IMG_1077a

Permitted open carry looks like a done deal in the Lone Star State. After considering the practical, political and editorial advantages of open carry, I’ve decided I’ll wear my gat on my hip as and when it’s permissible by law. In Austin. A city where the public radio announcers have northern or neutral accents (if you know what I mean). Schools are out, of course. As are restaurants and bars displaying the “51%” sign (where liquor accounts for more than 50 percent of their trade). And businesses displaying the 30.06 “no guns allowed” sign. Which doesn’t include Starbucks. If you recall . . .

Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America pressured the Seattle-based coffee chain to ask customers to leave their guns at home. Note: request. Without posted, legally-compliant signs, the request does not have the force of law. So I carry concealed at Starbucks. As do thousands of of gun owners, I’m sure. It’s a “they don’t ask, we don’t tell” entente cordial

Students of history will tell you that European agreement led to World War I. So what would happen if and when I open carry at my local Starbucks? Given the general demeanor and dress sense of my fellow customers (God bless yoga pants), I assume someone will complain to the staff, who will ask me to leave. Obviously, I will comply. But that will not be the end of that.

If enough people open carry at Starbucks, the company might change their firearms policy from a gentle, generally ignored request to an outright legal ban. Which would make Starbucks off-limits to the majority of gun owning customers, who carry concealed. In other words, open carrying at Starbucks could be seen as a selfish act of political grandstanding – as opposed to a Rosa Parks-like civil rights demonstration.

OMG! Did he just compare open carrying at Starbucks to Rose Parks’ stand for racial equality? Damn straight. But again, what would be the point? OC at Starbucks isn’t likely to achieve anything other than bringing attention to something that’s not going to change, against a backdrop of general win.

Help me out. Should I (and others) press the issue? Or just carry concealed or shun Starbucks and call it good?

193 Responses to Question of the Day: Should I Open Carry At Starbucks?

    • I think Tom is right. Where I live, I think a lot of people would not notice or care. Austin may be different.

      I occasionally see people open carrying where I live. As a gun guy, it kind of makes me want to go chat with them. My wife and I were at WINCO (grocery store) a while back and I saw a guy OC an XD. He was a well dressed older gentleman in his 60s with his wife. I wanted to go visit, but my wife was embarrassed, so we didn’t.

      Open Carry probably does raise the risk of having nice gun loving people like me befriend you in public.

      That said, I CCW and don’t generally OC. I go to Starbucks only occasionally, but certainly always carry (concealed) when I go there. In my state, the no gun signs don’t carry the force of law, so I disregard them (other than government buildings etc.).

      • I don’t Starbucks, but if I did, I would regularly OC into their stores right past a 30.06 sign, since what they can do at that point is ask you to leave. And watch your money go out the door. I mean REGULARLY, bring your OC friends, someday they will realize they are losing money on their prejudices. Walk in, order, sit down, do you really want to send paying customers out the door every day?

        • Here’sweetheart the problem with that logic: OC’ers are probably a small minority of their customer base, whereas the people that would be put off by that OC’er comprise a vastly larger portion of their customer base, so simple economics says if you are going to offend a subset of customers, your best bet is to offend the smaller of the two groups.

          I’ve always disliked OC, although I do it daily for my job. In my experience, it calls attention to you, which then does one of two things, it makes people around you nervous, or it makes you a target, be it for a bad guy wanting to get the drop on you, or the pesky “Oh I love your springfield” types. When faced with a bad guy with a weapin, I’d rather him not know that I am a good guy with a weapon, until I want him to know that I am a good guy with a weapon. CCing where legal also alleviates some of the chance of those awkward “sir we need to ask you to leave” moments. Out of sight, out of mind. Go in, get your overpriced coffee, and get out with no hassles.

          Beyond that, people that blatantly disregard these requests aren’t doing us in the gun community any favors. They are in the same group of people that carry loaded AR-15s up and down crowded sidewalks with sandwich boards. You aren’t making a statement, you are making a scene, aND making yourself, and, by extension, the rest of the 2A community which you represent, look like fools. If you want to to OC, good on ya. OC to your heart’s content, but also respect the companies that don’t want guns in their stores, that could be as simple as disarming before you go inside, or just not patronizing that business. The people of the State of Texas may have made progress with this new OC law, but just as quickly as it was made it can be repealed. We aren’t going to win this fight by ramming guns down the throats of people who dislike them.

  1. What other rights would you self-limit just to keep from upsetting the muggles?

    Open carry is (or will soon be) legal so unless or until you are asked to leave or they put up the magic sign you aren’t doing anything wrong.

    • Chip in Florida says:
      February 20, 2015 at 12:16

      “What other rights would you self-limit just to keep from upsetting the muggles?”

      You’re not self limiting anything. You’re attempting to exercise your right while deliberately ingnoring the rights of a property owner. While they have not posted the required signs in Texas they have given “verbal notice”.
      From Reuters: “Chief Executive Howard Schultz said in an open letter to customers late Tuesday that Starbucks Appreciation Day events “disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of ‘open carry.’ To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores.””

      “Open carry is (or will soon be) legal so unless or until you are asked to leave or they put up the magic sign you aren’t doing anything wrong.”

      A verbal notice is sufficient under Texas law to bar people of the gun to enter their facilities.
      PC §30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED
      HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
      (1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411,
      Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
      (2) received notice that:
      (A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was
      forbidden; or
      (B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and
      failed to depart.
      (b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the
      property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice
      to the person by oral or written communication.
      What you’re advocating is what prompted this response from Starbucks to begin with.
      Obviously we are not welcome as open carriers. So don’t poke the bear.
      Respect and rights are both a two way street

      • “You’re attempting to exercise your right while deliberately ingnoring the rights of a property owner. “

        This is BS and I’m tired of hearing it. No one is ignoring the rights of the property owner…IF HE POSTS THE SIGN.

        Get it through your head: the law gives the property owner a mechanism to claim his right for you to not be on his property if you are armed…post a sign at the entrance.

        There are all kinds of ‘due process’ type issues with the “we have a policy” claim. One is that there is NO WAY an individual random customer can know Corporate policy without being DULY INFORMED by the place of business – AT THE TIME OF ENTERING.

        I’m under no obligation to be up-to-date on Starbucks internal policies and how they might change from one day to the next to engage in commerce with Starbucks.

        Consider, for example, in NC, the LAW very specifically states that with a CHL, I can carry anywhere in the state except…and the exceptions are enumerated. None of the exceptions is “a place where someone has a policy against it” with no other due notice of that policy.

        This is not a “property rights” vs “2A” rights issue, and I’ve explained this many times. The property owner has rights to limit who is on his property (regardless of the 2A side of the issue) and he has a specific legal mechanism to ‘claim’ that right in the case of carrying a firearm on his property. If he ignores that mechanism by not posting a sign, any other attempt limit MY right to carry is illegal (here at least).

        • Agreed, in part, but if a vendor has shown themselves to be against your Freedom, why would you support them with your dollars?

          It’s like the Bakers out west who refused to service a gay couple getting married. I believe that’s their right (free association). It’s also my right to not patronize their bigoted asses.

          I don’t generally do business with Starbucks, Chipotle, Target or CTD anymore because of their 2A stances. Why would I support them with my business.

        • Agreed, in part, but if a vendor has shown themselves to be against your Freedom, why would you support them with your dollars?

          Starbucks has not shown themselves to be against anyone’s freedom. They have only shown that they don’t want to be distracted by Bullying Mommies and similar groups; they want to sell coffee. Their formal policy remains to adhere to State and local laws.

          Now, Whole Foods? They can go pound sand.

        • JR. We’re talking about Texas not North Carolina.
          The penal code is clear. There are TWO methods in TEXAS to communicate to TEXAS license holders that they are not welcome in TEXAS businesses.
          One is oral. This means communications from the pie hole. If you are asked to leave you must LEAVE. If a license holder refuses to leave he is committing what we here in TEXAS call criminal trespass. It is a class A misdemeanor.
          The other method is written. This means putting words on paper or a sign. In TEXAS the sign must meet certain criteria spelled out in the law. If it does not then it is not valid. Even so the intent of the property owner is perfectly clear to those of us possessed with common sense.
          You are not forced to limit your rights as nobody is going to force you to disarm and patronize Starbucks.
          I wish you the best. If you come to Texas don’t say you weren’t warned.

        • “Agreed, in part, but if a vendor has shown themselves to be against your Freedom, why would you support them with your dollars? “

          A very valid point but a completely separate issue from the “property rights” claim that is made where no due notice is given to the customer regarding Corporate policy.

        • “The penal code is clear. There are TWO methods in TEXAS to communicate to TEXAS license holders that they are not welcome in TEXAS businesses.
          One is oral. This means communications from the pie hole. If you are asked to leave you must LEAVE. “

          Fair enough, and no argument.

          But…the person I was responding to was claiming that a Twitter post (or whatever they are called) or some vague wording in a Huffington Post article constitutes due notification of intent, and that is what I am objecting to.

          I have NO PROBLEM with a property owner giving an individual notice…but with these vague notions of media released policy announcement, they cannot claim everyone read or heard it. THAT’S the difference I’m talking about.

          I hope that’s clear, and that’s why I say this is not a hierarchal of rights thing. The property owner has the rights to control who is on his property, but he has to be reasonable in his expectations regarding who knows what his policy even is in the first place.

          That’s why the sign (or verbal notice!) is so important. It’s also why some asinine “statement” on the Internet is completely meaningless. In the former case, the person KNOWS they would be in violation to enter or remain on the premises. In the latter, there’s no to prove or conclude that that ‘violator’ knew the policy.

      • First they would have to prove that he received prior verbal or written notification and I believe the intent is that you would receive it on the premises at the time of the event. I don’t think a general notice on a website covers it. Now in Robert’s case, having written this blog piece, it might be more difficult to plead ignorance if they wanted to push it.

        • Now in Robert’s case, having written this blog piece, it might be more difficult to plead ignorance if they wanted to push it.

          Ignorance of what, exactly?

          States that allow business proprietors to prohibit the carry of firearms on their premises under the auspices of the law also have specific, statutory means by which to assert that prohibition. Starbucks has not availed itself of those statutory means; therefore, they cannot assert the statutory authority.

          States that do not provide for the power of law for posted signage have civil trespass statutes. Those statutes (unless i’m mistaken) generally allow an explicit request to leave the premises, a refusal to leave the premises, a call to police to report the trespass. (And even then, in some states, a trespass citation requires the police to repeat the request, and for the trespasser to refuse that request yet again.)

          So, there is no need to plead ignorance.

      • Smoke Jensen,

        Property rights end when their exercise will kill someone. If a cougar drags a severely injured adult onto your property, can you forbid paramedics from saving the victim’s life since the victim is on your property and you hate strangers and paramedics? The obvious answer is no. Your only legal, moral, and ethical recourse is to charge rent to the victim for the amount of time that they occupied your property and to request that the victim pay for any repairs to any damage to your property that the victim or paramedics caused.

        • At which time there are several words for people like you, none of them printable, but you earned them.

        • I don’t follow your vague response LarryInTx.

          Are you saying a property owner should be able to bar paramedics from entering the property owner’s land to extricate and save the life of a dying stranger?

      • You’re not self limiting anything. You’re attempting to exercise your right while deliberately ingnoring the rights of a property owner.

        Someone carrying a firearm has zero inherent impact on property rights.

        Trespass is a matter of unwanted presence of a person, whether that person is carrying a firearm or not. The act of carrying a firearm in no way deprives anyone of any property rights.

        • Chip says:

          “Someone carrying a firearm has zero inherent impact on property rights

          And I never claimed otherwise.

          “Trespass is a matter of unwanted presence of a person, whether that person is carrying a firearm or not. The act of carrying a firearm in no way deprives anyone of any property rights.”

          True that. I never claimed otherwise.
          Re read my post two more times and reply in the morning

        • Chip says:

          “Someone carrying a firearm has zero inherent impact on property rights

          And I never claimed otherwise.

          You said (as I quoted previously):

          You’re attempting to exercise your right while deliberately ingnoring the rights of a property owner.

          I suppose you are attempting to make a distinction between impact and ignore? If so, that is a distinction without a difference – but let me re-state: someone carrying a firearm in no way ignores the rights of a property owner.

      • Thanks for the admonishment to re-read your comment. It reminded me to comment on something else:

        While they have not posted the required signs in Texas they have given “verbal notice”.
        From Reuters: “Chief Executive Howard Schultz said in an open letter to customers late Tuesday that Starbucks Appreciation Day events “disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of ‘open carry.’ To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores.””

        An “open letter” does not meet the statutory definition of oral or written notice, because an open letter is not explicit communication to a specific person, and the author of the “open letter” cannot prove that any specific person received that communication:

        (b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the
        property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice
        to the person by oral or written communication.

        Hey, IANAL, but I would assume that:

        1) Written communication = posted 30.06 sign, or specific written communication to a specific person, with evidence of receipt (e.g. certified letter).

        2) Oral communication = in-store request to leave the premises

        The “open letter” is neither. Further, the letter is written as a mere request not to carry firearms into the store, and not a request to leave the store – so it doesn’t even constitute written notice of trespass.

        • Chip Bennett says:
          February 20, 2015 at 19:14

          Thanks for the admonishment to re-read your comment. It reminded me to comment on something else:

          While they have not posted the required signs in Texas they have given “verbal notice”.
          From Reuters: “Chief Executive Howard Schultz said in an open letter to customers late Tuesday that Starbucks Appreciation Day events “disingenuously portray Starbucks as a champion of ‘open carry.’ To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores.””

          “An “open letter” does not meet the statutory definition of oral or written notice, because an open letter is not explicit communication to a specific person, and the author of the “open letter” cannot prove that any specific person received that communication:”

          —–Most POTG are probably aware of the quote from Mr. Schultz. Those who are would be deliberately IGNORING his wishes for us to not bring our openly carried firearms into his business. Just because he is located in some other part of the country and not in front of your face personally asking Chip to leave his store makes no difference to me. You and I and most other with a modicum of common sense know what his desire is.While not a violation of the letter of law it definitely violates the spirit of the law and the business owners right to refuse service to anyone.

          Chip says:

          “Someone carrying a firearm has zero inherent impact on property rights”

          —– And I never claimed otherwise.

          —–But now I’m going to tell you how it does.
          —–Chip B gets his new found privilege of open carry bestowed upon him by the great state of OZ. Chip decides he’s going to exercise the powerful privilege whilst getting a good hot cup of java. Now Chip is a great guy and wouldn’t hurt a fly but he’s new to this area and doesn’t know the local customs. Naively he walks into Javabucks with his BBQ gun displayed proudly on his hip and suddenly the timid locals begin to talk. One patron decides that Chip is an intimidating fellow and approaches the manager telling him that he is scared to death of this man with a gun and that he and his friends that have been going there for years will not be returning to Javabucks if he is allowed to stay. The manager though intimidated is a little irritated that he is not helping the paying customers and must now approach a man with a gun. He summons up the courage to politely ask Chip to leave. Chip politely explains that it’s his right to open carry his firearm and that he will no longer spend his money here ever again. Good riddance Javabucks!

          —–In this little scenario above you have unwittingly driven off paying customers (yourself included) which IMPACTS his bottom line because you IGNORED his open letter expressing his desire to not have OC in his stores. This is his right you just violated. His right to refuse service to anyone. His right to maximize his profits. His right to pursue happiness. Next thing you know poor Mr. Shultz can no longer to gas up the yacht on the weekends.

        • “—–Most POTG are probably aware of the quote from Mr. Schultz. “

          Bullshit. Maybe 1% of firearm carriers are even aware of this stuff. Okay, that number is just a guess, but it’s just as valid a guess as your claim of “most.”

          Besides, the specific percentage does not matter. What you are missing is that these things are statutorily defined precisely to prevent the question of who knows what from the fscking Internet.

          The law says specifically what the property owner MUST do to “notify” carriers that they don’t want carrying on their property. And…none of those laws say a Twitter post or article online or press release constitutes notification.

          Notification MUST be shown to be reachable to ALL people it effects. Unless it is a direction communication between an owner and a specific person, the only way (the law specifies) to reach the “general public” in a uniform way is a sign at the entrance.

  2. I see no reason for intentional antagonizing, but if you’re already out-and-about, and are open carrying, and decide you want a coffee? Sure, go on in and get your coffee. De-sensitization and normalization FTW.

  3. I OC at every location that does not explicitly prohibit it via sign. This includes, but is not limited to: Target, Jack in the Box, Starbucks (of which I rarely visit), Chipotle (personal favorite), and several other supposedly off limits establishments. So far not a fvck was given at any of them.

    What you have to remember is that Starbucks, Chipotle, et al, are not anti gun so much as they did not want to become political pawns in the gun debate. They don’t really care if you carry at their stores, they just don’t want you doing it as a big pro gun movement thing like what OC Texas people were doing.

    So go on, bring your gun in, order coffee, sit down, and write your blog. No one will bother you. Just don’t make a big deal of it.

    • What you have to remember is that Starbucks, Chipotle, et al, are not anti gun so much as they did not want to become political pawns in the gun debate.

      And had the same memo that asked us not to bring our guns in ALSO told MDA et-puking-al to keep their demonstrations away, I might believe this.

      When push came to shove in this battle they supposedly wanted to remain neutral in, they told US to go away.

    • This. Open Carry is fine when people do it sensibly and without grandstanding.

      When you have mall ninjas slinging their SKS while ordering burritos, that’s when it becomes less about the 2nd Amendment and more about being an attention wh0re.

      • “When you have mall ninjas slinging their SKS while ordering burritos, that’s when it becomes less about the 2nd Amendment and more about being an attention wh0re.”

        Geez…will you get this right once and for all?

        In the specific example you are mentioning here, they had permission and approval to be there. There was NOTHING “grandstanding” about it. They were actively engaged in “peaceful assembly” with the blessing of the manager of the property.

        That is was grossly mischaracterized by a biased MSM is no surprise, but the level to which the mischaracterization has stuck in the minds of POTG is sort of surprising.

        • Will YOU get this right, once and for all? It doesn’t matter if they a signed invitation in their pockets, none of that was visible in the pictures of goobers with SKS’s in a friggin burrito shop. Until you can convince the MSM to start including the text of the 2nd amendment with every news story they print, you’re just going to have to take my word that the average soccer mom and dad don’t understand why low ready carry is necessary when deciding between black and refried beans.

        • ” Until you can convince the MSM to start including the text of the 2nd amendment with every news story they print, you’re just going to have to take my word that the average soccer mom and dad don’t understand why low ready carry is necessary when deciding between black and refried beans.”

          With all due respect, I’m not taking your word for Jack Shit.

          Keep letting the proggie MSM set the narrative and keep hiding in the corner if you want. The bottom line is that that they lied, they got caught in a lie, and people can tell when lies are being told. If they can’t tell when lies are being told, I don’t much give a rat’s bohunckus what they think.

          You don’t like OC activists? Fine. Don’t be an OC activist. But the price of liberty is that sometimes you have to shut the hell up even if you disagree with how the other guy is acting.

          The OC guys in TX were not acting in a threatening manner. Nor were they violating ANYONE’S rights. They broke no law. They had permission to be there doing what they were doing. They posed for a picture…nothing more threatening than that.

          Yeah, liberty’s a bit of a Harsh Mistress…eh?

  4. Starbucks wants your money and they want Shannon’s money. They will adopt a policy that will maximize the amount of money they get. At worst I think it will become a store option. If a Starbucks in Waco puts up a 30-06 sign then they will go out of business but it might work out for one in leftwing Austin.

    • Isn’t it ironic that those Texas no gun signs are named 30.06?
      I wonder if there is a .357, .380, .308 or 7.62X54R, sign anywhere.
      Not that people are likely to carry a 30-06 into an establishment anyway.
      Hunting rifles and Garands are a little large even for OC.

  5. Yeah, but Dunkins supports full amnesty for illegals to “stimulate the economy.” When it all comes down to it, I don’t go to DD because I don’t support their political leanings, and I don’t like SB coffee. I do carry (either open or concealed depending on clothing of choice that day) wherever it is legal… and signs do carry the force of law here in WI.

  6. I CC in starbucks too, and while I am for open carry, I dont think that I will OC myself. I see Starbucks, just as someone else pointed out, not anti-gun, but pushed to make a decision. So they made a half hearted request to “please leave your guns at home”. If they were anti, they would spend the time and $50 to get the 30.06 sign installed. All that being said IF I find my self OC’ing I would not go to Starbucks and respect their choice as a private business. Shops that are strictly anti gun, well I respect their choice too, I won’t spend my money with them.

    • Starbucks’ request as I understand it was to take your damn demonstrations elsewhere, we’re trying to run a business, here. If I wanted $20 coffee I would walk right in and never even expect anybody to care, I am a customer. If several of my friends and I want to stand around on the porch waving guns around, it would not surprise me to be asked to leave.

  7. No, I think you shouldn’t OC in Starbucks, for the simple reason that the business’s management (note: not the owners) has expressed a preference that you don’t bring weapons into their stores.

    Whether or not they posted the sign, they made it clear they’d rather you weren’t there … at least openly. And I will respect their property rights.

    So, I say, oblige them, and buy your coffee and breakfast sandwich elsewhere if you’re open carrying.

    On a related note, it would be interesting to see whether a shareholder (is business owner) initiative could reverse the please-don’t request from management.

    • “No, I think you shouldn’t OC in Starbucks, for the simple reason that the business’s management (note: not the owners) has expressed a preference that you don’t bring weapons into their stores.”

      Wait, now, you do realize there are a zillion Starbucks’s, don’t you? You are claiming to speak for each and every manager of each and every one, in every state? I’d bet that 90% of the stores in TX would completely ignore OC, or CC, looking for SC, (Starbucks carry).

  8. I do here in Indiana. They haven’t ever said anything.

    I did get kicked out of Old Navy though. I shouldn’t be surprised however. Gap has a serious progressive streak. It’s my fault for shopping there.

  9. Hell yeah! In fact RF, you should organize an Austin TTAG OC event at a starbucks of your choosing. I would gladly attend as I am sure others will also.

    • See, THIS right here is a bad idea and one that will end up screwing us over big time. The whole reason places like starbucks made their no gun requests was to prevent hordes of gun toters descending on their stores in order to make a political point. This kind of event will do literally nothing to help us and everything to bite us right in our big white asses.

      • I agree.

        No, I’m not saying it will hurt the chances of OC passing, or inspire people to ban other carry. I *do* think there’s a significant likelihood that businesses will say “gee, they didn’t pay attention when we asked them nicely…so it’s time for signage.”

      • First off, my white ass isn’t big. I have done too many barbell squats, deadlifts, box jumps, lunges and runs for that, so I think I have earned the distinction 🙂

        Second, I can totally see where you’re coming from. I’m not an OC guy. I just want the right to be able to do it. Or, more specifically, the right to not be arrested if I grab a can off the top shelf at the grocery store and my glock 19 peeks out.

        I had imagined a small gathering of between 5 and 8 readers all acting politely but I can see where it might do more harm than good. I am just excited.

    • I would not attend because I have no use for their store. People who wish to BUY something should go right ahead as though requests or signs do not exist. Make them tell you directly that they do not want your money. Won’t happen.

  10. I will say this: once OC is legal in Texas, I think blood will run in the streets…. mainly from all the antis heads’ exploding when they see just how many ‘gun nuts’ really do exist. It will be a truly eye opening experience for some.

    • “I will say this: once OC is legal in Texas, I think blood will run in the streets…. mainly from all the antis heads’ exploding …”

      You sir or ma’am win the Intertubez for the day!

    • After OK legalized OC, I’ve seen it exactly once. A disabled gentleman at a grocery store, for whom concealed carry would be an issue at best.

  11. If you have to ask… you shouldn’t: it’s your internal self signaling ‘doubt.’

    Besides, if you wanted, you’d have already, THEN wrote about it, no, Farago? :cD

    Then again, ‘open to public foot traffic’ legal-fiction of CRA aside, personally, as a adherent of supreme individual freedoms and property rights, if Starbucks as a private biz chooses to deny 2A (they have every ‘right’ to within their private property, despite how much GovtTerrorist kunts fiat diktats) and continue be assholes against gunowners, then I’d say why continue to patronize anti-gun hoplophobic asshole businesses?

    Bob, why not simply find yourself an organic, fair-trade NON-transnational chain, local coffee houses with atmospheric aura of your liking, who ARE pro-2A, in Austin. There oughtta be aplenty.

    I have a simple personal rule: go where they treat you well.

    Make it a conscious decision to patronize only those businesses who actually treat you with respect. Where green goes, biz follows. Or, otherwise: they often go bankrupt…eventually.

    If you’re willing to boycott PRO-state fascist 2A manufacturer monkeys who blindly abide by any and all govt diktat on limits on whatever prevailing politically opportune Red Herring applicable type of guns, ammo, etc of the day, fit the govt terrorists’ fancy, ie: Armalite, Remington, or hell… ANY unprincipled dickless douchebags who willingly sold their biz to those feckless Cerberus/’Freedom’ Group umbrella Wall St. papershufflers {who know about guns and the gun biz as much as a unmatching-socks donning ironic (and unique…like everyone else) hipster metrosexual 2.0 ‘liberal’ hoplophobic statist knows about how to start fire in 20deg weather} come to mind, then certainly, the ‘least’ you can do is NOT patronize, non-2A industry dickbags who don’t treat you well, Robert.

    Long verbiage short: do what ya wanna do, Bob! But, if you’re asking, you’re doubting.

    And, if I personally had my druthers, I’d hope you’d simply NOT patronize those businesses that will even prompt you to ask such questions, to yourself, and to your audience.

    PS. By the way, any ‘inside word’ (industry scuttlebutt, or by way of NRA proxies) you know or are aware of, on just WTF the NRA will do, to finally push to fully repeal the NFA, GCA, FOPA, Brady, and utterly abolish the ATF, especially in light of the current Green Tip bulldickery??

    If they actually had any balls, as counter-intuitive it may seem to the non-PR savvy, the greentip brouhaha actually WOULD be the perfect time to do so, as Aaron Cowen deftly echoes many failures and a few ‘successes’ of the NRA here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5yRVE5t4CU

    The “ATF wants to hear ‘comments’ from the public” my ass: that’s their euphemistic declaration of intent ‘Oops, ‘sorry’ peons: we decided already, suckers!’

    It’s like any other commie-run ‘town halls’ where they deploy Delphi Technique/diamond manufactured consensus-techniques: it’s all for PR formality sakes, like govt and their ‘participatory democracy,’ let alone the ‘this is a Constitutional republic (from the Tea-o-Cons & RINOS)’ – rhetoric.

    No govt asshole gives a fuck about their citizen employers’ well-being, let alone their rights. And those that do, never want power to begin with, so don’t get very far in ‘Statecraft.’ C’est la vie.

  12. Open carry in a suburban environment is stupid, just stupid. Plain and simple. UNLESS open carry was the only legal way to carry, I don’t see the point.

    • I’d be willing to forfeit the admitted tactical advantage of CC for the political and educational advantage of open carry. Normalize guns and all this stupid debate goes away. Yes. I’d be willing to take a little risk in the fight for our freedom.

      There was time when riding in the front of the bus. or sitting at the “wrong” lunch counter, was “stupid, just stupid.” for those with the wrong melanin content. A few of the more courageous did it anyway.

      • “admitted tactical advantage of CC”

        Admitted by whom? According to what data?

        Look…I CC most of the time. I OC occasionally.

        But really, this OC “tactical disadvantage” stuff has got to stop. It’s not supported by any real world data. It’s some writer’s wet dream and it has stuck as the bastard child of Geezer Science and a Meme.

    • Open carry in a suburban environment is stupid, just stupid. Plain and simple. UNLESS open carry was the only legal way to carry, I don’t see the point.
      Point – The other option, state dependent, is CCW by permit (permission from your overlords and defacto gun registration by voluntary action). Where open carry, state dependent, requires no government permi(t)ssion, I think open carry in a suburban environ is the only way to go if you feel strongly about not asking permission from the state to conceal. To say OC is stupid, just stupid is another elitist point of view. Just because you caved in to your overlords and paid your dues doesn’t mean that’s the way to go for everyone.

    • M9A1Man,

      There are advantages to open carry as well. First and foremost is deterrence. How many criminals rob a liquor store or gas station while a police officer is standing around? Answer: none. Of course criminals occasionally assassinate the obviously armed police officer for various reasons as well. At any rate I am pretty confident that armed robberies of stores with NO police presence greatly outnumbers assassinations of obviously armed policemen and women. Second, drawing from an openly exposed holster is faster, easier, and less likely to fail due to interference from clothing that covers concealed handguns.

      Do those advantages outweigh the advantage of surprise or even the option to quietly slip away unnoticed that concealed carry enables? I have no idea. That is up to each person to assess on their own.

    • ” I don’t see the point.”

      Did you think anyone cares if you see the point? The point is “freedom”. Which leaves you to answer “why not, and why is what I do any of your business?”

  13. If OC becomes law of the land, then exercise your right as you see fit.

    On the plus (or minus) side, I think we will find out where businesses stand. Well actually, maybe not. I suspect some places will 30.06 up. Others will play middle ground and won’t go 30.06 or 51%, but the manager will ask OCers to leave in accordance with private property rules and, a few will go full retard and play MDA reindeer games and claim employees are too intimidated by OCers to ask them too leave.

    Outside of Austin things should be fine.

  14. The “request” made does not obligate you to not carry there (note: it doesn’t matter to them whether open or concealed, though of course, they might not notice if it’s concealed).

    But why should I want to give my money to a corporation that has made its hoplophobe leanings public? That applies whether I am carrying open, concealed, or (for some wacky reason) not at all that day.

    As an aside, Colorado signs don’t have the force of law, but a lawyer advised me that if the sign is prominent, a judge is most likely to rule that it’s sufficient notice and you are trespassing–i.e., you don’t need to be verbally asked to leave having set foot there, because you’ve already been asked not to set foot on the property.

    • The judge may rule that way, but to even get there the arresting officer would have to see it that way AND the DA would have to be willing to roll the dice that he can convict as well. Those are pretty high hurdles for a simple trespassing case.

      • True it would be very hard to get convicted just for walking past the sign. But if the owner asks you to leave, and you don’t it will only look worse. Of course, you might just decide “I’ll leave if they ask me to, until then, f___ it.”

        Regardless of whether they can convict you or not, isn’t walking onto someone’s private property in contravention to their clearly stated wishes (in this scenario, a prominently posted sign) just… wrong?

        • To answer that, we would have to get deeply into “shall not be infringed”. It does not say “except by business managers.”

        • If he asks you to leave, you have to leave. Doesn’t matter whether it’s because he doesn’t like your gun, or because you are wearing no shirt and no shoes.

          He’s not infringing on your right in the least. But you have no “right” to be on his property without his permission.

      • Which in Colorado, would mean most everywhere outside of Denver and Boulder, should be pretty safe. All the counties whose sheriffs signed onto the case against implementing the new gun laws (which was most of them). Denver has always been anti-gun, and one of the reasons that the state passed shall-issue was that Denver would only issue CC permits to cronies of the mayor, and so everyone there was driving to C. Springs where the sheriff was issuing them to anyone with a pulse. And, Boulder is Boulder – I think much worse than Austin, which has the state capital (with a Republican governor, state legislature, etc.) And, yes, I have worked in both (and lived in neither).

      • Not sure about TX, but in NC that may not be an excuse because of the way the statute defines a valid sign as “Conspicuously Posted.”

        There’s a lot of debate and discussion about what constitutes “conspicuous.” For example, there’s a movie theater here that has the “No Guns” pictograph posted on the ticket window and not the door. If my wife buys my ticket and I never approach the ticket booth myself, but get my ticket from her and enter through the non-posted door…am I in violation?

        Technically, I’d say no. (IANAL!!). But…do I want the hassle? No. So..we gladly give our $$ to the theater on the other side of town that does not have a sign at all. We might miss a few first release movies, but that’s not really a big deal anyway because…it’s just a movie.

        Point is…layers. Onions have layers.

  15. I would do it here for only one purpose: to have someone photo me with the manager, and then send the photo to any idiot who crows about the “moms” getting guns banned from Starbuck’s. But I’m not into that enough to pay for overpriced coffee when I can get it free at Chick-Fil-A.

  16. Sure, you can OC in Starbucks. Just don’t drink the burned swill they call coffee and you’ll be fine. And if the manager asks you to leave, he’s doing you a favor. Thank him (or her) profusely on the way out.

    Friends don’t let friends drink Starbucks.

    • I’m mystified that these people are so profitable. I’ve had better coffee at the gas station down the road. (Seriously. Those guys make a REALLY good cup of Joe)

      • I don’t drink Starbucks and doubt I even have. But, from what I can tell from most of what I hear and see, I can get better coffee by digging up some random dirt on the side of the road, wetting it and calling it ‘coffee.’

        I’ve never understood the ‘social’ aspects of “where you got your coffee.” To me, it’s little more than what label was on your jeans crap from back in high school a few decades ago.

  17. I think Vhyrus nailed it. Don’t use it as grandstanding. Don’t make a deal of it, at all. The MDA position was that if OC happens, great cracks in the earth will open, fire will rain from the heavens, and the streets will run red with blood and misery. The 2ndA crowd’s position is that big fat nothing will happen from OC. So let’s give them big fat nothing. Take the high road and don’t go out of your way to wag it in their faces.

    • While I agree, I feel the way to do that is to just act as though you are not carrying, while you OC. Go where you want, pay no attention to signs, if asked to leave, ask “why?” as innocently as you can, I bet it won’t come up. Even in Austin.

  18. I just don’t patronize places that want to insinuate I’m a criminal. Yes, it means I miss out on some food I really would like to have, but its a matter of priorities (and not supporting companies that hate on my rights is more important than Traditional Wing Tuesday)

  19. My suggestion is this:

    Wear both an OC and a CC holster (for a couple of years). When:
    – on the street/sidewalk, OC;
    – entering a sporting goods store, carry-on OCing;
    – entering a recognizable sensitive private-property venue, find a “phone booth” sort of location to duck into first, then move your handgun to your CC holster. Enter Starbucks (etc.)

    Make sure your OC holster is completely visible so everyone can see it’s empty.

    After a couple of years of this, the Moms will have wrung out whatever arguments they might come up with. Private businesses, such as Starbucks, will have grown weary of this game. No one will care any more.

    Assuming OC passes in TX soon, I think it’s a perfect place to bait the Moms. We just have to be clever about how we do it.

    Imagine yourself in a Starbucks in NYC and some Mom shrikes “Crazy people are OCing handguns in Texas!” We can chime in: “I’m shocked! SHOCKED!! to hear that there is gambling at Rick’s Cafe!”

    That sort of sarcasm will resonate with New Yorkers. They will see how silly they sound complaining about the image of a grizzled OFWG in a Stetson, cowboy boots, a vest and chaps with the outfit complemented by a six-shooter. In Texas of all places!

    When the controversy dies down, OCT will have to think of something to re-ignight the discussion. I suggest OC parades with the marchers wearing tutus. Then add rainbow boas when the tutus alone don’t do it.

    Then on to OK-City; then KC. By the time we reach Delaware, we will have won the OC culture war.

    Holster discipline, sign discipline, private-property discipline will be essential everywhere. Otherwise, flamboyance will win the media war.

    • No need for that. I carry in an OWB pancake style holster. When I want to OC, I tuck my t shirt behind my gun. When I want to CC, I pull the tail out and let it hang over my gun. I have literally walked up to a movie theater OCing, got to the door, pulled my shirt down, and walked in. When I leave, I take 10 steps out the front door and pull my shirt back behind my gun again.

  20. Don’t make a point of it, but if you happen to be open carrying and want a Starbucks go. Just go about your business up until they post a sign.

  21. I never stopped open carrying in Starbucks.

    Don’t do it often because there’s no Starbucks really close to me … and I obviously refrain in the PRofMD. But in Delaware I’ll OC there. No issues as of yet.

  22. I OC at the Starbucks near me, a P226 in a Safariland ALS. I’m plenty curteous with the staff, I often drop a bill into the tip jar, chat with them about the new beans, etc. It’s to the point that they know my order (a Grande Sumatra on the Clover brewer). Only response I’ve ever gotten from anyone was from another patron, a thin guy in his 40’s with exercise clothes and running shoes who looked me up and down and said, “You look like you’re ready to kill somebody.” Stunned at this (who says that?!), it took me a few seconds to come up with a response. I responded “Not if I don’t have to,” and continued to the counter to place my order. He promptly left.

    • Loud-mouth rude runner probably went wailing to management at the first opportunity too.

      You having established a pleasant rapport with the staff, Starbucks would likely have taken any complaint he made “under advisement” and politely blown runner-man off.

      There is obvious benefit to having an established congenial relation with an establishment’s personnel, armed or not.

  23. If you’re openly carrying and go to Starbucks, fine.

    If you’re going to Starbucks just to open carry, you’re being an a$$clown. And don’t be surprised if a 30.06 sign follows.

  24. What I would do, is if confronted by police, record it if possible and immediately file an open records request for all documents and recorded media of the event. Then take action as appropriate.

    • dh34 – See, it’s that very attitude that I really hate. The folks just looking for conflict. That attitude isn’t doing any of us a favor. We have this one guy here in VA that does that all the time. His entire existence is about creating conflict with the police. What is so wrong about just being nice? It doesn’t even matter if they shouldn’t stop you or have not cause to stop you or you are fully within your rights. Converting the police is much easier if you are pleasant and nice to them. Sometimes they need education too. Maybe I misread your intent and if so I apologize, but I don’t think we should be promoting conflict. We should be avoiding it at all cost, except one’s life.

      • The deliberate creation of an incident must be done very carefully. It is best to get guidance from lawyers who can think carefully about what you must do/not-do to set-up a case so that it is likely to be won. If not, we all run a risk that it will be LOST and set a bad precedent.
        If one finds oneself in an incident that he didn’t create deliberately then one must play it by ear.

        I see absolutely no point in raising one’s voice, being belligerent or uncooperative in any way. The cop might be violating your Constitutional rights. The court(s) will be the judge of that. Your duty as the suspect is to assert your rights clearly, calmly and respectfully. E.g.: “No officer, I do not consent to your searching my car.” If he threatens to detain you in the prompt resumption of your lawful activities your best course of action is to do the same to him. I.e., if he realizes that you plan to interfere with his time on-patrol and cause him to fail-to-make-quota, he will be less inclined to call your bluff.

        You want to keep the issues that need to be dealt with in court confined as narrowly as possible. Whether you did/didn’t have a non-functioning tail-light. Whether you were/were-not carrying. Mix that up with obstructing only makes the problem worse. You can easily create a probable-cause to blow your case.

        • Nowhere did I say go looking for trouble. Nope not once. I said IF something happens get all the documentation you can. Period. Then take appropriate action.

        • Sorry if my remarks implied that you intend to create an incident or advocate doing so. That wasn’t what I had in mind.
          I was speaking to those relatively aggressive PotG who are inclined to push their exercise of arms bearing as far as they can. The motivation might be to persuade the public that guns ought to be regarded as normalized; or, to provoke the police into an arrest that could be proven to have been falsely founded.
          If we are to advance gun-rights I believe we have to come out of the closet. In the field, at the range, in our gun-club-houses we are out of sight and out of the public mind. Our normal activity is not normalizing guns as a part of contemporary culture. If we keep doing this we will loose the war in the long run.
          We DO need to step out into the public square and assert our rights openly and forcefully. At the same time, we must be careful that our flamboyance is recognized by the general public as peaceful, not as violent. It’s not easy to get this right. We should applaud our fellow PotG for stepping to the front rank; yet, at the same time, we have to admonish them to do as little harm as possible (preferably no harm) to the cause.
          An armed, NON-violant, breach of the law MIGHT have a constructive effect; yet, by definition, as a breach it crosses the line. Anyone involved in such an activity must be extremely careful and act with the advice of council. Anyone arguing with a cop while armed is apt to be charged with resisting arrest; almost certainly a counterproductive effort.

        • Mark, I’d go further. If your goal is to create some kind of fuss, you should recruit the police to assist you. It will be pretty easy to find some who don’t like the stupid laws, and all you would be asking is for them to enforce the law. In that way, where they would normally just let you go, since you are a good guy, they will follow the letter of the stupid law and do whatever, leading to you arriving at the courthouse where all your lawyers are already there. You get the idea. Off the cuff arrogant craziness is not going to help anybody.

  25. I set foot in a Starbucks for the first time in years the other day, while waiting for my car stereo to be installed. I was mostly there to kill time but I was hungry too, so I got a piece of pie and a coffee.

    I forgot how terrible their coffee is. And how expensive. $6.50 for my midday snack and I didn’t take more than three sips of that black swill they call coffee.

    Open carrying or not, I don’t intend to ever go back to Starbucks. Here in PA though it’s a moot point–open carry is legal here with or without a permit, even in bars (as long as you aren’t drinking). The literally worst thing they can do is ask me politely to leave.

    In your case? ..Frankly I’d stay out of Starbucks altogether and get your morning half-caf no foam mocha soy latte at a place that doesn’t make crappy coffee.

  26. An alternate strategy is to make friends of corporations that are “on the fence” by hiring them to cater your firearm related events. It takes guts to turn down $1,000 worth of business over a principle held by a minority of the population.

  27. If they have posted signs, respect them. If not, carry. As for openly, I prefer concealed anyways, so without a sign, I’d just walk in, do my business, and leave.

    Now intentionally doing something you know someone or some company who, with legal rights, doesn’t want you to do, yeah, that is being a jerk. It’s up to you then: do you want to be remembered as a jerk or as a good person? Not saying they have any merit as to why they don’t want open carry, or any firearms, in their stores. Just saying sometimes it’s the image you want to convey, and how you want a business to remember those who think like you.

    I don’t see a right or wrong here.

    • +1 the only proper response IMHO.

      I’ll say something controversial. A 30.06 sign type law may be a good thing. It forces an anti-gun business to either fish or cut bait. If they want to uphold their principles, they WILL pay the price for it. Many of us won’t, without the force of law behind the sign, properly penalize these clowns, smugly thinking we are winning some sort of victory by sneaking in with a concealed weapon and rewarding them for their stance by handing them our money.

      • I can agree, tho I’m calling myself guilty. Mostly, while CCing, I simply ignore all prohibitions. I’m not thinking I’m winning anything, I just really don’t care, as though I were not carrying.

  28. I have OC’d for years before I caved in and got my VA CL. Never in all those years did I ever have a bad experience. I dressed nicely and behaved courteously so as to reassure those around me that I meant no harm. I learned about situational awareness and the fact that normal belts suck for carrying. I think OC is great and it generated many good conversations with less educated people. There was a time in this country when concealing a handgun was considered dastardly and dishonest. I wonder how much crime would drop if CC was not allowed and OC was the only way to go. Imagine 12 million guns suddenly appearing outside of garments and the sudden panic in the mind of criminals at the sight of all those people they never knew had guns that are around them all the time.

    • +1

      I have said many times if you carry openly or concealed dress like an adult and you will be treated with respect. You don’t have to walk around in coat and tie. All you have to do is dress to the standards of the community.

  29. Another approach would be to find a carry friendly café and patronize that. Get an estimate of how much coffee and food you buy from them weekly. Then send a note to Starbucks letting them know about the lost revenue.

    Frequenting their locations in spite of their request is not much of a statement. They win either way. Putting the effects of their request into dollar terms is a much stronger message.

  30. Ok this is all about optics. Let’s put this in perspective.
    A mom with kids in tow, and a heater on her hip hops into the equivalent of Java Wallmart to get a double latte. No one will bat an eye. No one will freak, or call for a SWAT team.
    You hit the local java joint with your main squeeze, heaters on your hips. Nope, no one will freak out. Life will in fact go on. When 30+ pro open carry protestors swarm the local Starbucks it is news. Pictures will be taken, and Moms Demand will spit blood and hell fire. The very nature of the reason for being there, and the seer numbers, will shape the optics. So carry on.. Oh and pick me up a couple cranberry bliss bars while you are at it. 🙂

    • I have told my wife that she can easily open carry in Arlington because of her age and her weapon, an M-9. In this are people will just assume she is retired military. She isn’t buying it.

  31. As many folks have said, if OC in Texas is a done deal anyway, just go with it. If you happen to be OC’ing and are thirsty for a Starbucks, then just go there. If you’re at home and think, “Gee, I’d like a Starbucks” then strap on your gat in your preferred carry device, and go buy a coffee. If your thought process is, “Whose Wheaties can I piss in today?” then maybe just leave the gun at home and refocus on something useful.

  32. “After considering the practical, political and editorial advantages of open carry, I’ve decided I’ll wear my gat on my hip as and when it’s permissible by law.”

    Translation: You intend to use a self-defense tool as a prop to make a political statement, rather than for its intended purpose.

    I don’t have a problem with open carry. And if you’re carrying for the right reasons, then the political/policy fallout shouldn’t be your concern. You seem to be asking if it’s the right thing to do in terms of political tactics, not self-defense tactics. Which means you’re carrying for the wrong reasons, using a gun in the wrong way.

    • Seems to me he made a statement, and was not asking anything. Yet you felt a need to tell him what to think. Interesting!

  33. DON’T DO IT. You won the first battle. You won’t win another. And you will look like jerks to the public. Don’t you have tires to rotate or guns to clean?

  34. I’m interested; how would open-carrying an authentic looking, albeit actually otherwise, imitation firearm by a licenced OC’er in Starbucks or somewhere similar playout if the carrier refused to leave the premises when asked after disclosing the fact it is a ‘toy’?

    • It is a private business. If you refuse to leave when requested you are trespassing and will be arrested. That is the price for stupid trolling IRL.

      • Question remains wether they would pursue asking you to leave once the fact of the gun not being ‘real’ was disclosed (honest situation being a airsoft player stopping for refreshment on way to/from a match). Further to the point of children and toys, would they ask a child with a toy gun to leave? My point is only that, as we more or less all know, the ‘antis’ seem to be more anti seeing the gun than anti the gun itself.

    • Only criminals and children are stupid enough to present fake/toy guns as real. An excellent way to become perforated.

  35. Expansion of open carry handguns to Texas is an opportunity.

    It is usually apparent to most (or not when properly concealed) when someone is going about their business and quietly exercising their right to carry while doing so. It can be seen in the way they project themselves with their mannerisms and how they conduct themselves while doing everyday activities.

    It is also apparent when someone is projecting a ‘notice me’ attitude with an intent to stand out and waive the pro-gun (or anti-gun) flag. Grand standing doesn’t help our cause much and tends to put people off.

    Leave the obnoxious behavior in business establishments for the anti-gun extremists. If you should be ‘victimized’ by some loud over-reactive anti, it will be apparent for all to see.

    • Perhaps simply being willing to tolerate unwanted attention on behalf of the Bill of Rights? If you can’t be asked to be “that guy” for the Bill of Rights, what are you willing to do for it?

      And you wonder why we have a guv that pisses on the Constitution at will?

    • “If you want attention from strangers then yes.”

      Have you missed the myriad comments from people OC-ing that have said “No One Noticed Or Cared”?

      Most people (especially in a place like SB) are too wrapped up in their own little world to notice ANYTHING about the other customers.

      Of the remaining, most don’t care so long as you are not doing anything to grab their attention…such as shouting “Everyone on the floor! This is a robbery!”

  36. IMO, the push for open carry is misguided and only serves to make the gun control crowd nuts (not necessarily a bad thing). An individual that has trained well will be very close to as fast from a concealed holster as from an OC holster AND will maintain the advantage of surprise.

    • And if a law restricts his choices, his rights are infringed. Did you ever swear an oath to “protect and defend”? Many here did. Might be the difference.

    • Liquor stores are not bussinesses that derive >51% of their income from the sale AND ONSITE consumption. They’ll have the blue sign.

  37. Depends? I dunno, man. Be discrete is all. Don’t piss off the yoga pants peeps, but educate those who seem amenable.

  38. No open carry in Illinois. And I have no use for Starsucks. But I’m less than a mile from Indiana and I would do it like Calvin mentioned earlier if I could…

  39. First let me start off with I think open carry should be completely legal. BUT! Why would you want to 1.) Scare liberals, kids, moms, and possibly others. 2.) Make a situation where restaurants and stores get a complaint and have there legal department tell them to post a no gun sign. 3.) Let the criminals know you are armed….. Why not just conceal carry? It’s the polite thing to do…No one knows you have a gun and all is good in the world. I’ve been a LONG time CCW holder and the rise of CCW permits has been a blessing and curse. A blessing because it shows government that citizens don’t want laws restricting conceal carry. But also a curse for some like me…. A long time ago if my gun showed when reaching up or my shirt got messed up and you could see the gun I never had issues. Everyone though I was either an off duty police officer or I worked for some government agency. No one ever got frightened because the public know if someone had a gun in a holster they were a good guy. Now people realize citizens can get a permit to carry a gun and if they see the gun they get all bent out of shape. It used to be nice being mistaken for a government agent and the politeness that came with it.

    • First let me start off with I think open carry should be completely legal. BUT!

      Nothing good ever comes after that “but…”

      Why would you want to 1.) Scare liberals, kids, moms, and possibly others.

      Why would you concern yourself with the irrational fears of others?

      2.) Make a situation where restaurants and stores get a complaint and have there legal department tell them to post a no gun sign.

      Where has this happened, in the history of ever? Sure, there’s been plenty of bullying by the Bullying Mommies – but they’re going to do that, regardless of where you go or how you carry.

      3.) Let the criminals know you are armed…..

      Because doing so is a verifiable deterrent.

      Why not just conceal carry? It’s the polite thing to do…

      Why is concealed carry the “polite” thing to do? Why is it more polite than open carry?

      No one knows you have a gun and all is good in the world.

      Personally? I carry concealed. But if I see a fellow gun owner carrying openly? My world is suddenly much better. Why? Because I know that’s a good guy, and because I know that an armed society is a polite society.

      I’ve been a LONG time CCW holder and the rise of CCW permits has been a blessing and curse. A blessing because it shows government that citizens don’t want laws restricting conceal carry. But also a curse for some like me…. A long time ago if my gun showed when reaching up or my shirt got messed up and you could see the gun I never had issues. Everyone though I was either an off duty police officer or I worked for some government agency. No one ever got frightened because the public know if someone had a gun in a holster they were a good guy.

      That remains true.

      And ironically, those people would be more safe, statistically speaking, if the person they see carrying is not law enforcement – because law enforcement commit crimes at a rate an order of magnitude higher than non-LEO carriers.

      Now people realize citizens can get a permit to carry a gun and if they see the gun they get all bent out of shape.

      Again: irrational fears. The only way to disabuse people of such irrational fears is to de-sensitize them to the presence of firearms in public, and to normalize the practice of carrying firearms. Gun owners are, by and large, far more polite and law-abiding than the general public. The only way for people to realize that truth is for them to see people carrying, and associate politeness and law-abiding with those people.

      It used to be nice being mistaken for a government agent and the politeness that came with it.

      You know, maybe it’s just a midwest thing; but I’ve always just been polite to other people, and found that they respond with politeness in kind – regardless of who I am.

      • “Why not just conceal carry? It’s the polite thing to do…”

        If we get OC in TX (which I am not convinced is gonna happen), I expect that within a year I will have spent a few thousand bucks on a “BBQ” gun and holster, after which the POLITE thing to do will be to let the peons see what a fine rig looks like, gold and silver filigree and all. So, why not just open carry? It’s the polite thing to do. Followed closely by the well known fact that only criminals and assassins feel a need to hide their guns while they sneak up on the children, CC should be illegal except for the politically privileged. /sarc

        How about everybody can carry how they damn well please, a right which is not infringed? And how about we support that right rather than supporting only single barrel shotguns, or whatever YOU think is OK?

      • “Personally? I carry concealed. But if I see a fellow gun owner carrying openly? My world is suddenly much better. Why? Because I know that’s a good guy, and because I know that an armed society is a polite society.”

        This is an INCREDIBLY important point to emphasize…over and over.

        I saw a dude recently in a retail store that was perhaps ‘concealed carrying’ under his outer garment, but his outer garment rode up occasionally and I saw his gun.

        (a) OC decriminalizes “printing.” That’s a win.

        (b) More importantly, with that view of his gun, I saw a “stabilizing effect” to the environment as a whole, not a threat. The dude was not acting like a ‘bad guy’ in any way, so seeing his gun promoted “equalization.”

        I don’t want to go as far as saying that I saw a “buddy” because I did not know him, but…I saw another person there that any TRUE bad guys would see as a threat sufficient to de-select the location for attack.

        The deterrent effect of OC is undeniable (it’s been seen “in the wild”). The “brotherhood” effect, for lack of a better word…is just as real.

  40. Robert, you already know the answer to this question – in fact, you gave the answer in an article you wrote back on November 21st of last year. In that article, which you originally titled “Memo to Gun Rights Advocates: Open Carry or STFU” (which you later renamed), you wrote the following:

    “When Texas enacts open carry, I will wear a gun on my hip wherever it’s legally allowed. Why? Because I can. Because I must. I must protect my gun rights for my children, my community, and my country. If you live in a state that allows open carry you need to open carry your firearm. Tonight. Tomorrow. For years to come. If you don’t, don’t tell me you are a gun rights advocate. By thy deeds thy shall be known. That is all.”

    So I guess it really comes down to whether you call yourself a gun rights advocate or not?

    On a lighter note, I have to agree with many of the other comments – I’m not a huge fan of Starbucks.

  41. 1) Why are you giving a company money that “requests” you not be able to defend yourself?

    2) If you open carry somewhere, please just go about your business… that was the problem with a lot of these places, people couldn’t just carry a gun while getting coffee they were getting coffee while carrying a gun (and taking selfies, etc)

  42. As the bill is currently written, if Starbucks had a problem with you open-carrying a firearm and wanted to post something to prevent you from doing so, the 30.06 sign would NOT stop you from open carrying. In fact, the bill is proposing a separate sign, slightly rephrased, that would be the “30.07” sign… specific to open carry.

    So here’s what would happen: you open carry your gun when you get some Starbux. Yoga pants moms everywhere fear for their lives and complain, you get tossed out, and they post a 30.07 sign. So now you can’t open carry, but you can still carry concealed, because the only the 30.06 sign applies to concealed carry! If they truly wanted to ban all firearms from the business, they’re gonna have to post both the 30.06 and the 30.07 signage. If they only post one or the other, or signage that doesn’t meet the language/height/contrast requirements, you’re in the clear.

    SOURCE: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/84R/billtext/pdf/SB00017I.pdf#navpanes=0 (starting at page 29 of the PDF.)

  43. I bet you won’t get any comments, unless you’re there around bar time or during a Hippy reunion. I OC in Starbucks all the time and never hear a peep — and that includes liberal enclaves like Madison, WI and Northern VA. Don’t be obnoxious about it and most other (civilized) people won’t be, either. And, if someone does open his mouth, thank him for his unsolicited opinion and ignore it, like you would any other monkey’s gibberish.

  44. Couple of years ago 4 uniformed officers & 2 investigators in suits sans coats. All had both I.D. & Metal Badges visible stopped by a local overpriced coffee store for a cup as the Chief was buying. We were asked by the manager to disarm as it might be upsetting to see police with pistols to other patrons. We all got up, walked out & since then not one officer from that department or family (200 sworn) has been inside except the 3 times they have been robbed. They offered free coffee if we would come sit inside, told them against policy to take freebies or discounts. Call 911 or hire a security co. If you want guards.

    IMO any business that posts that sign doesn’t want my $$$.

  45. You can’t claim to be a 2A absolutist and not. Otherwise turn in your card and claim the distinction nevermore.

  46. If any of you are still giving your money to a company that would trample on your rights then you are fools. If Starbucks does not want my gun in their store then they also do not want my money. Although I still do not understand how a company selling coffee at a higher mark up than alcohol at a restaurant is still in business.

        • Because you are voluntarily violating the restrictions the property owner has laid forth for entering said property. Is this really a difficult thing? You are not forced to be on the property, therefore when you are on it, you are there voluntarily and agree to abide by rules laid out by the owner. If you disagree, then leave that property. It’s the same that they can restrict you from taking photographs from the inside, even though if it were out in the public space, it would be completely protected by the 1st Amendment. Really simple stuff.

        • It is difficult in the sense I’m unconvinced the proprietor’s rights are violated when he is unaware that a customer is carrying concealed. I agree an owner should be allowed to ask anyone to leave an establishment for almost ANY reason. I don’t even have a problem with a sign that says no handguns. I have a problem with a law that turns a person with a clean background into a felon on the whim of a proprietor with doors open to the public for business. Would you also support a 30.69 sign that said a person is guilty of a felony if he is concealed gay while inside the business? How do you propose that woman concealed carrying is a threat? Does your objection have anything to do with possible threat? What other legal activities do you believe an owner can prohibit in their publicly accessible business that are otherwise legal in public and should the violations be felonies?

        • The discussion is in regards to OC, not CC. As I tell my wife in regards to carry, concealed is concealed. In my state, we don’t have 30.69 signs or anything like it. Businesses may post gunbuster signs, but they don’t carry force of law unless asked to leave. Of course, it’s just good manners to either comply with the requests of the property owner or to just not bother them in the first place.
          I have no objection, I am merely stating that property owners do have rights, too. I have not once stated that any of these actions should be felonies, that is a false dichotomy.

          Would you also support a 30.69 sign that said a person is guilty of a felony if he is concealed gay while inside the business?

          This got an audible laugh from me.

  47. Personally, I think open carry is tactically disadvantageous.

    Starbucks will NOT ask anyone to leave, so all your angst is mooot.

    • “Personally, I think open carry is tactically disadvantageous.”

      So what. Did the article ask your personal tactical opinion of OC?

  48. Northern or neutral accents? Your so witty with your nudge nudge wink wink broad brush B.S. regarding people not like yourself.

    Nevermind that Austin has numerous gun rights groups and one of the biggest in the state.

    • I’m a “Northerner” living in Oklahoma, and my “accent” fits in quite well. At least until I order some “pop”.

      I’ve never found much stock in judging somebody by their accent. I’ve lived all over the US and people are people despite the way they pronounce things.

  49. I love Starbucks and I go in and enjoy my coffee with my legally concealed weapon everytime I visit. I just don’t believe in open carry. I feel like if I open carry, I lose my element of surprise and the criminal gains it because he/she knows I’m packing.

    • The Element of Surprise is an offensive concept. It’s counter-intuitive to think that you could explain that on the stand…

      Better to advertise that it’s a bad move to attack you than to wait until it’s to late, try to draw from cover, and discharge lead in a public place.

      All in the name of feeling special? Whatever….

      • So your saying that protecting myself with my concealed handgun while in possessing my state issued CHL (Concealed Handgun License) won’t hold up in court if I gain the advantage over a criminal threatening my life?

    • ” I just don’t believe in open carry.”

      You don’t believe people OC?

      “I don’t believe in the tooth fairy.” In my belief system, the tooth fairy does not exist.

      “I don’t believe in open carry.” In my belief system, open carry does not exist.

      Oh yeah…tactical disadvantages of OC? Citations, please. Lots of pontification on this subject, but no data supplied.

      Carry how you want to carry…I really don’t care. But, I also don’t like the editorialization that is based on Geezer Science and memes and not on facts.

  50. Starbucks is in the business of selling overpriced coffee. They are NOT in the business of promoting “gun rights” or “gun control”. They just want to sell coffee, preferably to both sides. When OC demonstrations force businesses to take sided they are shooting themselves in the foot. OC proponents will tout the 2nd Amendment and their right to carry what they want, when they want, where they want.

    But what about a property owner’s rights? It is their property. Shouldn’t a property owner be the one to decide what happens on their property? I don’t want Moms Against Guns, Prolife, Women’s rights or whoever setting up shop on my front lawn. If I don’t want someone who I feel is rude or insults my wife in my home or business, I should be able to ask them to leave. Regardless of what I believe in, I don’t think anyone should have the ability to force their opinion or belief system upon me. I’ve seen signs in the windows of businesses: No shirt, no shoes, no service. One microbrewery has a sign: no ballcaps worn backwards allowed. Its their place, their rules. Seems simple. (except if you are a Christian florist or baker, and a gay couple can close you down via the courts…. But that’s a whole other issue)

    Starbucks has tried to take the middle ground. They’ve asked nicely for people not to openly carry in their coffee shops. By not posting signs it allows those who conceal carry to do so legally. I’m all for gun rights, but I am also for private property owner rights as well.

    It all comes down to your rights end when they infringe upon mine. If the OC movement pushes the issue it will end up as an outright ban on all guns (open or concealed). We should learn from the failure of the Moms when they try to push businesses to ban guns and end up being told to take a hike.

    • “No shirt, no shoes, no service. One microbrewery has a sign: no ballcaps worn backwards allowed.”
      None of that turns a person into a felon unless they refuse to leave when asked.

    • But what about a property owner’s rights? It is their property. Shouldn’t a property owner be the one to decide what happens on their property?”

      Yes, and when they post a freaking sign, they will be meeting the legal obligation to notify me and others of that decision.

      Until then, it’s an Internet rumor I may or may not have heard. Literally.

    • If the OC movement pushes the issue it will end up as an outright ban on all guns (open or concealed).

      Chicken Little much? People OC every day all over this great fruited plain with zero issues or fanfare. It’s people like you who are the real enemies of 2A and freedom.

      I’m all for gun rights, but I am also for private property owner rights as well.

      Please distinguish between private property such as your home and private property which has opened themselves up as a public accommodation such as a store or hotel. What I think you are saying is that a business should have the right to ban Republicans or blacks.

      It all comes down to your rights end when they infringe upon mine.

      What rights of yours are being infringed if someone open carries next to you in a Best Buy or Kroger?

      • What I think you are saying is that a business should have the right to ban Republicans or blacks.

        There’s a difference between what a person is and what they choose to carry.

    • Totally agree and I do like Starbucks. I conceal carry there and any place not legally prohibited. If open carry passes I can switch to larger, heavier, Ruger SS 25.5 oz. 9mm revolver, with cover garment, instead of Ruger .38 LCR I carry now in front pocket of blue jeans. I’m a 64 yr. old, 5’6″ 122lb. woman with bad knees, in the flight or fight equation, flight is not an option. Whole lot more comfortable to OC holstered than have to carry smaller, lighter weapon. At least will not have to be concerned if wind blows cover garment for all to see a big ass gun, holstered on my hip. when walking out w/to go coffee and pastry.

      If OC passes, in Austin, expect every LEO you encounter, to ask for your CHL, if you choose to full on Open Carry

      • “If OC passes, in Austin, expect every LEO you encounter, to ask for your CHL, if you choose to full on Open Carry”
        Personally, I’m fine with such an outcome in TX or anywhere else. The more popular OC becomes the faster LEOs will grow bored with their inquisitiveness. The sooner OC will become normalized.
        Granted, some LEOs will grow bored rapidly (if they have any inquisitive streak at all). Others will take a bit of kidding by their fellow officers before they calm down.

  51. So, let’s just lay to rest the question of whether Howard Schultz’s “open letter” constitutes notification of trespassing.

    Here’s the relevant passage from the letter (my emphasis added, underline in original):

    For these reasons, today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas—even in states where “open carry” is permitted—unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.

    I would like to clarify two points. First, this is a request and not an outright ban. Why? Because we want to give responsible gun owners the chance to respect our request—and also because enforcing a ban would potentially require our partners to confront armed customers, and that is not a role I am comfortable asking Starbucks partners to take on. Second, we know we cannot satisfy everyone. For those who oppose “open carry,” we believe the legislative and policy-making process is the proper arena for this debate, not our stores. For those who champion “open carry,” please respect that Starbucks stores are places where everyone should feel relaxed and comfortable. The presence of a weapon in our stores is unsettling and upsetting for many of our customers.

    So not only is it a request and not an outright prohibition; but also, the person in authority is not comfortable with his employees giving oral notification. So this letter is in no way whatsoever legally binding.

    Carry on.

  52. I’d say do it, but only if you were going to go there anyway. Just don’t do it for the sake of bugging Howard Schultz anymore or they will get banned there.

  53. First off Circle K is hot brown water. But apparently that is most people’s preference… But I would also agree with the Open Carry is a bad idea folks. You lose your tactical advantage and you’re basically asking them to put up a sign. I see no benefit to OC except for a shirt slowing my draw…

    • . You lose your tactical advantage

      Tactical advantage? Surprise is an offensive strategy, not defensive. You haven’t thought about this enough. If you have to surprise someone, you’re already in deep trouble. People who want that “element of surprise” always assume they will be a bystander instead of the target victim. Surprising your attacker after you’ve been attacked is ridiculous.

  54. …OR someone here could just open a new chain of coffee shops: Guns & Coffee. Your tag line could be, “No gun. No Coffee.”

    • Not a bad idea! Now how to pull it off so that it achieves the desired effect?

      TX is ripe. Pick a community where there is a large enough cadre of OC promoters. Look for a Mom & Pop coffee shop near a Starbucks. Talk to Mom, see if she is game (Pop would probably be and he doesn’t call the shots anyway). Talk to the cops who patronize the cafe and arrange a few times for OC promoters to be there when the cops will be there. (No conspiracy between the cops and the promoters; just a pure coincidence, of course.) Sit and drink coffee with them. The hoplophobic customers will calm down. Then, the OC promoters come in randomly (not when they expect to meet the cops). Soon enough, a few OC sympathizers who aren’t necessarily promoters will join in. If it becomes popular then it will be normalized in THAT neighborhood.
      What will happen to Starbucks? Probably nothing immediately. Nevertheless, having normalized OC at Mom & Pop’s, it will quickly become an occasional happening that someone strolls in and out of Dunken Doughnuts OCing. More normalizing. Repeat at grocery stores, barber shops, hardware stores in that same neighborhood.
      Then, hit Starbucks. At first, wear both an IWB and a conspicuous OWB holster. Transfer your handgun to the IWB (discretely) before entering Starbucks. Everybody will see the empty OWB holster and figure out that you are likely CC. Build-up the practice until it becomes an open secret in the community. Assuming the manager isn’t some damned Yankee, he will get used to the idea and then it will become normal to OC in Starbucks. Once Starbucks falls, the A&P will follow along with most everyplace else in that community.

      Obviously, there are other States where such a strategy would work such as AZ. Gradually, news will spread outside these starter-States and OC promoters can try it in MO, LA etc.

      Eventually, the movement would reach legally-OC States that are pure Blue such as DE.

      Shouldn’t take much. The critical elements are: a reasonably-sized group of OC promoters; a Mom & Pop venue with a friendly management; a couple of sympathetic cops willing to play along just a little while (purely by coincidence); a decent sized group of OC sympathizers who would constitute a critical-mass once the cries of “I’m Shocked! SHOCKED!! that there is carrying going on at Mom & Pop’s!”

  55. I was inside Starbucks in Weatherford, Texas today and saw OC. He was in line in front of me. Nobody seemed to care.
    Mine was concealed.

Leave a Reply

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