www.ucp.org on March 10, 2010 at 9:02 AM
11
Gun owners carry guns around all the time - concealed. Personally, I'd be a lot more comfortable knowing who has the guns in any room I'm in, than trying to figure out who's packing. Because somebody is.
Posted by Hannah in Portland on March 10, 2010 at 9:16 AM
Urgutha Forka 12
Starbucks is really missing a great opportunity to be the Official Coffee Sponsor for our well-regulated militia.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on March 10, 2010 at 9:17 AM
linda with a y 13
These nut jobs are the only ones who have time for this kind of stuff.

I wonder if he needs approval from the CDC to post the "Health and Safety Warning"?
Posted by linda with a y on March 10, 2010 at 9:32 AM
Enigma 14
"They are one sided organizations who are de facto intolerant of opposing points of view."
Sounds like the two sides can agree on something!
Posted by Enigma http://approvereferendum71.org/ on March 10, 2010 at 9:53 AM
15
Permitted, responsible gun owners are not the ones we need to be concerned about, regardless if it's open-carry or concealed.
Posted by happy renter on March 10, 2010 at 9:59 AM
Fnarf 16
@15, no, we need to be worried about the thugs who steal the guns of the permitted, responsible gun owners who keep them in their houses. That's where thugs GET guns, don't you know? Millions of permitted, responsible gun owners keep buying them for them.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on March 10, 2010 at 10:07 AM
Fnarf 17
@15, no, we need to be worried about the thugs who steal the guns of the permitted, responsible gun owners who keep them in their houses. That's where thugs GET guns, don't you know? Millions of permitted, responsible gun owners keep buying them for them.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on March 10, 2010 at 10:07 AM
The Amazing Jim 18
Guns don't kill people, I do.
Posted by The Amazing Jim http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#/profile.php?id=100000076496291&ref=profile on March 10, 2010 at 10:16 AM
giffy 19
God I hate high unemployment. In a better economy this guy would be back at what ever form of marginal employment he normally has and not bothering people about stupid and pointless issues.
Posted by giffy on March 10, 2010 at 10:31 AM
Fifty-Two-Eighty 20
You got it, Jimbo (the tat says it all).
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on March 10, 2010 at 10:34 AM
21
Fnarf

Actually, the statistics don't back you up, at least from what I know of the source of guns for gangs in SoCal. Most of them get the guns through illegal trade coming in from other nations. The percentage of guns they get by stealing them out of the home of legal gun owners is very, very small. If you wanted to prevent gun thugs in LA, the best course of action would be to redirect border patrol from harassing illegals and toward chasing down gun running.

Posted by Former Law Enforcement on March 10, 2010 at 11:00 AM
22
@19,

See also: teabaggers and those assholes in Amarillo.
Posted by keshmeshi on March 10, 2010 at 11:01 AM
23
@21,

Gangs are highly organized. What about common criminals? You know, the ones more likely to shoot YOU. You think they have the connections to buy foreign guns?
Posted by keshmeshi on March 10, 2010 at 11:03 AM
24
Straw purchases are also a big problem. 2nd Amendment defenders are always talking about enforcing existing gun laws is enough. If a dealer is selling to straw buyers, the ATF should strap on their jackboots and go after them with both barrels.
Posted by Westside forever on March 10, 2010 at 12:07 PM
25
24
Straw purchases?
Doesn't Starbucks throw in the straw for free?
Posted by no wonder the bastards went bankrupt on March 10, 2010 at 1:56 PM
26
@21

I thought all those Mexican Drug Cartels got their guns from American gun stores.

Are they smuggling them across the border and then back again or what?

Also, @15
Why should assume that someone carrying a gun is responsible? Why should we assume someone with a permit is responsible?
Posted by emor on March 10, 2010 at 8:18 PM
Fifty-Two-Eighty 27
@26: Your first premise is only true if you believe everything the New York Times says about guns is the gospel truth. Not only isn't it the truth, sometimes it's a flagrant lie. Yes, really - they have an agenda and don't mind "bending the truth" to further it.

As far as your second point is concerned, well, sigh, I guess you're right. People have a long-standing history of fucking up everything they touch, so we should never trust them with anything. That leaves out driving cars, of course, because they screw that up on a regular basis. And knives - well, you don't need them, right? (Tell that to a cook.) And dogs, well, they're dangerous, right? Don't forget bicycles - they kill more kids than guns do every year.

Got it?
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on March 10, 2010 at 8:37 PM
28
26
innocent until proven guilty.
or irresponsible.
Posted by this is America on March 11, 2010 at 6:03 AM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy