Tweet
The National Gun Victim’s Action Council (NGAC) has announced a Starbucks boycott
A nationwide boycott of Starbucks stores and its products will be launched on Valentine’s Day 2012. Its goal is to eliminate the risk of guns in public places and ultimately to bring sane gun laws to the U.S.
(image: Fuzzy Gerdes, flickr)
So if you need an excuse to not go to Starbucks, there you go. I’m not involved in this action although I’ll support it.
My problem with boycotts is that it’s not always made clear to management why sales have dropped unless the boycotters can make it clear they are the reason for the drop in sales. Additionally there is a chance for competing boycotts, for example Starbucks didn’t respond to a boycott by a Christian pastor because they supported a bill to legalize gay marriage in Washington State. So if you are going to boycott Starbucks tell them on Twitter with an @starbucks each time you don’t go into a store and why. Right now pro-open carry people are posting photos on Facebook of their guns next to Starbuck logos thanking Starbucks of “not backing down to bullies.” (which I find hilarious, who’s the bully here? The people with lethal force strapped to their hip or people with petitions, emails and flyers?)
I like to remind people that my actions to defund KSFO hosts, Michael Savage and finally Glenn Beck, were not boycotts. They were designed to convince advertisers that these people were tainting their brand. Then, after the advertisers stopped supporting the hosts, we went to the media company investors and pointed out that their “asset” was actually a liability (see my world famous call to Rupert Murdoch asking why he was subsidizing a money-losing Glenn Beck). Sara Robinson called this process “getting Spockoed.”
Since Mike Stark and I now talk about activism on Virtually Speaking once a month I’d like to share with the folks some specific local actions I did around the Open Carry issue in 2010 in Northern California that wasn’t a standard press release or physical protest that also didn’t involve Twitter or Facebook but did involve the media and educating local businesses and national chains around Starbucks to understand their rights when it came to Open Carry participants.
Below I’m going to lay out my actions. I’m not going to get into the issues of Open Carry, the 2nd Amendment or gun violence because then an army of “pro-guns everywhere” activists will show up to tell me how wrong I am and demand I respond to their well researched talking points coming out of the NRA (with their $250 million dollar budget). I’ve already had those discussions and I have my position on the issue. This is about my process working my side of the issue.
Advance Work Before an Open Carry Event
When the California Open Carry group was planning an event at a pizza place in Palo Alto the day before the event I went around to the retail businesses in the immediate vicinity and asked them what their policy was for people who wanted to bring guns into their store. What I found is that none of them knew their policy, they also didn’t know their rights as a business manager (especially when confronted with someone who knows California 2nd Amendment rules backwards and forwards).
I not only explained to them their rights to ban guns in their stores I also gave them copies of sample policies used by other businesses like California Pizza Kitchen, Peets and IKEA as well as what they could say if an open carry person came into the business the following day. They were all very, very grateful for the sample policy and wording. Some of them also contacted their headquarters to see if they already had a policy in writing.
I also found out that they didn’t want any employees talking about this issue. The employees couldn’t talk to anyone officially on how they felt about working where Open Carry people were meeting after going to Starbucks. (One Chili’s waitress was really pissed off, but had to serve them and be polite for tip purposes, she was from a rough neighborhood and asked me, “Why don’t these jokers go over to East Palo Alto and wear their guns around there?”)
Research Businesses Impacted by Open Carry Meet Ups
When an Open Carry event was planned in an area shared with other retail businesses further from my home I did a Google Map search of the area and found the closest big store in the same parking lot that had a policy against weapons in the store. I alerted their security staff to the Open Carry event at the Starbucks next door and advised them to brief the clerks and checkout people what they should do if someone was open carrying in their store following the Starbucks Meet Up. I did this for Target, a girls ballet school and a drop off babysitter place right next to the open carry meeting place. I suggested that if they saw these people walking on their property and were concerned to contact 911. I also contacted the local police who might get these calls and asked what they would do if they got 911 calls from area businesses of a “man with a gun”.
Guiding Police Response and Setting up Negative Press Visuals for Open Carriers
The result of these actions was that the police sent out a team to one Starbucks meeting place in advance to make sure that there were no “misunderstandings.” (This also gave the Open Carry people the opportunity to show off their superior knowledge of 2nd Amendment law as it applies to their state, county and city. They carry video cameras so they can video tape their interactions with LEOs so other Open Carry people can use this later to rub the noses of the police in their open carry knowledge. One local TV station captured the police asking the Open Carry guy questions outside a diner. The Open Carry people considered this a ‘win’ because he wasn’t arrested and educated people about their rights and their attempt to normalize people with guns strapped to their hips in their community. I considered it a win because several people called the police about a “man with a gun” and there were no misunderstandings when the police arrived. Also the Open Carry guy looked like an smug jerk carrying his gun outside a Pottery Barn in the “raging crime district” that is downtown Livermore. Check out the video of him here)
Follow through with Local Customers, Staff and Corporate Management
Next I went to one of the Starbucks where this Open Carry event happened and asked customers what their experience was and what they thought after the open carry people were gone. Everyone I talked to was annoyed by the Starbucks policy and said that if they knew that regular people (not law enforcement) could come in the door with handguns strapped to their hips they would not go in or leave. When I asked the local Starbucks staff what they thought they wouldn’t talk to me but referred me to Starbucks Corporate PR. I called them and they had no comment but just directed me to their policy.
Creating Financial Pressure Outside of a Boycott- The Insurance Angle
My next step with local businesses who held the Open Carry events in their stores was to find out who their insurance carrier was and ask them if they were aware that this business was actively hosting armed customers, and if their policy covered any “misunderstandings”. I think this is an important area to look into, but it is hard to find out who the insurance carrier of a company is unless they tell you.
I asked one national insurance carrier what the corporate financial consequences of a shooting in a open-carry-welcoming Starbucks would be if an innocent bystander was accidentally shot in a store. He suggested that Starbucks’ courting of the open carriers could add to their culpability and liability. Then he noted that following that incident most insurance carriers wouldn’t cover any businesses that courted and allowed open carry people.
Giving Starbucks A Face-saving Excuse to Change their Policy Without an NRA Backlash
I tried to get the director of insurance at Starbucks to comment on this but he wouldn’t return my calls. I believe that if the insurance director inside Starbucks explains the possible liability risks management might change their policy. One thing that I want people to understand when working with corporations is that sometimes they need a face-saving excuse to make a policy change. They don’t want to look like they caved to the anti-gun people, which would piss off the pro-guns people. The quote from Starbucks would look like this:
I read the Open Carry web forums, they want to make people more comfortable with seeing people with weapons and want to educate people on their 2nd Amendment rights. I wanted to educate businesses on their rights and the rights of their other customers when people bring firearms onto their premises. I didn’t have an impact on Starbucks, but I did on a number of businesses in and around the Starbucks and helped them avoid becoming a battle ground for the next location that the Open Carry movement decide to go to when Starbucks finally changes their policy and bans weapons in stores.
Oh, funny story, when I contacted Starbucks headquarters about the insurance issue I asked if I could open carry my gun to a meeting to the Starbucks store in the building and then up to the director’s office. Surprisingly they ban weapons in THAT store and in their offices. So they have no problem asserting their right to ban weapons when it comes to some stores and employees, just not for the people on the “front lines.”
LLAP,
Spocko
Twitter: @spockosbrain
blog: spockosbrain.com
Bio: Spocko is a media activist who trains people to tell their stories to the press and public.
68 Comments
Too bad you human’s don’t know how to do my nerve pinch.
I haven’t been in a starbucks since………..can’t remember. Worse coffee ever.
Thanks, spocko. Good work.
It would be a better answer than packing heat.
I’ll be frequenting the Starbucks.
While I am a big proponent of sane gun laws, I’m also a big proponent of allowing those that follow the law to carry their handguns as they see fit.
I’ve wondered a lot what would close down the ability to open carry in open-carry states. I came to the conclusion that that would occur when lefties started to show up openly carrying firearms.
The open-carry demonstrations work because the folks show up with their weapons polite and well-behaved and with a “Shucks, I’m just packing heat for protection…” attitude. Would the same be true if the folks showing up looked like “hippies”?
How many people have been shot to death in a Starbucks.
As opposed to how many people have been killed by U.S. military.
Priorities.
There is only so much energy in people for political engagement and activism. You have to pick your fights carefully as you only have so much (sorry) ammunition in the form of people ready to make a statement. I don’t think boycotting Sbux over gun carry policies is really a fight to pick.
The fight of today is the fight over wealth inequality and economic injustice. This is a fight that can be fought together both by fans of the 2nd Amendment, as well as opponents of the 2nd Amendment.
For my part, I’d really like to see guns reduced as a cultural issue relative to oh-say corporate personhood, the power of financial institutions with no accountability to go along, and the indulgences heaped by the government at the feet of the richest and most parasitic members of society.
This is one of the reasons I prefer concealed carry and will be applying for a permit in the next few days.
Do people really need all these guns? Do they expect to have an OK Corral moment or what? I’m just puzzled by all this gun stuff. I hate them and don’t think people should be walking around with them – especially concealed.
Also, if black people went into a white neighborhood Starbucks. The 1966 Black Panthers’ armed patrols provoked the drafting of legislation that established today’s gun regulation. Carrying loaded guns into the Capitol building was perfectly legal—until three months later, when Gov. Ronald Reagan signed the Mulford bill into law.
What’s more important given the limited bandwidth available to message to the public what’s an issue, and what’s not?
The consequences of the Citizens United court decision, and what a “Super PAC” means for all of us? Or the same red v. blue gun rights issue that has divided people for half a century who would otherwise find it easier to relate to each other?
(Hint: the gun rights issue hasn’t been resolved to the satisfaction of either side in the fight, even after aalll this time. It could be that what’s good for some places and people in the country isn’t good for some other places and people in the country, and that a totally comprehensive and uniform national ban on different guns is a ridiculous if also hopeless prospect …)
Heh. Surprised to see that some on the ‘left’ of this issue consider it to be low priority.
Wish some on the ‘right’ of the terrorism issues could be as sensible.
I like boycotts that don’t require me to change a thing in my life to support. :)
Won’t be a problem for me to boycott Starbuck’s. I never go. I hate coffee and their snacks must be filled with gold judging by the prices.
Exactly. I’ve been boycotting liver and veal since 1985.
Even Wyatt Earp had a check ‘em at the door policy.
I like Starbucks but I never go there, much preferring Peet’s Coffee of San Francisco which my neighborhood market carries. I like Starbucks for its WiFi hotspot, free with my AT&T account, which I’ve used when my home connection was down. I stay in my car so the espresso maker won’t damage my hearing. I learned today from an audio frequency test online that my hearing won’t hear above 13,340Hz, so my MP3 files can top off at 192kbps (and require relatively less disk space); I’ll never hear the fuller 256kbps MP3s, 320kbps MP3s, or any ‘lossless’ files.
I still boycott Nestle’s and ever shall.
3 were shot in a DC store- after hours. The store was closed. It wasn’t any rabble rousing open carry customer. ;)
I would love to see saner laws in regards to guns (background checks for EVERY gun sale, even private sales. A requirement for mental health screening with a board for reviews for those that disagree with findings) however I see positively no reason to pick on gun enthusiasts that follow the law and do absolutely nothing to put others at risk with their behavior.
I had a gun-carrying dude come into my salon. He was a gun rights political activist. He wore the gun mostly conspicuously on hip. He wore a loose-fitting t shirt which covered most of the weapon.
At first, I thought he wanted to rob me.
Soon, he told me stories of how he’s been harassed and arrested by police who did not know the law.
He intended to test the law wherever he could – or more likely – whenever he felt like testing the law.
Surely he didn’t feel like getting (wrongfully or otherwise) arrested ALL the time.
I suppose I could have asked him to leave my shop.
At first, I was very nervous about the clown. Soon I had realized that he was simply a gun-rights politics junky.
Could I get to my gun first? Not likely.
He was one of those guys that Spocko is talking about.
That was Hugh O’Brian.
He only came in that one time. Perhaps he was testing me.
Interesting about the hearing issue. I used to have really great hearing in both ears. But I used a headset with an ear piece for years in my right ear and gradually noticed that my right ear was less sensitive than my left. I’m pretty sure the headset had something to do with it.
I was outside of a Starbucks last week and did a speed test on the wi-fi signal. It was less than 1/2 a megabit a second. There were about 14 lap tops and as many smartphones all trying to use the wi-fi and they were probably all trying to get the same 3 or 10 Mbs per second.
That could be a story written by Ned Buntline, the inventor of the ‘Wild West’, though he wrote from a saloon.
If a man needs a gun to feel like a man, then he already knows that he isn’t one.
audio frequency hearing test:
http://blog.naxos.com/2012/02/14/dude-wheres-my-frequencies/
Do people really “need” a starbucks, or the million other things people may “want” in their lives? Some people LIKE guns. As long as they are responsible and aren’t harming anyone I see no reason they shouldn’t be allowed to enjoy their hobby.
I labor under no delusion that our firepower is the equivalent of the US military, however it gives my husband peace of mind(from the point of view that he could protect us from an intruder) and he enjoys them.
A gun is no more dangerous than a motor vehicle. The operator is what determines whether something is dangerous, not the tool.
One thing I’ve learned is that people who want to talk about the 2nd Amendment and gun rights often want to engage people and are ready with all their slogans and arguments. People who aren’t spoiling for this fight are not. They will happily quote sections of the current civil code from memory. The NRA does an excellent job training people in those rhetorical tactics.
It’s difficult for people who want to push back on the “guns everywhere at all times” folks. One thing that I’ve found though is that with in the gun carrying community there is dissension. Many look down at the Open Carry people as a dangerous joke who will end up costing them their guns.
I also know there is a difference between many rural and urban people regarding guns as well as types of guns.
He was a real gun nut. Early twenties. He loved guns. He also told me that he went to gun-smithing school in Colorado. One of few such schools in the US.
He had been arrested in Colorado for gun toting.
“You’d think with that school nearby, the cops would know the law,” he said. “But, they don’t.”
He told me that he intended to open his own gun smithing shop in town.
That was 2 years ago. No gun smithing shops have opened yet.
Again with the “needs” word…….just because you don’t understand why someone else might want to own or shoot a gun doesn’t mean that there aren’t people out there that don’t feel that way.
Insulting someone because you don’t like their hobby is childish and doesn’t strike me as overly manly.
“who’s the bully here? The people with lethal force strapped to their hip or people with petitions, emails and flyers?)”
Well, Earp never told any sign carrying folks to leave their signs at the door.
IIRC, Twain is a female. Just sayin’.
I like to build amplifiers. I don’t need to, but I like it. My wife doesn’t understand it. It’s a hobby.
I have never had a gun. I can’t imagine living a life where one felt the need to have one stuck on the outside of your leg. The only reason to have a gun is to be able to shoot someone. I have never needed to shoot someone. I have felt like shooting a few people at times but that is a completely different story.
The Black Panthers created a panic for doing a lot less than the open-carry folks who dogged Barack Obama’s healthcare reform town halls.
The folks most in favor of gun rights are those who are sportsmen –hunters, trap shooters, target shooters; those who make, buy, and sell guns as art objects; those who are paranoid of their neighbors; those who want the “last defense of liberty”; and those who just want to prove a point. Or those in an arms race against the law or other guys with guns.
Those most in favor of gun control are those who have known someone killed or injured by guns, in a crime or accidentally; those who would like not to worry about encountering someone with a gun; and those with a strong philosophy of peace and order.
The issue has become a wedge issue in political campaigns instead of a dialog between those two groups primarily because the NRA became a front group for the Republican Party. And mounted a campaign of hysteria to drive Southern and Western voters away from the Democratic Party.
And succeeded primarily because of FBI actions in Waco and Ruby Ridge.
“Don’t take your gun to town” was very much a narrative of the Western movies and during the McCarthy period was a frequently recurring plot. Interesting that.
I have a Dynaco 120 in the closet, ready for active duty again with KLH Twenty Fours I recently inherited in a trade. Just today I bought a spool of wire. I last used the Dynaco in a direct connection from my Mac’s audio.
My friend had a jewelry store, sold it, and became a private detective. I was at his apartment and held his .357 Magnum. I swear, somehow Smith & Wesson used my hand for their mold. I love archery though.
You might need one to get some birth control pills pretty soon.
“Ok, everybody put your hands in the air! You over there! Open the Birth Control safe! Now! Don’t make me use this gun.”
Remember, the guy that shot Gabby Giffords was legally carrying. While you may be comfortable with a blatantly armed society, I am not. I doubt mothers across America want to be taking their children into businesses where who know who is walking around armed. Our society is filled with people with emotional and mental stresses that render them unstable. These people, unless they have a previous criminal record, have no problem arming themselves. And for that matter, felons and the unstable have no problem finding someone that will sell them guns. I will not enter any business that allows armed customers, ever, nor do I have any desire to visit/vacation any state that has such irresponsible gun laws.
Why don’t talk to an ER nurse or doctor. They will enlighten you about accidental and intentional gun shots! They also have a pretty good handle on unstable people that have been involved in shootings that are legally carrying!
I’ve always contended that women could live without sex much easier than men. If the GOP is successful in blocking women’s access to birth control, why don’t women just say “NO” to sex. After all, that is the ultimate form of birth control. I suspect there would be a turn around pretty fast.
My rule of thumb- you don’t punish everyone because someone mentally ill might get a weapon. Instead you create laws to make it hard for the mentally ill to obtain weapons. I know, common sense, is so passe’.
Actually I was a nationally registered EMT on a Marine Corps base. Almost all of those guys were armed. Know what? I saw more people injured from motor vehicles. Should we outlaw cars since I’m pretty sure more people die or are injured as a result of automobile accidents then from guns?
If you are worried about mentally unstable people obtaining weapons then create laws that create an additional barrier to keep weapons out of the hands of someone unstable. It’s absurd to suggest though that all gun owners should not be allowed access to their guns simply because other people feel uncomfortable with the idea of guns.
I’m female too. My point is that there is no reason to insult someone for having a hobby you don’t enjoy or understand someone enjoying. When you do this then you lend credence to the idea that the left is intolerant as the right.
Different strokes for different folks. My husband doesn’t understand my fascination with gardening or the fact that I enjoy walking. I don’t completely get his fascination with guns or cars. We both coexist though because we respect that we don’t have to get it, to support the other in their respective hobby. As long as he’s responsible and law abiding there is absolutely no harm or foul with him owning the things and hitting the range to relax.
Why on earth would you contend that? Speaking as a member of the fairer sex I can honestly say that many of us enjoy sex as much as our male partners.
Furthermore, no is not always an effective means of birth control. Rape numbers are pretty horrendous and it is considered an underreported crime.
“Almost all of those guys were armed.”
Did the Skipper know? How about the Armory? I think you misunderstood what was going on around you. Very few military personnel are ever armed on base inside CONUS or at major bases outside of an active war zone. And never without a direct military function. Private weapons are tightly controlled if not banned.
Below is the weapons policy for private weapons upon arrival at 29 Stumps(Every Base or Post has a similar policy):
“WEAPONS REGISTRATION
All personnel residing in Military Family Housing, or BOQs are required to register their weapons with the Vehicle Registration Office. Weapons are any firearms, which includes but is not limited to BB guns, paint ball guns, and cross bows and any knife with a blade length of four inches or greater. To register weapons, personnel must complete the weapons registration form available at the Vehicle Registration Office. Bringing the weapon itself to the Vehicle Registration Office is not necessary. All enlisted personnel (sergeant and below) living in the BEQ must store their weapon in their unit armory.”
Personally, when I go to Starbucks I always order my grande in a real ceramic mug rather than those stupid paper cups. And I feel very secure as a result, because those heavy mugs can kill a fella.
First of all, Mr. Spock is my spirit guide, so don’t take any further liberties with his name, or I might have to shoot you. Second, I actually do know how to do the “getting-on-my-nerves pinch, because my girlfriend uses it on me all the time.
Part of organizing a successful protest is doing something that has a chance of being effective. This means doing a little critical thinking and, perhaps, even a little homework. Was the intent of this organization to create a huge sales spike for Starbucks? Was it to point out how little/lame their organization really is (260ish FB followers)? If anything, they reinforced to Starbucks what a good decision they’ve made with their policy. The reality is that Starbucks doesn’t really want to be in this fight — and they don’t have to be. http://koifishcommunications.com/blog/branding/keeping-brand-politics-001123/.
Regardless, the piss ant organization who put this on should have understood that the supporters of the first and second amendments would have rallied in a big way. They always do and always will. Hell, the only reason this little protest got any attention was because the pro gun crowd caught wind of it. The pro gun crowd is connected via social media in such a way that not much slips by them. And this crew is willing to mobilize. There’s a reason the NRA is so well funded and so powerful.
The Occupy movement is another example of a political opportunity squandered. In the beginning, they grabbed great headlines and attention, but they didn’t figure out exactly what they wanted to say. I’d also argue that they were aiming their anger at the wrong people once they did kind of/sort of figure out their message.
But they made a huge mistake by deciding to occupy places for the long haul. From an outsider’s perspective, the group morphed from political activists to dirty, filthy, low-life squatters who were turning public places into garbage dumps. Shitting on police cars, vandalizing businesses, etc. is no way to get positive or effective attention.
And when your community has devolved to the point where some butch little chick with a bullhorn needs to explain how to handle sexual assault(because it happens so frequently), you’ve hit the point where you need to go home and regroup. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1BWETV75hU.
This kind of ties back to the whole second amendment thing. Those who are unarmed are a lot more prone to being sexually assaulted. When an OWS member sees sexual assault, the only thing they can do is report it to the “really, really rad medics,” who are “totally on top of their shit.” Those who exercise their second amendment rights get to decide whether or not the assault happens in the first place.
Enjoy.
Neither white middle class gun control advocates nor white middle class NRA members know anything about life in my neighborhood where hand guns are ubiquitous and there is no police protection. It’s all theoretical and make believe when you have always led a protected life.
“…fairer sex…”
I have been forced by the weight of many summers to arrive at the following conclusion regarding the word ‘fair’:
It’s a place where pigs compete for blue ribbons.
Now the words ravishing, spectacular, enchanting, captivating, et al are adjectives I can associate with the double X’s that inhabit this rock.
Thank the universe for blessing men with women!
Sure, but is life without sex living?
Right on target! (couldn’t resist)
Guns have but one purpose:
To kill something whether it be paper or living things.
Ban private ownership of firearms, period!
Kill a gun and save a life!
The new take out order at Starbucks:
That will be a fragmentation grenade latte to go and a couple of 9mm clips on the side.
Guns at Starbucks?
Insanity in the flesh!
Yeah, when the English required all personal firearms be kept at guns clubs or ranges, the incidents of knifings skyrocketed.
Face it: human beings are a rather brutal form of pond scum and violence will always find a way.
But then again, no one could claim the knife went off by accident!
It is not possible to ban private ownership of firearms just like it is not possible to ban the use of marijuana. It only happens in your dreams.
As someone mentioned above I am a female but I have several reasons for hating guns. I admit that hunting bothers me, I couldn’t do it, but I have many family members who hunt (deer) and they do eat the venison. I’m not really comfortable with people keeping guns at home but I understand that it makes them at least feel safer. But I do NOT understand why people feel that they need to own something like a military weapon and I fail to see any need for carrying a gun around on your hip. Too many things can happen that take people’s lives. Oh, and my last reason – 3 members of my family have committed suicide with guns and a high school friend as well.
How many western or eastern industrialized countries allow private ownership and possession of firearms?
It is my understanding that we continue to be the only western, industrialized society to legally allow such gun ownership.
Why are so many Americans afraid of their fellow citizens?
What has gone so horribly wrong with our great democratic experiment?
Or, perhaps the experiment has already miserably failed and too many Americans think only their firearms will protect them from the abyss of anarchy.
And if dream I must, I will dream of a society void of guns and the death and destruction they bring to far too many innocent people.
By the way, what’s shakin’ at your end of the universe?
Mr. Spock is your spirit guide? And you think that you will have to shoot me if I take further liberties with his name? Do I have that right?
Okay then. Good to know. I’m going to go ahead and attribute that to tongue in cheek hyperbole because if I actually took that statement at face value I would have to flag this comment and get you banned for threatening violence. (Not to mention ignoring the dictates of your spirit guide. Of course maybe you have the evil Mr. Spock as your spirits guide.)
Actually the Spocko in question was a character in the episode of “A piece of the Action” in a community where guns were rampant. He was shown holding a Tommy gun.
If you remember the episode of Spock and Sarek and Abe Lincoln you will know that Sarek was a huge believer in non-violence and logic and he was the founder of modern Vulcan thought.
But I’m sure you know that if Mr. Spock is your spirit guide
Dear ElJugador.
Thanks for stopping by. I doubt if you will be back to read this comment. Drive by comments are really effective in changing the minds of people in a community like this. But your real purpose is not to change minds is it? Just like mine wasn’t to change yours. But you did provide me with an opportunity to show the members of this community a few things.
Diversity of opinion in our community does exist and I’m talking to both gun owners and non-gun owners. Some of the best proponents of sensible gun laws are gun owners. They are the people who know that the NRA’s stance on gun show loopholes, for example, are ridiculous. Many of them, especially in the LEO community, find the Open Carry movement dangerous and counter-productive.
1) You are right, the action would kick up the pro-gun community and their network. Might it spike the sales at Starbucks? It might. Might it generate the “he said she said” stories about the issue that the press loves? Yes. And might these stories lead to Starbucks trying to get the hell out of this entire issue? Probably. And that is the bigger point. That would be a win for the people who want to activate the marketing and policy people within Starbucks, because THOSE are the people that need to be reached.
2)You are right, the occupy movement may have squandered their political opportunity, if that was their goal. But the very fact that you are talking about this shows that they have already met and succeeded in their first goal, discussion of the failure of Wall Street unregulated financial markets with no effective oversight. Was anyone talking about that before? Nope. Now it’s on the table.
3) You think they are going after the wrong people? So who are the right people? Let me guess – Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac? Barney Frank? And you heard this where?
4) In case you didn’t notice the FDL community is very supportive of these activists. Now you believe that they have morphed into “dirty, filthy, low-life squatters who were turning public places into garbage dumps.” And that “Shitting on police cars, vandalizing businesses, etc. is no way to get positive or effective attention.” But I ask you, if the movement was going after the wrong people do you really thing that the media that support these “wrong people” would work over time to paint political activists as “dirty, filthy and low-life squatters?” Who does Andrew Breitbart support?
And, surprise! I agree with you that vandalizing businesses is not a good way to get positive attention. I have written stories not only condemning “Black Bloc” techniques and actions but suggesting and demonstrating how the community can expose them and keep them out of the movement.
5) Finally we get to your argument that women (men?) need to carry guns to prevent sexual assault. I’m sure that your concern for the victims of sexual assault is sincere. I don’t want to think you are cynically using their assault as just another argument for more guns everywhere. If the “butch little chick with the bullhorn” had a talk with you I’m sure she would explain just how the process of dealing with sexual assault works in the real world of police officers and medical staff at hospitals and the media, all of whom follow confidentially rules. She might even explain why she looks so “butch” she might be able to tell you about how her hair is growing back after chemo that she got after her breast cancer. She might also ask you about the steps you are taking in your community to reduce sexual violence among your friends, since that seems to be something that you really care about.
So thank you again for stopping by. El Jugador. I don’t know if I’m going to buy your album “Live at King Tut’s Wah Wah room” but I do like your song “I hate everything” It seems to define your views very well.
Spocko
“What has gone so horribly wrong with our great democratic experiment?”
We Americans are wallowing in decadence. Everybody is to blame and nobody is to blame. It’s entropy 35.
You are on track when you speak of choosing your dreams. Be in the world but not of it. You are redeemable even if society (the world) is not.
Peace be with you brother 35.
Coming here late but I’ve got a few questions for those who want to get rid of the 240 million or so guns that are in private hands in America. (Saw a graphic on a show just the other day — think it was on Discovery or Nat Geo — that 47% of adult Americans own a firearm of some sort.)
How exactly do you propose to get rid of those firearms? Pass a law saying everyone must turn theirs in? What about the people who don’t comply? Do we send the cops or the Nat’l Guard around to those the government knows has weapons from its permits and sales files?
Okay, then what about those who hold weapons that the government doesn’t know about? I’m not just talking about criminals who have deliberately obtained guns illegally, I’m talking about all the folks who have come into possession of firearms but never bothered to register them, in some cases because they didn’t even know it was required in their state? How do people innocently come into possession of firearms? Here’s a few examples:
- Relative dies. Among their belongings the heirs find a gun nobody knew about or forgot about decades back.
- Somebody buys a house or a farm or a closed commercial building. Looking through the attic or the barn or whatever they discover an old firearm left behind by some previous owner, tenant, whatever.
- A gun is inherited and passed down on a daughter’s side of the family. Her name changes when she marries. Then her daughter marries and her name changes and eventually her family inherits the weapon along with Aunt Tillie’s Irish linen and china, Uncle Wally’s WWII uniform, etc. For all intents and purposes, this gun is untraceable.
War souvenirs, esp. from WWII, fall into the above category. Lots of Lugers, Mausers, earlier model Baretta’s and Walthers, not to mention Navy revolvers and Army 45′s running around that were never registered. Many haven’t been loaded or fired in fifty years, but they’re still around.
And then, what do we do with the illegal weapons trade? I never cease to be amazed at people who want to ban private ownership of firearms but who decry the war on drugs because it, like Prohibition, has been a total failure in eliminating illegal drugs.
Those are really interesting questions. Of course you will note that it’s not at all something that I was promoting.
What is that technique again? I’m trying to remember the name, hayman? Grassman? stickman? AH now I remember, Strawman!
Thanks for posting!
Yes, but Doremus35 raised the issue of an outright ban.
Another interesting suggestion is permitting guns at home but not allowing them to be carried in public (except on a hunting trip, to and from the target range, etc.)
However, that brings up other issues:
What about the ex-wife or GF faced with an ex intent on beating or killing her. The woman can protect herself at home, maybe even in her front yard or driveway, but what if the ex attacks her in the parking lot for work, the supermarket, or even…Starbucks?
What about the merchant who has to take the proceeds of the business to the bank, and/or bring back a substantial amount of cash for change?
“How many western or eastern industrialized countries allow private ownership and possession of firearms?”
Well, I don’t want to cast aspersions on your research skills, but I thought I’d help you out here. For your convenience:
Brazil (but severely restricted so legal guns are eclipsed by illegal ones), Canada (with many more restrictions than most of the USA), Czech Republic (reasonably free), Finland (from age 15), France, Germany, Italy (more restrictive than here), Pakistan, Israel, New Zealand (unlike Australia), Norway, Russia (with over 470k legally owned shotguns in Moscow alone), Sweden, Switzerland, even the UK (although with such draconian restrictions it is useless for self defence…then again self defence of any kind is frowned on there). Licensing requirements vary from country to country as do regulations on specific firearms. That’s just a partial list, but to save time, I have cut it short, but you get the idea.
To sum up briefly, many, many western or eastern industrialized countries allow private ownership and possession of firearms. Those wishing to emigrate from the USA in search of a state void of private ownership of firearms would be advised to look into Cuba or the Peoples Republic of China.
“It is my understanding that we continue to be the only western, industrialized society to legally allow such gun ownership.” Well then, you understand wrongly. Sorry!
Spocko, before you go snarking on me for being a “drive-by” as you did to El Jugador, let me point out that I signed up here specifically to disabuse doremus35 of some of his misconceptions and misstatements. Doremus is entitled to his own opinions but not his own facts. You could just as easily have corrected him, or he could have gotten the same information with very little effort had he been interested in knowing rather than just assuming. But he didn’t, so I invited myself to visit here. This blog of yours might be the center of your universe, but frankly it never even came up on my radar until, well, y’know…
Have fun, play safe.
Little Mike. I have no problem with your comment. I actually appreciate it. I wasn’t able to provide those answers at the time being tied up with tweaking my time travel calculations.
As you stated, facts are facts. How western civilizations deal with the availability of firearms varies.
Thanks for stopping by, please come again, we probably have more in common that you realize. I always like to have accurate information when possible.
LLAP,
Spocko
P.S. Please note how you were treated and responded to by me. I appreciated your information filled comment and replied respectfully accordingly. When I was commenting on this issue on the Starbucks Facebook page I was not treated civilly. Of course I do tend to be polite even when people call me names, it’s just my nature.
Wow, that will teach me to NEVER leave out the snark tag.