Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've never been a fan of Starbucks, or coffee for that matter, but the Mrs loves the stuff. We both stopped by today, (both CC'd) and made it a point to let the on duty manager know that we support Corporate Starbucks decision to stay neutral in the matter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/2 ... 80062.html

The "other side" is loudly voicing their opinion. We should show support to companies that don't give in to opposition like this. I'm encouraging my wife to enjoy a cup of that $5 coffee more often. I support them :righton: , and she thinks I'm spoiling her :love: (win/win) :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Stopped into the Starbucks in Athens yesterday evening (Epps Bridge Parkway). OC'n my Sig 229. Placed my order and the nice lady told me it was $7.41. Then the guy working the drive thru walked up to the register, said something to her. She then said that I would have to pay for my Scone, but the drink was free. I, (already knowing why) asked her why. She said, they give LEO's a free drink, but they would have to pay for the pastry. I told here that I was not an Officer, and she said, "Well, what are you?" :shock: I told her I was just a private citizen and although I appreciated it, I would never impersonate an officer for any reason, let alone to get something free. She said, Oh, okay. The guy working the drive through comes back over.

Employee: So you just open carry?
Me: Yep
E: Nice, that's cool. What kind of gun is that?
M: Sig 229.
E: What caliber?
M: 40 cal
E: Cool, my brother carries an XD-40
M: That's a great gun, hoping to get that one soon!

He starts talking about how he wants to get his GWCL, but hasn't. We chat a bit about the gun he wants, and how we wants to carry, etc. I answer a few questions about the process and give him a GCO card and told him to give us a visit, and to visit the forum as well. He seemed very appreciative. Before I left, I expressed my thanks to all of them working for supporting our right to carry.
I thought it was a wonderful experience, and I will definately go back. I'll also let my brother in law(who is an office) know he can get a free drink there, too! lol :righton:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
16,485 Posts
Did you end up paying for it? I've corrected people before and still gotten comped. I wonder if it's hard to undo a comp or if they are just being polite.
Howerpower said:
I thought it was a wonderful experience, and I will definately go back. I'll also let my brother in law(who is an office)
Oh my. I guess he's really big, then?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,447 Posts
trust me they get plenty of support from my wife and I Oc every time I go in there. I'm proud that a company such as starbucks don't buckle to the pressure of the opposite minded. A company should decide on their own what they wish to do without the pressure. starbucks +1
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
So, they've made the stand they the will follow the gun policy of the states they operate in. That's definitely a step in the right direction. However, a lot of stores claim to this this, but have employees that think otherwise or are completely ignorant the gun laws of the state. What separates Starbucks from the rest? Do they train their employes, especially supervisors and managers, on this policy? If so, I'd be impressed and would patronize my local Starbucks a little more often.

Out of curiosity, what stores in Georgia are publicly pro-carry or chose, like Starbucks, to follow state laws AND their employees know it?

Since a store is private property, could they chose to extend MORE rights than the state allows? Could a store say "sure, you can open carry any gun you want here, GWL or not."?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,548 Posts
Sorry, a little off topic, but from the article posted:
Legislators in Montana and Tennessee, meanwhile, have passed measures seeking to exempt guns made and kept in-state from national gun control laws.
What exactly does this mean and is there a thread or anything on these? Are they seeking to exempt guns made in state and kept in state from BATFE or NFA regulations?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,548 Posts
P.S. as usual the comments on HP almost made me :puke:

I think that article might have the highest concentration of "for the children" comments I've ever seen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
well, he is big guy...not as big as an office, though! :shock: ~

Nonetheless, he is a sworn officeR! :dtmb: OH, and yes, I did end up paying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
dcannon1 said:
P.S. as usual the comments on HP almost made me :puke:

I think that article might have the highest concentration of "for the children" comments I've ever seen.
??? :?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,548 Posts
Howerpower said:
dcannon1 said:
P.S. as usual the comments on HP almost made me :puke:

I think that article might have the highest concentration of "for the children" comments I've ever seen.
??? :?
The article in the OP is on the Huffington Post. The readership of the Huffington Post tends to be on the liberal side. Most of the time when their is a gun article on there it attracts the most thoughtless, liberal propaganda BS comments you've ever heard (just go read the comments). Of the 20 I read at least 50% mentioned we need to ban guns in public "for the protection of children". This is a common argument by antis to tug on the heart strings of parents.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,239 Posts
dcannon1 said:
Sorry, a little off topic, but from the article posted:
Legislators in Montana and Tennessee, meanwhile, have passed measures seeking to exempt guns made and kept in-state from national gun control laws.
What exactly does this mean and is there a thread or anything on these? Are they seeking to exempt guns made in state and kept in state from BATFE or NFA regulations?
Basically, if I buy a suppressor made in Montana, I live in Montana, and I never take it outside of Montana, I shouldn't have to register or pay the Federal Tax Stamp requirement for it, because the Federal government has no business taxing intrastate commerce. There's a thread on here about it from like 6 months ago... hmmm... lemme dig it up...

Oh, here, we got off topic and discussed the Wyoming version of the same provision. It got proposed in Georgia as well, but didn't pass. http://georgiapacking.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=43256
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
ah...as a newbie here, I just made a critical error! I apoligize...
my friends call me HP, so I really confused....I was sitting here wondering, how did I tick off someone already! :help: :lol:

I now know HP= Huffington Post and not just HP=Howerpower :screwy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,548 Posts
Howerpower said:
ah...as a newbie here, I just made a critical error! I apoligize...
my friends call me HP, so I really confused....I was sitting here wondering, how did I tick off someone already! :help: :lol:

I now know HP= Huffington Post and not just HP=Howerpower :screwy:
Haha no worries I probably shouldn't abbreviate random things in my posts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,548 Posts
ookoshi said:
dcannon1 said:
Sorry, a little off topic, but from the article posted:
Legislators in Montana and Tennessee, meanwhile, have passed measures seeking to exempt guns made and kept in-state from national gun control laws.
What exactly does this mean and is there a thread or anything on these? Are they seeking to exempt guns made in state and kept in state from BATFE or NFA regulations?
Basically, if I buy a suppressor made in Montana, I live in Montana, and I never take it outside of Montana, I shouldn't have to register or pay the Federal Tax Stamp requirement for it, because the Federal government has no business taxing intrastate commerce. There's a thread on here about it from like 6 months ago... hmmm... lemme dig it up...

Oh, here, we got off topic and discussed the Wyoming version of the same provision. It got proposed in Georgia as well, but didn't pass. http://georgiapacking.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=43256
Thanks, looks like that all happened when I was on hiatus from the forum to increase my work productivity.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,239 Posts
Every anti-gun poster on HP, or anywhere for that matter, always fall into the same logical pitfalls.

1) Guns are inherently dangerous objects that could harm other people all on their own.

For this one, the anti's are just ignorant. I have never heard of a modern pistol or revolver in a holster discharging on its own. User error is always involved. Modern firearms have safeties to prevent these things from happening.

2) Adding location X to a list of carry locations is bad because we don't need wild west shootouts in that place.

Straw man. People already carry in other places outside of location X, and there aren't wild west shootouts in those places. Also, people can already carry in location X in other states and it has not resulted in wild west style shootouts there.

3) It's ridiculous for someone to think they would need a gun at location X.

Again, straw man. When does someone's right to defend themselves go away simply because the odds of it happening at location X are lower than at location Y? People don't carry because they think they will need to use a gun at location X. They carry because they believe they have a right to protect their life from harm regardless of location.

4) We need this law to reduce gun crime at location X.

(thanks CoffeeMate)

5) People having a gun near me at location X bothers nearby citizens who don't like guns.

Irrelevant. Since when does your comfort trump another person's right to protect themselves from harm? There was a time where people didn't like it if a colored man came into the same shop as them as well. Whether or not you're comfortable with it is not a reason to make it illegal.

I'm pretty sure you can copy and paste the same 5 responses to anything that comes out of an anti's mouth when it comes to gun control.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
ookoshi said:
Every anti-gun poster on HP, or anywhere for that matter, always fall into the same logical pitfalls.

1) Guns are inherently dangerous objects that could harm other people all on their own.

For this one, the anti's are just ignorant. I have never heard of a modern pistol or revolver in a holster discharging on its own. User error is always involved. Modern firearms have safeties to prevent these things from happening.

2) Adding location X to a list of carry locations is bad because we don't need wild west shootouts in that place.

Straw man. People already carry in other places outside of location X, and there aren't wild west shootouts in those places. Also, people can already carry in location X in other states and it has not resulted in wild west style shootouts there.

3) It's ridiculous for someone to think they would need a gun at location X.

Again, straw man. When does someone's right to defend themselves go away simply because the odds of it happening at location X are lower than at location Y? People don't carry because they think they will need to use a gun at location X. They carry because they believe they have a right to protect their life from harm regardless of location.

4) We need this law to reduce gun crime at location X.

(thanks CoffeeMate)

5) People having a gun near me at location X bothers nearby citizens who don't like guns.

Irrelevant. Since when does your comfort trump another person's right to protect themselves from harm? There was a time where people didn't like it if a colored man came into the same shop as them as well. Whether or not you're comfortable with it is not a reason to make it illegal.

I'm pretty sure you can copy and paste the same 5 responses to anything that comes out of an anti's mouth when it comes to gun control.
This is great! :righton: I'll definately be using this one for reference!!
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top