The New York Times’ Op Ed team has weighed-in on the controversy surrounding licensed gun owners bringing their firearm into restaurants. The story hit the headlines when Virginia moved to rescind its ban on concealed carry weapons in eateries, provided the licensed owner doesn’t drink excessively (go figure). Needless to say, The Gray Lady comes down on guns in restaurants with its usual combination of condescension and derision. After praising the owner of the California Buckhorn Grill chain for reiterating its gun ban, and tipping their metaphorical hat at Peet’s Coffee & Tea and California Pizza Kitchen for their firearms prohibition, the Times trains its literary guns on Starbucks. “Should customers be free to sip Skinny Cinnamon Dolce Lattes at their laptop screens while brandishing a gleaming Ruger .357?” Brandishing? Really? To its credit, the Times does not misrepresent the coffee chain’s position on the issue. “So far, Starbucks executives say yes, claiming they are quite safety-minded within a policy that ‘supports the federal, state and local laws in the communities in which we do business.'” The Times ends their dietribe [sic] by urging the Seattle caffeine vendors to erect metal detectors at all entrances to all of their 11,068 American stores. Just kidding. I think.

One Response to NYT: “Should customers be free to sip Skinny Cinnamon Dolce Lattes at their laptop screens while brandishing a gleaming Ruger .357?”

  1. Does Starbucks also deny folks their right of free speech will they are in their establishments? How about gays and lesbians? African Americans, Jews, Hispanics? Or are they just prejudiced against those who exercise their 2nd Amendment rights? Well if a gay couple can sue (and win) a bakery for denying service because they are gay. why can’t a 2A person sue Starbucks for denial of service. Time to turn the tables on these deniers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *