The big example is Starbucks, which has been selected by advocates of the "open carry" movement as a place to show up with unconcealed firearms. Open carriers and gun-control advocates (peacefully) confronted one another recently at the Starbucks in Pike Place Market.
Starbucks says it will follow the law; thus, in states where it's legal to openly carry a firearm, those customers are welcome. "The political, policy and legal debates around these issues belong in the legislatures and courts, not in our stores," the Seattle-based coffee company said in a statement.
That might be an artful way to avoid controversy. Unfortunately, it probably won't work. With Starbucks' size and iconic place in corporate America, it was the perfect way for the Virginia-based group OpenCarry.org to gain international exposure for its cause.
It also received a backlash from gun-control proponents. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence has an online petition urging Starbucks to keep guns out.
I found it interesting that several pro-gun writers blamed the Brady campaign for putting Starbucks on the spot. This article says, "The big example is Starbucks, which has been selected by advocates of the "open carry" movement as a place to show up with unconcealed firearms."
I was wondering though if the statement by the famous coffee chain was in fact an attempt to stay out of it. Couldn't it be construed as supportive of the gun movement? Saying they'll follow the local laws is in effect siding with the gun folks, is it not?
Where do you think this is heading? What's next?
Please leave a comment.