Skip to main content
Report this ad

Protesters rally against Starbucks for allowing guns in their stores

Starbucks is "sticking to its guns" regarding firearms within its stores.
Starbucks is "sticking to its guns" regarding firearms within its stores. / Michael Schaus
Related articles
Supreme Court to look at second amendment
CSU board refuses students the right to carry guns
Arms treaty threatens 2nd Amendment rights
Conservatism 101: What is the role of guns in modern American society?

Picket signs and protesters rallied at a Denver Starbucks in an effort to implore the chain to change its policies on firearms. Currently the coffee giant allows customers to carry firearms into its stores in accordance with state laws. Starbucks has no ban on lawful concealed carry, or even open carry, on its premises. But Colorado Ceasefire, a Colorado based gun control group, is trying to pull Starbucks into the center of a divisive social issue.

Attention was first brought to Starbucks when some open carry supporters (people who support the lawful act of openly carrying a firearm) began meeting in coffee houses across the nation. The Brady campaign, followed by groups like Colorado Ceasefire, quickly rushed to pressure Starbucks into changing their policies. But it’s not just open carry that the protesters where rallying against. “We’ve got approximately 50,000 permits to carry concealed weapons in Colorado, which means that these loaded handguns are going into stores all over the state” said Ted Pascoe with Colorado Ceasefire. . . . An accurate statement. What’s the point?

But Starbucks, much to their credit, has so far refused to let the political ambushes wreak havoc on their policies. Starbucks has further explained that their allowances of lawfully carried firearms are part of their respect for the local rule of law rather than ideological agendas.

Do you think the group would like to ban police officers from obtaining coffee? Probably not. Obviously the objection is not to the gun, but to the law-abiding citizens that are carrying them. Colorado Ceasefire’s agenda is clearly to limit and eventually reverse the practice of concealed carry. The Starbucks at which the protest took place was in Denver County; the only county in Colorado that bans the open carrying of firearms. How many loaded weapons do you think walked into that very store behind the protesters without their knowledge? (I know of at least one.)

Tom Mauser, with Ceasefire Colorado said about Colorado’s concealed carry laws, “[Starbucks] is not required by the law to accept it.” Another accurate statement. And again I struggle to see his point. Starbucks has a choice, and they have chosen to respect local laws and communities around the country. If someone wants a cup of coffee without the possibility that a law-abiding citizen, who has been properly vetted by the government and has had sufficient training, might be carrying a gun, don’t visit a Starbucks. It is very telling that the anti-gun group is protesting a company for exercising a right of free choice.

The basic right of self-defense is not granted to us by our Constitution or by the laws of Men; but by our existence and our creator. Moreover, it is within the rights of any business, or property holder, to determine how restrictive they decide to be when it comes to prohibiting certain activities that are within the confines of the law. Starbucks itself may have had the most quotable reaction to the anti-gun protesters when they said that issues with city or state laws should be taken up in court, legislative processes, or ballot initiatives. . . Not within their stores.

“A gun is just a tool;” said David Williams with the Colorado Libertarian Party. And he is right. Colorado Ceasefire resents an individual’s right to carry that tool. In their view, a woman does not have the right to defend her life with deadly force against a rapist or an attacker. . . At least not while she gets her tall vanilla latte.

Please read Starbuck’s statement by clicking here.

To receive Michael’s articles in your email as soon as they are published, click on the “subscribe” option above this article. To contact Michael, visit Also, be sure to find his fan page on facebook.


  • SAM 5 years ago

    Yeah Starbucks for not caving to special interest groups! The second admendment seems to always be the center of some sort of negotiation, but it is, as of now, the right of people to lawfully carry a fire arm. Good for Starbucks to respect the local rule of law rather than ideological agendas. Good article Michael.

  • C Ellmaker 5 years ago

    Why do you need to take a firearm to Starbucks? Who cares if you *can* take one there. What purpose does it serve?

    I really question the intelligence and maturity of anyone who thinks that getting a latte while armed is "standing up for the Constitution."

  • James 5 years ago

    I see plain cloths law enforcement going into Starbucks packing heat. Should we stop them from exercising their 2nd amendment, and make them keep their guns in the unmarked cars?

  • James 5 years ago

    Starbucks gets my business everyday. I am a
    voter, and strong 2nd amendment supporter.

  • molonlabe 5 years ago

    @C Ellmaker
    you're right. why would you need a set of jumper cables every where you go? you shouldn't keep them in your car. why would you need a fire extinguisher accessible in your home at all times? you should ditch it.

    It is about more than standing up for the constitution. It is about being able to protect yourself whenever/ wherever you need to. And by the way, my gun is far more dangerous in my car (unattended, where it can be stolen) than on my hip in a secure holster.

    Next time someone cuts you off in traffic, and you think to yourself "I wish there was a cop nearby", think about how that feeling would amplify if you were being robbed, raped, or beaten. Maybe one more tool to protect yourself is not such a bad idea. . . no matter where you are.

  • Paladin 5 years ago

    Ellmaker: We don't give a damn what you question. You're a person of no consequence to us. Why don't you seek out and talk to some victims who were either injured or lost loved ones because they were "somewhere" in public and denied their right to defend their and their loved ones' lives. You never know when or where you may need to defend yourself. Criminals generally do not make appointments with their victims.

    Gotta go. Have a caffe awaiting at Starbucks.

  • Lorraine Yapps Cohen, Jewelry Examiner 5 years ago

    If they don't like guns with their latte, why don't they get their latte elsewhere? Instead, the rest of us suffer from them ramming their ideals down everybody else's throats.

  • MachoDuck 5 years ago

    Open Carry in Denver is illegal, thus there's no problem for the anti-rights crowd to complain about. The open carriers I'm acquainted with (open carry dot org) never break the law; we're scrupulous about that. That's why I know my first sentence is true.

    Have you noticed that the anti-rights crowd panders to peoples' ignorance? From outright misstatements of fact to general impressions directed toward the ignorance of people who get all their "knowledge" from mainstream media, the one thing the anti-rights crowd can be counted on its being wrong.


  • MountainCop 5 years ago

    Starbuck's will continue to get my business - I applaud them for standing by their principles and respecting the local rule of law. As an American, and as a cop (who carries all the time), I have no problem with open or concealed carry.

    CeaseFire Colorado, the Brady Bunch, and all others like them who feel the 2nd Amendment infringes on their so-called 'rights' need to shut up and get a life. Since they are such a small minority in our society and can't get the rules and laws they want, they feel the need to whine, moan, yell, stamp their feet, and complain - using illogical arguments that ignore the facts.

    You don't like seeing guns? Then don't look or go somewhere else. We are tired of arguing with you. You are not worth the attention.

    You have the right of free speech - but you do NOT have the right to force others to listen to you or believe you. You also have the right to remain silent. We wish you would exercise the 5th with the same fervor you practice the 1st.

  • Lorraine Yapps Cohen, San Diego Conservative Exami 5 years ago

    ...and now they're dragging Starbucks onto their agenda. Hey, they just want to do business in joe.

Report this ad