Mediamatters.org blogs a blog post at pagunblog.com. Our man Sebastian is calling off any remaining proactive Starbuckian gun rights advocacy. “I notice there’s still quite a lot of pictures of guns and coffee appearing on Starbucks’ Facebook page,” Sebastian writes. “I would like to note that Starbucks never asked for their brand to be associated with gun rights; all they want to do is sell coffee. Now that two days have passed since the end of the appreciation day, I’d like to ask everyone to support Starbucks by continuing to buy their coffee, and yummy baked goods. That is what I intend to do. For the purposes of really playing up the Buycott, I think we’ve gotten our message through. It’s time to let them go about hawking their product . . .
By all means, let’s keep the gratitude pouring into corporate, and pouring into their coffers, but I think we ought to let Starbucks’ brand go back to just being about great coffee. That means not engaging in, what in a person-to-person analogy would be walking up to the barista, and continuing to stick pro-gun stickers all over her, and handing her guns. She didn’t ask for that. She just wants to serve you coffee.
Handing her guns? Was that exaggeration for effect or did a gun rights advocate really hand a barrista a firearm? I suspect the former. But it flags the main issue that’s come to the fore: did Starbucks Appreciation Day participants remove remove their guns in store for photographic / political purposes?
None of the pics I could find on Starbucks Facebook page or the ones on mediamatters.org are definitive. But all of them risk arming our enemies (metaphorically speaking). Check this from imbecile (screen nic):
These people are flaunting it for the of flaunting it. The kind of person who is a “show-off” with their weapon is much more likely to use it when it isn’t warranted.
These kinds of people are the reason that I understand the need for the 2nd Amendment, but am not a big supporter of everyday citizens being able to own a weapon.
I don’t think “understand” means what he thinks it means. Anyway, here’s the usual gutter sniping from Boswell:
well, flaunting it to make up what the have so little of that they can’t compete in penis-waving contests even with newborns…
Yes, well, it’s certainly true that anyone who puts a firearm on a table at Starbucks to photograph is not using their big head. Not only does the coffee house firearms snaptography hurt the gun rights cause, exposing fence-straddlers to unnecessary (not say potentially dangerous) gun handling in an inappropriate environment.
But were these photos taken inside or outside a Starbucks? I’m going to assume not—and give the Facebook posters the IGOTD nod anyway. The Facebook pics cloud the issue of gun rights, “pollute” the Starbucks brand raise the possibility that the Seattle coffeesmiths’ suits may come to see pro-gun customers as a liability.
I’m all about freedom of speech and firearms normalization and art for art’s sake. But I think Sebastian’s got this one right. Gun rights activists should not only be responsible; they need to appear to be responsible.