Brady Campaign vs. Starbucks

Not even sure where to start with this one. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Man that sure sounds great! Who in their right mind wouldn’t want to put an end to gun violence? I know I surely would but then again I’m a gun enthusiast, I love guns I love almost everything about guns and I will own one till the day I die.

I know quite a bit about guns so therefore I can speak on the matter very openly and resist looking like a fool. It has become evident that some people can’t do that, namely with the Brady Campaign.

Recently, I watched a video on YouTube(link provided above) of Starbucks shareholders asking the board of starbucks questions on their gun policies in stores. If you didn’t already know Starbucks sticks to the law in all 50 U.S. States when it comes to firearms.

I’d like to take a minute to point out some discrepancy in the video. First and foremost the speaker from Starbucks is wrong you may carry a loaded firearm openly in many states, including my home state of North Carolina.  This being said their are local laws that can prohibit open carry, such as in Cary, NC which doesn’t allow for open carry in city limits.

Secondly, the lady in the video brings up a tragic event that occurred in Washington State detailed below from wikipedia:

The Lakewood police officer shooting took place on Sunday, November 29, 2009, when four Lakewood, Washington police officers were murdered at a coffee shop in the Parkland unincorporated area of Pierce County, Washington, United States. One gunman, later identified as Maurice Clemmons, entered the coffee shop, fired at the officers as they sat working on their laptop computers, and then fled the scene.

This event did not take place at a Starbucks but the lady in the video explains that it could happen in a Starbucks, which is valid, but it could also happen anywhere. Now the argument at hand implies that if Starbucks were to chance it’s policy things just as the Lakewood tragedy wouldn’t happen. This is, at best, failed logic and, at worst, moronic. To own and possess a handgun you must first apply for a handgun permit which runs you through background checks, criminal history, employment history and much more.

So in order for Maurice Clemmons to possess a firearm legally he would have to have hand a permit for such firearm. Noted in his Wikipedia profile he would have never been allowed to possess this firearm or purchase this firearm legally. I hope you aren’t over looking the LEGALLY part. I would say that, generally, someone open carrying a firearm in public probably isn’t asking for trouble.

If anything we should be looking for people conceal carrying firearms illegally, as that is much more dangerous to Police Officers and the public.

So if you are scared or threatened by people open carrying firearms then chances are you should probably look more into it firearms. Take a few minutes to learn more about a firearm before rushing to judgment. Don’t get me wrong, you don’t know who/what/where/or why someone maybe carrying a firearm or there mental condition but there is a high chance that you don’t have much to worry about.

This article isn’t about blasting the legitimate questions of people or the Brady campaign. But maybe your tactics and resources could be geared at trying to actually stop gun violence and not get rid of guns all together.

Categories: Featured,Politics

Tags: ,,,