Starbucks Appreciation Day, With A Twist

by Categorized: Gun control, Newtown Date:

Gun advocates have designated Aug. 9 as \”Starbucks Appreciation Day\” and planned gatherings in coffee shops across the country, including Newtown. Starbucks does not prohibit customers from entering its stores with firearms in states that have open-carry laws.

\"starbucksA group called Mom\’s Demand Action For Gun Sense in America is calling for Starbucks to change its open carry policy. They want the coffee giant to denounce the appreciation day and bar gun-carrying customers from entering Starbucks.

\"starbucks

 

The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on courant.com articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

167 thoughts on “Starbucks Appreciation Day, With A Twist

    1. Tom

      I wish we could. Hard to get a life when surronded by gun violence everyday. Now it is in our schools.

      Sad but true, Newtown is one of the few “gun towns” in Connecticut. Probably the only “gun town” in wealthy Fairfield County. Three shooting ranges in one town w/ informal shooting ranges in suburban bacyhards all over town.

      Relaxed town laws on guns led to a horror beyond comprehension.

      One of the saddest times I can recall.

      I refuse to believe the founding fathers intended this. Mentally ill people with guns wandering around? Shameful.

      1. Jim

        Have to clue you in on something. Laws have nothing to do with stopping an insane person bent on committing mass murder. After all, murder all by itself is illegal. Why didn’t that law stop that crazy kid from committing his atrocity? For the same reason that laws against illegal drugs don’t work. If people want drugs or weapons, they will get them. We need societal change, more focus on the mentally ill and a return to morals. That is real change, not some do-nothing, feel good laws.

        1. Billy Hypocrite

          Then let’s just legalize bomb making . I will repeat myself; the 2nd amendment referred to organized militia not personal possession. But it has been bastardized over the years.

          1. Kim

            samed old ignorant, tired ‘well regulated militia’ argument from billy boggs, when he’s been educated on this subject over and over again but simply chooses to ignore truth and history. When pointed in the right direction, he actually stated that he didn’t need any facts or figures to know what the truth is. Thus, people, is the liberal philosophy – pretend to know what is meant by certain laws IN SPITE of the words of the creators of those laws themselves as recorded in their journals, letters to acquaintenances, and news agencies.

            for thos of you who are interested in real truth instead of false rhetoric, please read ‘The Founders’ Second Amendment’ by Stephen Holbrook. It clears this ‘militia’ and second amendment debate up once and for all.

            Billy can lie, prevaricate, spin, accuse, deny, obfuscate or attack. It won’t change the truth. And the truth can be found in that single book which contains writings of the people who made the law in the first place.

          2. Dave Robertson

            You should probably get a hold of the US Supreme Court and let them know they have been interpreting it wrong since 1934. Or, better yet, go get an 18th century English dictionary and look up the word “regulate”.

          3. Billy Hypocrite

            Dave;

            And I welcome you to read “A Well Regulated Militia” by Saul Cornell. As soon as I mentioned his name a while back, the Inquisition Kim-ission immediately called him a screaming liberal. Point of fact, Cornell’s book gives much argument to both sides of the issue of person verses state organization. And yes, this debate has continued since the the Bill of Rights was written into the Constitution as a compromise between the Federalists and the Anti Federalists. But much of the reasoning lay at the point that arms possession were included on the state fear of federal government’s growth of a national army. This issue has been about striking a balance between states rights to defend themselves against an encroaching central government.

            Dave, I have read quite a bit. i am not a scholar. You are probably not either the way you have reproached me. Maybe we both should do a little more reading and a little less screaming. Maybe we should rethink our belief system. My beliefs don’t provide the opportunity to avail weapons to anyone who wants to kill and kill and kill.

            Do you not think there is defectiveness with your ideas of arming? And please don’t tell me that you can have enough guns in the hands of good guys to get the bad guys.

            This isn’t a children’s game. This is about life and death.

          4. Man from the Walt Whitman rest stop

            Kim: you and your ilk don’t educate me. If anything, you nauseate me.

            Dave Roberts:

            I remember talking with you here some time back. You at least had the decency of an honest dialogue without insults.

            My answer: The Supreme Court is subject to political orientation and interpretation. Different eras bring forth new perspectives. But please don’t give me this crap that strict constitutionalism trumps interpretation. Our human languages are designed to stretch and contract. I don’t need a tutorial on the meaning of “regulated” by 18th century understanding. I already understand it. And it referred to a muster on the town green in a regional practice for defense of the state. It hardly ever was defined as a right to personally arm oneself.

            Oh, and by the way, do you know the 18th century meaning of “muster?”

            When society demands a different perspective on the law, a shift will take place as it has through 235 or so years of this republic. The majority is now so fed up with the culture of guns that a shift is already in the making. You may wish to deny it but it is taking place. And your pro gun side is on the wane. Trust me on this one.

            We will win. And do you know why we will win? Because tragedies like Sandy Hook will continue until our society is so fed up with this needless violence that the Supreme Court also shifts. Even at this time, we are only one vote away from a major victory and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Chief Justice sides with those who desire more gun control. He doesn’t want to be on the wrong side of history.

          5. Billy Hypocrite

            Oops. I fog pot to change back my usual profile name. I use special names for Kim, who is a most deviate sort of character on these boards.

          6. Randy

            Actually, the 2nd amendment is about personal possession. Always has been.

            That is why it states that the right of the ‘people to keeo and bear arms’, not the right of the militia. And that is not just my opinion, it is also also supported by the Supreme court in Heller vs. DC.

          7. Billy Hypocrite

            Ranger Randy:

            Sorry to dethrone your position, but you are not quite correct. Much of the legal recognition of the 2nd recognized the 2nd for its need to have a regulated state militia. In very rare cases was it spoken in personal terms. Ultimately, it become a conservative verses liberal argument for some odd reason and con conservative side is on more Americans killed. But this is changing and I even doubt the current Court will rule in a majority decision in favor of personal possession.

            I would put money on that. I don’t think Roberts wants to be on the wrong side of history

          8. The Conn-servative

            You are right Billy. I agree with you that it has been bastardized over the years: by you secular regressives.
            Also, Roberts has already erred on the wrong side of history with the Unaffordable Healthcare Act.
            All pro 2a folks, you can see how this really upsets the controlling anti gun freaks out there. They don’t care about the 500+ killed in Chicano last year. Since Newtown,we have been making this point clear: where have you anti’s been all these years. Now they “appear” to have some vested interest in urban violence to come across as caring. It’s all a bunch of horse poop. They’re not screaming at Malloy to keep the violent offenders.Rather he is still letting them out in droves on early release. Again,for the millionith time,you nuts are concerned about mr whitey in suburbia posing some sort of resistance to a tyrannical government,and this is what the founders did not want: a trannical government. It is not subject to some mind warped ,regressive interpretation. It is what it is , deal with it.
            Read the next post about those TRAITORS in the US senate voting to hand over gun control to the UN.

          9. The Conn-servative

            I believe this vote may have occurred before their summer break.
            All dumbecrats and a few independants

            Friends,
            Over the weekend, we came four votes away from the United States Senate giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote, the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.

            The Statement of Purpose from the bill read:

            To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty. The U.N. Small Arms Treaty, which has been championed by the Obama Administration, would have effectively placed a global ban on the import and export of small firearms. The ban would have affected all private gun owners in the U.S. , and had language that would have implemented an international gun registry on all private guns and ammo. The ultimate purpose of the “treaty” is to confiscate all privately owned firearms in all countries supporting the treaty.

            Astonishingly, 46 of our United States Senators were willing to GIVE AWAY our Constitutional rights to a foreign power.
            Here are the 46 senators that voted to give your rights to the U.N.

            Take notice of who they are, what they are, and where they come from:

            Baldwin (D-WI)
            Baucus (D-MT)
            Bennet (D-CO)
            Blumenthal (D-CT)
            Boxer (D-CA)
            Brown (D-OH)
            Cantwell (D-WA)
            Cardin (D-MD)
            Carper (D-DE)
            Casey (D-PA)
            Coons (D-DE)
            Cowan (D-MA)
            Durbin (D-IL)
            Feinstein (D-CA)
            Franken (D-MN)
            Gillibrand (D-NY)
            Harkin (D-IA)
            Hirono (D-HI)
            Johnson (D-SD)
            Kaine (D-VA)
            King (I-ME)
            Klobuchar (D-MN)
            Landrieu (D-LA)
            Leahy (D-VT)
            Levin (D-MI)
            McCaskill (D-MO)
            Menendez (D-NJ)
            Merkley (D-OR)
            Mikulski (D-MD)
            Murphy (D-CT)
            Murray (D-WA)
            Nelson (D-FL)
            Reed (D-RI)
            Reid (D-NV)
            Rockefeller (D-WV)
            Sanders (I-VT)
            Schatz (D-HI)
            Schumer (D-NY)
            Shaheen (D-NH)
            Stabenow (D-MI)
            Udall (D-CO)
            Udall (D-NM)
            Warner (D-VA)
            Warren (D-MA)
            Whitehouse (D-RI)
            Wyden (D-OR)
            People this needs to go viral. These Senators voted to let the UN take our guns. They need to lose the election. We have been betrayed. 46 Senators Voted to Give your 2nd Amendment Constitutional Rights to the U.N. Do you really want these people representing you???

          10. Billy Hypocrite

            Calm down, Con-serv. you will give yourself a health emergency with that kind of paranoia. Yes, the reformists were not around in. Big way as Chicago children were being killed. The Black community knows this. But we all have realized that there is no time for arguing among ourselves. Missteps are always made along the way. The goal is to make society a less threatening place to live. I have one solution and you have another.

        2. Tom

          We don’t have legalised guns in the UK, and very very few shootings. This is no coincidence. Yes, nutters are nutters whether it’s legal or not, but we don’t have guns readily available for them to be nutters with guns. It’s really simple.
          Guns don’t kill people, people kill people, but it’s a hell of a lot easier with a gun. Why argue for making it easy to kill people?

          1. Pete Seager Lives

            Thanks Tom. You are correct.

            And this land is your land – not their land of guns.

          2. Dave Robertson

            You have a society that is a fraction of the size of the US and far less diverse. While the UK certainly has very few shootings, it has a much higher violent crime rate, which is easily attributed to the fact that criminals have little to fear from a disarmed populace with no recognized right to self defense.

          3. Randy

            Yet getting rid of the guns did not reduce murders of violence in the UK, it increased. In fact, now they are openly discussing the banning of long kitchen knives, due to all the violence.

            Naturally, women and the elderly are paying the steepest penalty for all this new violence.

    2. fil

      Guns are here to stay, THAT WONT CHANGE! Liberals should focus attention on embracing and educating instead of fighting king Kong (the NRA and the constitution) Get over your silly liberal gun rhetoric. That 911 call does a lot of good when Tyrone (an arbitrary bad Guy) is raping your 14 year old
      daughter, or your wife, or stealing your possessions.

      What, are you going to protect your family with a cell phone and a few harsh words. Smarten up Libs. Imagine life without guns for personal protection. You’d all be begging for legalized gun legislation. God Bless Starbucks, a Seattle institution. Liberal haven but gun-sensible. Thank God they are sending a message, even to you Connecticut folk. Jump on the gun train or you’ll be left in the stone age. Train the teachers to shoot guns, put a pistola in every classroom and train kids to shoot after kindergarden, in case there’s a liberal teaching the class and a shooter comes in. Little Timmy can grab the weapon and save the classroom, while Linda, the teacher, prays for mercy because she’s “anti gun”.

  1. pat

    just where I want to be, a Starbucks, with people coming in carrying fire arms. what is wrong with you people?
    you have no idea of the mental stability of these people carrying guns and yet you invite them in to a store full of people. as a store owner you have the right to refuse service to anyone. are you afraid if you do someone will go nuts on you and shoot up the place. forget whether it’s Newtown or not, you don’t need to allow gun carrying patrons in, unless you’re afraid you might lose a dollar or two.

    1. Fake Thomas Jefferson

      Pat, every where you go you are passing thousands of people each day who are carrying firearms but you don’t know it. I carry mine everywhere except for where it is not allowed. Starbuck will be the safest place to be that day!

      1. Tim in Tacoma

        In 2009 four sheriff deputies where ruthlessly gunned down in a Tacoma coffee shop. Are you trying to tell me you think you are better trained than those deputies and you would have saved themif you where there? Do you honestly believed six, seven, twenty five more guns would have saved them? What about the 2012, Cafe Racer coffee shop shooting in Seattle, five people dead. How would you have save them? Sitting behind sandbags in the corner of the cafe taking a bead on every patron with your stockpile of weapons?

        Are you so trusting, that if you see someone with a gun in a Starbucks, you would instantly trust that person as a stable, well-trained NRA gun owner? Based on what super powers?

        If I see someone in a coffee shop with a gun, I would think “nut,” and not ever think “oh good, a well-trained, armed NRA member is here to protect us.” If those poor four deputies saw you pull out a gun for your “heroic moment'” I fear your body would be identified as a “second shooter.” So no, I would not put my safety in the hands of random people walking around armed. That does not make me feel safe at all.

        Stay home with your guns please and just do something sensible like prepare for the impending zombie apocalypse. I think we will all be safer.

    2. Kim

      Pat: we’re getting a clear picture of YOUR mental stability (NOT) along with your obvious lack of knowledge on this subject.

      LEGAL gun owners are some of the most responsible people in this country and state, and should be welcome in ANY establishment. They have followed all required procedures, attended all necessary classes, and paid whatever is asked of them in order to enjoy the privileges extended by the 2nd Amendment. Further, many of them invest a great deal of money on training, practice, and security for their weapons so they don’t fall into the wrong hands.

      You, on the other hand, appear to be the ‘loose cannon’ here. Your rants are merely those of an uninformed, emotions-filled crybaby who feels entitled to spout off on things about which he knows next to nothing. You are PRECISELY the kind of person that should not be allowed to own a weapon. Thanks for YOUR part in destroying this country and the freedom it represents for people in the world who both live here already and who go to enormous effort to migrate to this country from other countries. It’s telling that those who DON’T live here want to so badly, but many who DO live here have no clue about the privileges they have at their disposable. In fact, idiots like you do everything you can to DESTROY those privileges – a great disservice to this country. You should be proud.

      Funny how much you sound like that other fool, billy boggs. I wonder if HE has the backbone to put his money where his mouth is by putting up a sign in his business forbidding legal gun owners from entering his store. We already know he is so hypocritical as to NOT put up a sign on his property proclaiming his gun-free policies (even though he owns shotguns). What about you Pat? Got one of those signs on YOUR property? Why not?

      1. Buckaroo Banzai

        “…and paid whatever is asked of them in order to enjoy the privileges extended by the 2nd Amendment.”

        Kim, nice post, except you aren’t clear on an extremely important detail. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t “extend a privilege”, it SECURES A NATURAL RIGHT GRANTED TO US BY OUR CREATOR.

        The difference is critically important. Privileges are granted by man to other men, either by legislation or by decree. Frequently privileges are exclusionary, i.e. they favor one class of men over another class.

        Rights are bestowed upon ALL men equally, by God.

        The distinction between Rights and Privileges is a foundational one in a free society. The fact that so few people understand this distinction tells you just how far we have fallen intellectually and morally since our ancestors founded this great country.

        Incidentally, I’m not suggesting I’m any better than you, as recently as 10 years ago, I didn’t understand this either– a tribute to our pathetic public education system. But that’s a topic for another time.

        1. Kim

          buckaroo: you are absolutely right and I agree with you 100%. Thanks for pointing this out to everyone

          1. Kim

            isn’t that nice – the obsessed billy boggs using my name to make a pass at someone else. It can only mean he assumes ‘buckaroo’ is a guy and wants him to visit one of those rest rooms he’s always obsessed with – probably to stand in line with the others for billy to service.

            good for you billy. you’re so transparent and completely oblivious to the damage you are doing to yourself on these blogs, especially in light of your identity being known.

            Please continue degrading yourself and exposing your ignorance – it provides me with a great deal of satisfaction and amusement

        2. HLSlawyerchik

          I beg to differ, Buckaroo. Methinks you have confused the U.S. Constitution with the Declaration of Independence. It is the Declaration of Independence which speaks of certain rights endowed to us by the Creator:

          “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

          You will not find any similar phrase or reference in the Constitution. Indeed, it makes little sense to suggest that God Himself created mankind with inherent, natural rights to possess certain things with which He did not see fit to provide them – such as guns (or other types of arms). God gave us life, liberty, and the right to pursue happiness, and He gave us the means with which we could achieve these things, but He certainly did not create guns, civil jury trials, warrants issued by magistrates upon a showing of probable cause, and I am sure many religious fundamentalists would assert that He did not intend for us to worship other Gods or abandon faith in Him (a Right which is nevertheless guaranteed to Americans by the First Amendment).

      2. pat

        wow Kim, is that all you’ve got? since you don’t know me is all you can do is call me names and make derogatory comments? you just keep proving my point about a mental health background check being needed. I am a legal gun owner but do not feel I have to strap on my gun everytime I go out like a gun slinger.
        Have had my license for many years and know from being at the shooting range, most of the people who come can hit a non-moving paper target but wouldn’t trust any of them to defend me against another gun carrying human, it’s not quite the same thing to shoot paper as opposed to a human.
        You have no idea if all those carrying are legal or mentally stable so make sure you don’t cut in front of any of them in case you get them aggravated. I have the Constitutional RIGHT to speak my mind just as you do so if I don’t agree with you it’s too bad. Call me all the names you want, frankly it just points up your immaturity.

        1. Billy Hypocrite

          Pat, I may disagree with personal gun ownership with you but at least you make very good sense. This Kim character is a real wacko dacko who not only owns firearms, but also has extreme anger management problems.

          What does that tell you?

          Dangerous and he should own firearms. The police already were informed about this character.

          1. Billy Hypocrite

            I will also mention this; I once owned a retail establishment and if anyone dared to enter my store with a gun on his belt, I would have thrown out the bastard in in instant regardless if he had the right to exposed carry.

          2. Kim

            I leave these blogs for the weekend and come back to all the lunatics coming out of the woodwork (if ‘all’ is appropriate given that they are probably the usual multiple iterations of billy boggs). Everybody from Kim’ swife to Ayn Randy (who billy calls ‘brother’, so that should be a clue that I’m right about his being that person given that Ayn is a woman’s name) to billy hypocrite (rare honesty). You really are knee-deep in the psycho world, billy.

            And by the way, you stated “I once owned a retail establishment and if anyone dared to enter my store with a gun on his belt, I would have thrown out the bastard in in instant regardless if he had the right to exposed carry.”

            Now billy, we all know that you are not only a compulsive liar but a well-known coward. You would never stand up to a person with a gun, let alone a child with a lunch box. You would – as you have in the past – run straight to the WH PD with your tail between your skirted legs. Addionally, let’s not pretend that you’re no longer in business in WH – just another lie to try to make up for your huge mistake in admitting who you are on these blogs. Don’t be ashamed of who you are billy – let us do that for you.

            Just goes to show – psychological deficiencies and shortcomings don’t take the weekend off. In fact, they appear to bloom on weekends. What a pathetic little toadie – I’m pleased to see your continued self-degradation on these blogs. It couldn’t happen to a less-nice person

          3. Billy Hypocrite

            KimScum: Well then why don’t you just waddle in to my store so that I can publicly pee on you. Just give me a few hours notice so that I can booze up a few cold ones. unfortunately, you would like that andIi would run out of urine.

            disgusting piece of work you are.

            but welcome back. we need you.

          4. Billy Hypocrite

            kimscum: BTW, where did you go; the New Jersey Turnpike for a little R & R?

            Are you declaring this income no pun intended?

            Hahahahahahahaha

        2. Kim

          yes, pat, that’s what I’ve got. And it summed things up nicely in response to your wild post.

          Nice to see you appreciate having the right to choose not to carry your weapon. Would be nicer if you allowed the rest of us our own choices as well. But that doesn’t appear to be likely. And I have doubts as to your status as a legal gun owner – legal gun owners I know don’t consider themselves ‘gunslingers’ or other such deragotory nonsense.

          As far as not knowing who out there is carry what and their emotional state: thanks for making the case for the right to bear arms for self defense. You would apparently prefer that we remain unarmed and therefore at the mercry of those very lunatics you seem to fear so much (and rightly so). THAT is your choice as well, if you choose to be a victim for whatever reason. But you have no right to force that choice on me.

          Nor do you have the right to force me to leave myself unprotected against the possibility of government overreaching (go ahead, deny that our government is not growing more intrusive so we can discuss lunacy and willful ignorance of the facts – your pseudonym billyboggs will stand right behind you).

          If you find yourself in the horrible position of being attacked on the streets by a gang of thugs, will you instruct legal, responsible gun owners to back off and let you take a thrashing or even lose your life, so you can stand by your unprincipled principle? let’s hope so – at least we could remove hypocrisy from the list of your weaknesses. Something tells me you’ll take the help from anywhere it is offered.

          You’re in good company with the most dangerous, unstable character on these pages: billy boggs

          1. ayn randy

            Nothing worse than a “the-gubmint-is-coming-to-get-me” turd-for-brains paranoid sociopath. Let me clue you into something Skimmie. You’re not worth coming after. And I see you are still living that dangerous life of yours. You know, always being beset upon by thugs and what not. You are a total freakin’ mess, Scummie. Anyone disgaree?

          2. Billy Hypocrite

            me think yer better to the right of the morning crow announcing the arrival of the shadow him the kim.

          3. Kim

            Right on queue – Mention “lunacy and willful ignorance of the facts” and in jumps billy boggs in one of his aliases, this time ‘ayn randy’. Nice job billy

          4. Kim's wife

            So there you are Kimmie. Now don’t be thinking that you’re gonna get some after you’ve been tricking in the men’s rooms.

          5. Kim

            Honey, I am sorry to break this, but after an enjoyable weekend on the New Jersey Turnpike, I will be seeking a divorce from you. I can’t lead two lives anymore and my other life has taken over me like a wild bear in a honey bee colony.

    3. Mick

      You clearly are not thinking. The good guys who carry legally are not your threat, they are your DEFENSE if a nut who illegally has a gun enters a Starbucks so he can start shooting people. Do you REALLY think a nut with a gun is going to obey a Starbucks “policy” prohibiting the bring of guns into one of their stores? It’s the good guys who might one day save your life. The cops won’t. By the time they arrive, it’ always too late. (like in Newton, and in Chesire with the Petit family). Think straight, won’t you?

    4. KatieCameronn

      Pat, I hate to break the news to you, but you are around legally armed citizens everyday. You just don’t see it as many “conceal carry.” It is legal to carry with a permit in certain states. It is not against the law to carry into a store, restuarant, movie theatre, etc. Although, these businesses have the right to put up signs that state “No Firearms” at their establishment, and gun owners will respect that decision and leave. But it is not against the law, just against the rules of that business.

    5. Adam

      Actually…… when store owners sign the franchise agreement, they agree to abide by corporate policy; starbuck’s corporate policy states that where it’s legal, customers may carry firearms. Deal with it.

      Walmart’s policy ststes the same thing, why aren’t people boycotting Walmart?

    6. jes

      Seriously?!!! Do u know anyone who owns a gun??? It is a right and anyone who thinks a citizen with a permit and a registered weapon is a criminal and fears being near them is ignorant and this lack of knowledge and respect for guns is what scares me!!!

    7. Raul Duke

      Pat your ignorance and stupidity which are both proven by your statement.
      You need to read Buckaroo B’s statement below.
      I hope to god you are not raising any children an or have any seat or position of authority.
      People such as yourself are scary.
      Lenin and Marx would be proud of you.

      1. Billy Hypocrite

        raul: why don’t you stick your head where the sun don’t shine. but I guess it is already there.

    8. Randy

      Pat,

      Unlike you, those people have passed extensive background checks, and taken part in mandatory safety training. The slightest hint of eratic behavior can be used to pull their permit to carry guns.

      And FYI, there are more than a quarter million people with permits to carry handguns in CT. You likely see at least one of them each and every day. NOTHING ever happens, there is a reason for that.

  2. Angie

    This is ridiculous! A. The gun owners in this case are supplying an opportunity that would allow for a nut case to walk in there and shoot the place up while you law abiding citizens are trying to make a point (albeit, that you shouldn’t have to make). B. The MDAFGS people…Seriously? Can you not get through your heads that it is LEGAL to carry a gun in this state with the correct credentials? It’s not those that have obtained a license that are going off their rockers and killing people. It’s those that have obtained the firearm ILLEGALLY (and usually have been found to have severe mental health issues) that you should be trying to find a way to control. Maybe instead of attacking law abiding and responsible citizens you should be finding a way to better the mental health industry and practices in the state and/or country. Go find a way to fix the actual problem instead of addressing what you have appointed the problem.

    1. Kim

      Angie, I agree with you to some extent but would like to point out that it’s highly unlikely that a ‘nutcase’ who doesn’t own a gun legally will enter ANY establishment where he knows the odds of his survival are against him. That is the nature of cowardly criminals, bullies, and gangsters. They only target the helpless.

      If that weren’t true, you would read more about holdups at gun stores, places like Cabelas’ and Bass Pro shops, and ranges where people practice shooting.

      I submit that the SAFEST place to be is the place that openly announces it’s support of legal gun owners AND advertises that their properties are protected with weapons.

        1. Mike Jagger

          Angie, when will those clouds all disappear?

          When you stop trying to make sense with the biggest sociopath on these blogs; namely Kim. He is unsteady, unbalanced, known to fornicate in men’s rooms, and sleeps with his side arm every night.

          He once demanded from another male poster to give him pleasure and continued this raunchy demand until another contributor to these blogs related this need to insufficient early childhood maternal bonding. After reading the summation, he suddenly stopped his rants.

          That to me sounds like someone was getting quite close to the truth about Kim’s need for abusive outbursts.

          1. Kim

            once again billy boggs chimes in under a pseudonym (Mike Jagger) and contributes – absolutely nothing of value. His obsession continues – but be sure to support him by buying his so-called ‘art’ at his business

          2. Billy Hypocrite

            Kim, I’m afraid to say it, but that wasn’t me. It appears that you have a fan base here.

            But I certainly agree with the premies. You are a danger to society and law enforcement knows all about you. Hopefully, this will act as a deterrent for any future twisted behavior on your part or we will one day read about you.

            Well, we did already – popped at the LOB for miss conduct,

          3. Kim

            your big mouth just gets you into trouble everytime billy boggs. If you’re right and law enforcement knows all about me, the fact that I am posting on these blogs instead of sitting in jail says volumes. Better than that, it highlights just how full of crap you are.

            Nice job self-destructing, gollum. Gottal love a guy who degrades himself every time he opens his mouth. What was it you said? Something about not having the problems that come along with having to think? Right on the money, girlfriend

  3. Liz

    The day Starbucks changes its policy so that I can’t go in there with my concealed weapon is the day I stop going to Starbucks. I won’t go into any “gun free” zones. I don’t want to become a helpless victim, waiting for the useless cops to finally arrive and stand outside, trying to figure out what to do.

  4. pete

    Why don’t these MOMS lobby for REAL DEATH PENALTIES – LIKE YOU COMMIT A CRIME WITH A GUN YOU ARE EXECUTED and let’s luck up the wackos for LIFE.

  5. WestSideWillie

    I’ve never been to a Starbucks (I’m a simple man – Dunkin’ Donuts is about as ‘high end’ as I’ll go with my coffee) but will certainly stop into a couple of SBUX stores tomorrow to buy something to reward the company for their support of the Constitution.

  6. Mopar

    What Pat and other dont realize is that here in CT, one out of every 13-14 adults over age 21 has a permit to carry a gun in public, and thousand more are getting their permit every week. Newtown has one of the highest ratios of gun ownership in the state, there it’s more like 1 out of every 10. Chances are every time Pat goes into a Starbucks, or a supermarket, or any other public place, there are people nearby legally carrying a gun.

  7. Starbucks for Guns No More for Me

    I will never drink anther cup of coffee in Starbucks again. Ever.

    1. Kim

      starbucks aka billy: given that you’re a compulsive liar, your post must be interpreted to mean that you will ALWAYS buy coffee at starbucks. Either way, I’m sure that company could give a crap about you (kind of like us, right)

      1. Billy Hypocrite

        No, I said that I would never drink inside again. Too dangerous. I’ll take mine to go, now.

        What a dull wit didn’t you understand such a simple statement? Of course snot.

    2. Fake Thomas Jefferson

      Hope you don’t like coffee to much because I am sure DD will be having one next week! What will really blow your mind now is thinking about who is carrying when you are in a crowd. That is why more open carrying is necessary so that people are not conditioned to panic if they see a firearm.

      1. KatieCameronn

        FakeThomasJefferson, I agree. In my state in the NorthEast, the upper half of the state is more country-like, with gun shops everywhere and shooting ranges, people can walk around “open carry” as permitted in our state, but I live in the Southern end of our state against New York City, and if I opened carry, I would probably have the Police called on me every 10 feet I walked. Don’t need the aggravation of being detained, and waiting for them to run a permit for backup. Ugh!

  8. Ron

    I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been sipping a latte at Starbucks when a crazed gunman stormed in, only to be stopped in his tracks by a responsible, law-abiding gun toter. Why, if it wasn’t for those experiences, I’d probably be afraid to ever go to a coffee shop again!

    1. Kim

      it only takes once, Ron. Hopefully, you won’t ever learn that lesson. Until then, it’s good to see you’ve looked deeply into the issue

  9. Karen Fischer

    Me, me, me, my, my my. That’s what I hear loud and clear in many of the comments made thus far. To say to open carry in Starbucks in Newtown is a disgusting and gross act of human insensitivity doesn’t even describe the feeling I have at the moment. Have you people no shame? Are you so narcissistic and blind to the feelings of residents of Newtown-the families of dead, the first responders suffering from PTSD, the survivors in the school??? Pick another Starbucks to make your statement-there are many around the state. Leave Newtown alone!

    1. letfreedomring

      The misguided folks of Newtown could have left me alone, but instead they chose to capitalize on everyone’s shock and pity as they jumped on the liberal bandwagon to illegally legislate away my Constitutional rights. There are two sides to every argument, and on Friday you’ll see the sane and responsible one…….

        1. Kim

          poor, pathetic billy. Shouldn’t you be out at the ‘service’ station about now? Theres’ a line of guys waiting for ‘the usual’ from you

    2. Billy Hypocrite

      Karen – why don’t you stick your head where the sun don’t shine. but I guess it is already there.

    3. yekul

      Karen surely you must realize that pistol applications in Newtown are up fifty percent over last year. Not all want to be sheep or victims.

      1. Honest Republican

        That’s 210 people who applied for new pistol applications, up from 140 last year. Spin the %’s however you want. It’s a small number. Folks don’t need to be walking around packing unless they are in the business of protecting people. If you think otherwise, what’s your motivation? This isn’t the wild west here in CT.

  10. Fake Thomas Jefferson

    It is not just Newtown it is nationwide, Guns are in Newtown everyday including the Starbucks. It is a national recognition of Starbucks for their freedom loving policy. You do not have to go if you do not want to.

  11. James McGovern

    Please join me at the Starbucks in Bloomfield on August 9th at 8:30am. Coffee is on me for those who support and defend our constitutional right to keep and bear arms…

  12. Cephlid Finch

    If you want to know why America is falling apart, just look at the citizens whose only concern in the world is that they get to carry their shootin’ irons into every public space they see, regardless of neccessity or common sense. Gun owners are a bunch of babies who can’t face society without their pistol pacifiers, a bunch of paranoid folks who have love for firearms but not for their fellow citizens. These self-centered brats pack heat for god and country, without giving an inch of compassion or respect to those who’ve suffered terror and tragedy at the barrel of a gun. Those weapons you wear to Starbucks are for killing other people, not hunting deer. Whether you intend to kill someone with your gun or not, carrying one in a public space sends that very dark, selfish, and love-less message. “In-your-face” gun owners keep alienating the rest of society without a moments thought yet they wonder why there is a strong backlash against parading these dangerous weapons around everywhere. I say grow up and learn to live without a death dealer strapped to your person, society and culture will be better for it.

    1. Fake Thomas Jefferson

      You must have bought the democrat talking points books on exploiting tragedy’s that was exposed earlier this week. Take the liberal lines and sell it someplace else, you have been exposed. Carrying firearms is legal no matter how much you would like to wish it away or insult good people. Grow a set and enjoy life.

    2. tao

      Cephlid Finch, great points, now, please get rid of all criminals that kill, beat and rob hundreds of people every day and – then go on your crusade of bashing responsible people who legally carry firearms, till then, please do STFU.

    3. Billy Hypocrite

      Cephlid – why don’t you stick your head where the sun don’t shine. but I guess it is already there.

      1. Cephlid Finch

        Awww, you big tough gun lovers are real sensitive when it comes to your inanimate objects. Go ahead and blame whatever party or agenda you like, truth is you bunch are a load of crybabies who can’t give a thought for the rest of us who somehow get along just fine without carrying a weapon in public. What a pathetic bunch you are. Bring on the insults, if it makes you feel less impotent to strut around while carrying a weapon I pity you all to the core.

        1. Greg

          Finch- I’ll be going up and down Albany Ave in Hartford tomorrow collecting the guns from the fine folks there, feel free to join.

          1. Greg

            @billy- Just going to get the guns from the people who shoot eachother withthe greatest frequency. Don’t you read the courant?

            Not me making a skin color issue…it’s you.

        2. Billy Hypocrite

          Cep, that was Kim using my name. He is unbalanced and he happens to be a gun owner. Go figure.

        3. Fake Thomas Jefferson

          Just by the level of irritation you display is evidence that you have lost the narrative of the gun grabbing agenda.

        4. Kim

          yep, ceph, you’re getting along just fine – until you don’t. If you can’t understand why people buy insurance you certainly wouldn’t understand why people want to own weapons. If you DO understand the concept of insurance, then you are a true hypocrite. Your pity should be for yourself and those you encourage to be slaughtered because YOU don’t think they have a right to defend themselves. Good for you

          1. Billy Hypocrite

            kim took a detour on the New Jersey Turnpike.

            wanna finish the sentence? dinner is ready.

        5. The Conn-servative

          Finchy, how do feel about the good governor,Malloy and his minions letting out all of these criminals early. Bet if you found out that some of them were holding up in your neighborhood you’d be singing a different tune. Oh yeah, for what it’s worth, two convenience store clerks are dead because of this policy. So think about that.

  13. fred

    You better hope those gun-toting, law-abiding, hard-working, tax-paying, guys don’t get too ji-ji-jittery on all that caffeine.

      1. Kim

        more obsessive behaviour from the pathetic little gollum, billy boggs. Make sure to buy his ‘art’ – the honesty and integrity he displays on these blogs are deeply ingrained into his business model

    1. pat

      just for my edification, are you or anyone else going to be checking id’s at the door to be sure everyone coming in carrying is licensed and legal?

      1. Kim

        do you plan to show up now, pat? Do you expect everyone on the road to stop you and check your driving credentials?
        I’m sure starbucks will miss you pud, er spud

  14. Connecticut is circling the drain

    While I respect the right of gun owners to open carry with permits, using the Newtown Starbucks to make a statement is in bad taste.

  15. Ayn Randy

    How utterly pathetic. The perfect example of how ineffectual gun-toting paranoids really are. They claim that their mere presence is a deterrent to crime, and yet the best they can offer is to crowd into a Starbucks. Obviously, they have too much time on their hands, and too little brain wave activity in their heads. Eight-year-olds who just won’t grow up. The true American Disaster.
    Please note: I am not Billy Boggs, but Billy, Jimmy, if you’re out there, Carl Solomon and I got your back.

        1. Billy Hypocrite

          I will never be able to figure out why Kim so badgered Carl way back then. It appears that he never told his wife and I did find out that, incredibly enough, Kim is married. Must be a new inter-species law. because I cna’t imagine a woman tying the knot with him.

          1. ayn randy

            Well, you know what a sensitive person Carl is, and he just couldn’t accept being ragged on by the Philistine Kim. To quote Carl: “If I need a dose of Kim, I can just look in the toilet bowl after I take a s…”.

            I fear we may never again get to experience the wisdom of that great thinker, Carl Solomon. A great loss, indeed.

          2. Kim

            there’s a lot of things you can’t figure out billy. Why you are obsessed with Kim is one of them. Be proud

    1. Kim

      now THAT was a complete waste of space Randy/billy/Carl. You said absolutely nothing while trying to make it sound rational and important. Failed on all counts. Keep trying

        1. Billy Hypocrite

          he only sells half life. but why didn’t he ever tell his wife what he really wanted from a man?

          I wonder. Tell Carl his honor has been salvaged.

  16. Kim

    there goes pathetic little billy off on one of his Sybil moments again, having a multi-person conversation with himself. good stuff, fool

    1. The Conn-servative

      Yeah he probably rubs one out to Reagan in the exorcist while her head is turned 270 degrees and spitting pea soup. I’m thinking many libs practice turning their head like Reagan and ultimately cause unrepairable damage, which then leads to misfired synapses in their cranial cavity, and hence the mental disease commonly referred to as progressivism.

      1. ayn randy

        Hey Conn-vict. For your information, (and I know that everything is new information to you because you are a basic anal-wart-cement-head), being Progressive is the only way to be. If not, then we would still be hitting each other over the head with rocks. Oh, sorry, I forgot that I was talking to a trog. Never mind.

  17. kim's wife

    Hi. I’m Kim’s wife. I used to be a man, but I had that, er, operation. If not, Kim wouldn’t have me. Just wanted to clear that up darlings. Have a good night. Bye.

      1. billy's husband

        billy dear, please stop stalking Kim and come home to bed. I miss your touch – no one does it like you

        1. Kim's wife

          No original material, eh Fartier? You see, that’s why you sell insurance–no freakin’ imagination.

          1. Kim

            The other reason I am seeking a di-vorce is that I will be crossing genders soon and I won’t have any tiny wiener to boo boo you.

            Conservatives like it this way.

  18. kims wife

    Hi. I’m Kim’s wife. I introduced myself earlier. Has anyone seen or heard from Kim in the last few hours? He was supposed to take me to the Transsexual Charity Ball, but he’s very late and I’m beginning to worry. I hope he hasn’t slipped back into that old “habit” of his: prowling the men’s rooms in the New Jersey Turnpike rest areas. He nearly dumped me for a guy he met at the Walt Whitman rest area two years ago. I thought the thereapy sessions had cured him of this obsession. I pray that it has, and that my Kimmie will walk through the door at any moment. Will you all take a moment to pray with me?

    1. Man from the Walt Whitman rest stop

      Mrs Kim:

      I must sadly inform you that your Kim stopped by and well, things were going well through the little hole I dug into the separator wall stall. Then all of a sudden, he bit me and I screamed so loud security was called and took your hubby away.

      It appears that he was arrested for the 2nd time today – the first being at the Connecticut LOB. That one eye he has missing gives me the creeps. You may go his bail at the regional state police barracks on the New Jersey Turnpike.

      1. Kim's wife

        Oh thank you kind man from the Walt Whitman rest stop. I was hoping my one-eyed Kimmie wasn’t up to his old tricks, but alas, I see his obsession is hopelessly ingrained. I will not be bailing him out this time, and I am sorry that he damaged your dipstick.

        1. Connecticut is Circling the Drain

          Really billy? I think this little joke is about played out. Get some new material.

          1. Kim

            Circling the Drain and Conserv:

            Billy gollum Carl Solomon Jimmy Boggs thinks he is humorous but he isn’t. And he shouldn’t question my orientation. It is unfair and I am tired of this talk. I have decided to sign out.

            Goodby everyone. Guns unite and without possession of firearms, we are not free.

          2. The Conn-servative

            Kim

            Billy is a special case that I’m sure the state dept of mental health wouldn’t know what to do with. I agree with your points and enjoy your cantor. Billy,or anyone for that matter isn’t worth staying off the boards for. Don’t let somebody who gets at you, dictate you to leave through their word and comments. Let Billy go off on his stupid comments about you and just ignore him. Keep the faith.
            I’m sure now Billy will make some horses ass comment about us making up,maybe even at the rest stop,but just consider the source. He’s exhibit A why it’s an uphill battle in libtardian CT.

          3. Billy Hypocrite

            Kim and Drain: no, I want to, once again, extend an olive branch. Let a thousand flowers bloom. Allow the channels of communication to open unfettered so that we all may have a rewarding experience on this site.

            This a swear to if it is fully reciprocated. This is my offer. Come back, Kotter.

          4. Kim

            conservative: thanks for the kind words, but all that mumbo jumbo under my name wasn’t me. I wasn’t anywhere near these boards over the weekend. More simpleton billy talkng to himself. And I certainly wouldn’t say something as stupid as “Guns unite and without possession of firearms, we are not free.”

            I agree with your comments about billy the class dunce. And I assure you idiots like billy don’t scare me off. Just the opposite in fact. This country’s survival is dependent on exposing fools like him for the liars and socialists they really are.

          5. Pierre Montebank

            Who are you calling a Socialist, fool? You don’t even know what that term means. You make me sick, fascist-gun-douche-insurance-salesman wimp.

          6. Billy Hypocrite

            Ayn, I was about to take a break from this, but let’s move to a newer blog story. All in.

  19. John R. McCommas

    “Gun advocates” Mr. Green? Pardon the pun but that is a loaded term. It is more accurate to characterize such folks as “Supporters of the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution”.

      1. Noah Joad

        I call ‘em sons of Cain. And Cain was rumored to have had a daddy who grew a monstrous stout.

        1. Pierre Montebank

          I call them for dinner, and they always eat too much. Gun douches are freakin’ pigs.

  20. ayn randy

    Maybe he petitioned the court for a name change, Conn-vict. Maybe you should try it, too. How about Con-yo?

Comments are closed.