I just listened to a story about Starbucks deciding, after trying to make nice with the "open carry" terrorists, to tell them they aren't welcome in their stores, terrorizing their unarmed customers. The "open carry" industry has vowed to make them pay for asserting their right to have gun free places of business. We can only hope financially and not violently but I doubt that the organized gun nut industry has that much control over their armed, paranoid, arrogant members.
Starbucks didn't dare outright ban guns for fear of the consequences for their employees if they had to ask armed people to leave. In other words, they are worried that the gun enthsiasts might use their guns in a fit of rage of exactly the kind that produces the movement for "open carry". It is a reasonable expectation that, eventually, someone will be killed by them.
The Roberts Court is to blame for this, they have given a free hand to those who want to intimidate the country with guns, to hold the rest of under a reign of gun terror. I suspect that open carry wouldn't carry the day in the Supreme Court or in venues the RATS+K "Justices" like appearing in. I can only imagine what would happen to someone displaying a gun in a way that could be interpreted as possibly intimidating in a restaurant where Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia or Kennedy were sitting. I hope that someday soon we will find out what happens as they experience the freedom they've granted to the kind of people who want to openly carry guns. Somehow, I don't think it would be seen by them as being the same as it is for the rest of us. But it's always been my opinion that politicians and judges should get to experience the effects of their decisions. Certainly unelected judges shouldn't ever be able to exempt themselves from the rules they make for the rest of us. That should automatically nullify those rulings.
No comments:
Post a Comment