Bradys Claim 25,000 Signatures on Starbucks Petition

See here. If it’s a true number, it’s a pretty good tally. Better than I would have imagined it would do. Be warned, if this works they will try this template again. Be sure to contact Starbucks and thank them for standing up against this nonsense, if you haven’t already.

18 thoughts on “Bradys Claim 25,000 Signatures on Starbucks Petition”

  1. I really hope Starbucks brushes them off again. What do they have to gain (in a buisness sense) from bowing to pressure from Helmke and Co? I think they would piss people off, lose sales, and lose image if they did. Its not like the Brady campaign is going to boycott Starbucks. The NRA and gun owners might though, which would result in lost sales and negative publicity.

    What the heck does a coffee company care about gun rights? They don’t, they just care about making money.

  2. Dude, this is “slacktivism”.

    They can’t raise any real money and it looks like the joyce foundation slush fund has dwindled to a trickle, but they can sure still create a facebook survey and make mistakes about the decimal point.

    Remember, they only have a hundred and one people following their twitter feed, and most of them are grassroots RKBA supporters keeping track of there BS.

    We can probably generate that many emails for our side if we pushed for it, easy.

  3. Message of support sent. Hope they don’t cave to the Bradys. My daughter will be very disappointed if we have to boycott…

  4. It would be an interesting revelation if *where* those signatures were received from was revealed.

  5. Message of support sent.

    I was considering writing Starbucks a message via the Brady page, but editing the content to be pro-rights, but I figured the Bradys would just count my message as one that supported them.

  6. What do they have to gain (in a buisness sense) from bowing to pressure from Helmke and Co? I think they would piss people off, lose sales, and lose image if they did.

    Brady’s banking on Starbucks’ target audience, which is less likely to be well educated about guns. They’re hoping Starbucks will see the potential for damage to its image if Brady can successfully associate them with allowing “loopy gun nuts” to carry freely. It’s a non-issue, but may not feel that way to somebody who has no context to understand open carry. At the same time, the stereotypical Starbucks customer isn’t likely to be offended by a ban on open carry. Brady’s hoping Starbucks will see a risk on our side, and little to no risk on their side. This is why they aren’t targeting, say, Chick-Fil-A

    Frankly, I dunno. It’s possible Starbucks has a bigger following in free America than the stereotype assumes. They know their customers a lot better than I do, and there’s probably a reason they’re blowing Brady off.

  7. I think Starbucks following among our people, so to speak, is probably a lot higher than you would imagine. People who think gun rights is primarily a rural phenomena are generally mistaken — it’s really much more of a suburban phenomena. Think about all the gun bloggers. How many of them live a rural life? Some, but most of them have jobs near major or minor cities, and live in suburbs. Most are professionals. These are the types of people Starbucks customer base is made of.

    I agree with your analysis of what the Bradys are hoping for, but I would imagine Starbucks is less than happy about this kind of attention.

  8. Though their cookies and brownies kick ass, i don’t much like starbucks coffee…more i think about it, i don’t like coffee. I feel that STARBUCKS should set policy about firearm possession in their stores, not the bradys.

  9. I haven’t been following this issue closely so I don’t know what the Brady group is trying to do, but, if the Bradys would just concentrate on the SF Bay area and boycotting the stores in that area, they could get Starbucks to change their policy there.

    Public opposition in Los Angeles and SF was the thing that forced Walmart to eliminate handgun sales in stores in California. Since this happened years ago, I can’t remember all the details.

  10. I sent a thank you to starbucks. I buy their beans regularly for my espresso machine but I would find an alternative if they fuck us on this issue.

  11. That makes sense.

    I’m dropping Starbucks a line, too, and telling them that I’m going to try their coffee for the first time just because they decided to respect my rights.

  12. My response to Starbucks:

    “Starbucks is currently receiving petitions from both pro and anti gun political organizations asking it to pick a side and make a political statement. I would like to urge Starbucks to ignore both sides and just continue to make great coffee.

    I got a real thrill out of your initial response to this, it went something like “we defer to federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding this issue”.

    Please continue to do so, I love your coffee, several friends are happy employees at Starbucks around the world, and your social efforts (free trade etc.) all stack up to a net good. No good comes from getting involved in contentious political issues.”

    Not my most elegantly worded work, but hey it gets the point across. I think I was more excited to read their initial response than I would have been if they had come out with some pro-gun support.

    I support gun rights, Starbucks makes coffee, Helmke is an ass. Thats the state of the world that I can understand and live with, leave it that way.

  13. The Brady Bunch sent a request to sign the petition to 180,000 people and only got 25,000 to sign?


    Maybe they’ll start to realize most of those 180,000 on their distribution list are just us keeping tabs on them.

Comments are closed.