“Starbucks spokeswoman Jamie Riley defended the company’s gun policy, arguing that it should be up to legislators — not Starbucks — to decide what restrictions, if any, are necessary on gun possession,” thehill.com reports. “Gun control advocates are quick to point out that Starbucks does not allow its employees to carry guns and wonder why there’s a discrepancy between workers and customers.” And now I’m wondering too. If Starbucks respects local firearms regulations rather than banning guns from its stores (as it has every right to do) why should it restrict its employees’ right to keep and bear arms in their own defense? FYI click here and here and here and here (etc.) for news reports of armed robberies at Starbucks stores.