Monday, March 22, 2010
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Another 40k vehicle?
Not Sure of where the pic is from, but it would fit right in with some of the bigger Imperium tanks.
40k stuff...
Mentioned the Forgeworld Tauros Venator before. Still looks cool, but the price is a bit high for something I wouldn't use much in a game.
Forgeworld just released pictures of the Tauros Assault Vehicle, a version with one less axle and either a grenade launcher or heavy flamer from the look of things.
I like the Mk19 style, even though it appears to be a dual feed (which works well for 40k rules) and as usual, Forgeworld packed the sucker with detail. The gunner even has a strap seat deally along the lines of what the Army's rigged up for humvee gunners. Hopefully the smaller size brings the price down closer to what I'm willing to pay.
Forgeworld just released pictures of the Tauros Assault Vehicle, a version with one less axle and either a grenade launcher or heavy flamer from the look of things.
Something that pisses me off...
AG A$$hat, er Holder, opening his mouth. It almost never fails that when he does that, I get angry.
Well, according to the Supreme Court, and the letter of the law and whatnot, yeah, we would have.
However, these were non-uniformed operatives working to commit an act of war. They were tried in a military court as such and shot. Foreign saboteurs trying to kill Americans aren't looked upon kindly. The Supreme Court even backed it then.
The Geneva Convention notes that uniforms are not necessary, just that any organized militia or such needs to have something that identifies them as such from a distance, an obvious commanding officer, and be openly displaying weapons. However these are pretty much the last thing Al Queda wants to do, and on top of that, they don't follow any of the rules anyway. Those giant red crosses on a medical helicopter are nothing but a giant target identifier to them.
The Germans knew it back in WWII, after dressing up as civilians to get behind enemy lines, they'd make damn sure to get back in uniform before attacking, otherwise they would be granted no rights as POWs. When OSS agents and the like dropped into France, they knew damn well that the had none of the rights that the soldiers of the 82nd would have when they jumped in. They knew if they were caught they'd be tortured and killed and nobody could complain.
As I see it, Al Queda and the like terrorists essentially have no rights under the GC and the Laws of Land Warfare. Essentially, by participating in non-uniformed actions, committing numerous atrocities, and breaking truckloads of other international laws, they have given up their rights, as far as international laws are concerned, as human beings. You could shoot them on sight without much worry.
Then again, I'm not a lawyer. I'm a line grunt at heart, and my view of things can be pretty simple at times. I almost fully support the shoot on sight concept, if it weren't for enough exposure to the intelligence aspect of things to know that some good intel can do wonders.
So what I can't figure out, is why these wastes of organic matter (remember, I don't think of them as people anymore) that have no rights as far as international laws are concerned, suddenly are afforded the rights of an American citizen? Granted, the way the Bill of Rights reads is "all men," not just Americans, and those rights should extend to all people, even illegal immigrants or anybody arrested and tried in the United States. But Al Queda operatives technically have as many rights as a rabid wolf. It's quite dangerous, but it's still a living thing, and should be put out of it's misery quickly, but we're not gonna hold a dang trial over it, let alone make sure to treat the wolf nicely while we get it set up.
The apparent difference with current terrorists and the Germans back in 1942 is that back then, there was an "official" war going on. Congress had passed a law the title "Declaration of War" making things all pretty and by the book. The current administration doesn't think that we are at war with terrorists. "The Global War on Terror," that damn thing I have two freakin' medals from, isn't a war, and even calling it that is no longer allowed. (On another note, I've been out for a bit, can you still earn a GWOT? Or is there some new name equivalent? Not the Iraq or Afghan Campaign medals, but something for guys in Kuwait or Qutar and the like?)
That's out of the Geneva Convention, a set of rules governing warfare. I thought we weren't at war with them, why are we following rules of warfare?
The only thing I agree with Holder on is the fact that his "rights," if read, will be read over his corps. If the guys that do finally get him find him alive, given what some SEALS are going through, I'm sure he'll be combative right up till a round makes it's way right between his beady eyes, and then we can all congratulate the soldiers fantastic marksmanship in combat, being able to place such a precision shot under such strenuous conditions. At least that's how the report will read.
Hmm... the sun disappeared behind the neighbor's house, so the porch is a cold shadow now... Guess we'll call this one.
In testy exchanges with House Republicans, the attorney general compared terrorists to mass murderer Charles Manson and predicted that events would ensure "we will be reading Miranda rights to the corpse of Osama bin Laden" not to the al-Qaida leader as a captive.I'm still trying to wrap my head around why we would be reading him Miranda rights in the first place. He is not an American citizen, he will not be captured on American soil. He is responsible for an act of war that took place on American soil, and so were some Germans back in WWII (well, attempted anyway), would we have had to read them their rights if they had been around then? (They've only been around since 1966)
Well, according to the Supreme Court, and the letter of the law and whatnot, yeah, we would have.
However, these were non-uniformed operatives working to commit an act of war. They were tried in a military court as such and shot. Foreign saboteurs trying to kill Americans aren't looked upon kindly. The Supreme Court even backed it then.
The Geneva Convention notes that uniforms are not necessary, just that any organized militia or such needs to have something that identifies them as such from a distance, an obvious commanding officer, and be openly displaying weapons. However these are pretty much the last thing Al Queda wants to do, and on top of that, they don't follow any of the rules anyway. Those giant red crosses on a medical helicopter are nothing but a giant target identifier to them.
The Germans knew it back in WWII, after dressing up as civilians to get behind enemy lines, they'd make damn sure to get back in uniform before attacking, otherwise they would be granted no rights as POWs. When OSS agents and the like dropped into France, they knew damn well that the had none of the rights that the soldiers of the 82nd would have when they jumped in. They knew if they were caught they'd be tortured and killed and nobody could complain.
As I see it, Al Queda and the like terrorists essentially have no rights under the GC and the Laws of Land Warfare. Essentially, by participating in non-uniformed actions, committing numerous atrocities, and breaking truckloads of other international laws, they have given up their rights, as far as international laws are concerned, as human beings. You could shoot them on sight without much worry.
Then again, I'm not a lawyer. I'm a line grunt at heart, and my view of things can be pretty simple at times. I almost fully support the shoot on sight concept, if it weren't for enough exposure to the intelligence aspect of things to know that some good intel can do wonders.
So what I can't figure out, is why these wastes of organic matter (remember, I don't think of them as people anymore) that have no rights as far as international laws are concerned, suddenly are afforded the rights of an American citizen? Granted, the way the Bill of Rights reads is "all men," not just Americans, and those rights should extend to all people, even illegal immigrants or anybody arrested and tried in the United States. But Al Queda operatives technically have as many rights as a rabid wolf. It's quite dangerous, but it's still a living thing, and should be put out of it's misery quickly, but we're not gonna hold a dang trial over it, let alone make sure to treat the wolf nicely while we get it set up.
The apparent difference with current terrorists and the Germans back in 1942 is that back then, there was an "official" war going on. Congress had passed a law the title "Declaration of War" making things all pretty and by the book. The current administration doesn't think that we are at war with terrorists. "The Global War on Terror," that damn thing I have two freakin' medals from, isn't a war, and even calling it that is no longer allowed. (On another note, I've been out for a bit, can you still earn a GWOT? Or is there some new name equivalent? Not the Iraq or Afghan Campaign medals, but something for guys in Kuwait or Qutar and the like?)
But the best reasoning I've been able to find as to why we're giving them rights, is a chunk of the Geneva Convention along the lines of:
An unlawful combatant or unprivileged combatant/belligerent is a civilian who directly engages in armed conflict in violation of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and may be detained or prosecuted under the domestic law of the detaining state for such action.
That's out of the Geneva Convention, a set of rules governing warfare. I thought we weren't at war with them, why are we following rules of warfare?
The only thing I agree with Holder on is the fact that his "rights," if read, will be read over his corps. If the guys that do finally get him find him alive, given what some SEALS are going through, I'm sure he'll be combative right up till a round makes it's way right between his beady eyes, and then we can all congratulate the soldiers fantastic marksmanship in combat, being able to place such a precision shot under such strenuous conditions. At least that's how the report will read.
Hmm... the sun disappeared behind the neighbor's house, so the porch is a cold shadow now... Guess we'll call this one.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Not sure if I should be laughing...
Or stocking up on ammo...
I've seen the first one followed closely by the Pentagon's ISP too..............
I've noticed this domain name a few times before...
And a little later today there's this one...
Brady Excavation Services
A petition didn't work, and borderline slander didn't go too far, so let's try just some good old elementary school tactics. I did have the same thought when the story first broke, but for the same reasons that Sebastien brings up, I quickly realized that it's not going to happen.
I've worked at a few jobs over the years where you are wearing a uniform. All the way from the Boy Scouts, the Army, LE/Security work, and corporate retail. Any time you are wearing a uniform, you no longer are an individual to any random stranger/customer. You are (insert employer's name here) and all of your actions are judged so. If you happen to be working for an employer the public views as successful, and you do something sufficiently stupid, lawsuits against your employer will occur, and you're gonna be looking for a new job with a really poor reference from your most immediate former boss. Good luck. Granted (insert big name here) could care less about what happens to you, they do care about the lawsuit and resulting press.
So they put clauses in contracts and make company policies to prevent things from getting that far. Pretty straight forward.
What I do love, though, is the fact that the Brady Campaign is scratching for any little thing to draw out the stupidity as long as they can. Starbucks has nicely asked, a couple times now, for everybody to just back off. For the most part, aside from buying coffee and a few metaphoric pats on the back, the gunnies have shown a willingness to move on. But the Brady Campaign, like an annoying little purse dog, just doesn't know when to stop, and, at least in my mind, just make themselves look more and more idiotic. Of course I don't like them anyway, so I'm perfectly happy with them expending all sorts of money, time, and energy into pursuing the result they want, and will never get, and dragging their own name through the mud in doing so.
Keep it up guys, I'll even donate a shovel to help you dig faster.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Nordic Magazine Tube Extension
I ordered a +5 model for the new shotgun, showed up while I was at class. Look how nice it tucks up under the 24" barrel.
Instillation is pretty straight forward, strip down the front half of the gun, unscrew the factory tube so you can get the guts out, take a big long dowel to tap out the pluggy deally (technical term) from the end, screw tube back on, reassemble the front half sans tube guts, screw on extension in place of the old cap. Now comes the hard work. Unscrew the end of the tube extension, drop in the follower (make sure it's pointed the right way) slide in the new spring, measure 10-16 inches from the end of the extension (I did 16" to be safe, you can always cut it down more if need be) wiggle the spring all the way in, and screw the cap on. The end has a hole you can stick a cleaning rod in to help guide the spring if you need it.
It looks good, but will make disassembly a little awkward, as that will now involve unscrewing the extension and dealing with a long squirrelly spring. But the gun now holds 9+1, so I can handle it I guess. Hopefully I'll be able to get out to the range this weekend or something and make sure it works right and I don't have too many hangups inside.
Instillation is pretty straight forward, strip down the front half of the gun, unscrew the factory tube so you can get the guts out, take a big long dowel to tap out the pluggy deally (technical term) from the end, screw tube back on, reassemble the front half sans tube guts, screw on extension in place of the old cap. Now comes the hard work. Unscrew the end of the tube extension, drop in the follower (make sure it's pointed the right way) slide in the new spring, measure 10-16 inches from the end of the extension (I did 16" to be safe, you can always cut it down more if need be) wiggle the spring all the way in, and screw the cap on. The end has a hole you can stick a cleaning rod in to help guide the spring if you need it.
It looks good, but will make disassembly a little awkward, as that will now involve unscrewing the extension and dealing with a long squirrelly spring. But the gun now holds 9+1, so I can handle it I guess. Hopefully I'll be able to get out to the range this weekend or something and make sure it works right and I don't have too many hangups inside.
Insomnia and Long Days of Zombie Slaying
Make for no posts marked Tuesday. Although it's still Tuesday in my mind (it's not tomorrow till I go to sleep!).
So with the weather being above freezing for the most part, broke out the single speed with the giant ring (I think it's a 55 tooth ring up front and a 16 on back... glacial outwash plains are flat) and went to school. I was running a bit late, so I was booking it, and am still amazed I was able to make it up to the third floor of the Science Building on campus. Legs do not equal in shape in the least.
And when classes are done, Tuesdays are game day at the shop, so my Angels of Vengeance decimated some traitorous skum, and my Dark Heresy guardsman maintained his "King warp-zombie Slayer" award for another session.
And now it's 2am, the alarm clock will start screaming at me in a little over 5 hours. Screw you daylight savings...
Monday, March 15, 2010
Why Gun Owners are Angry
From The View From North Central Idaho.
Lots of good points, and stuff that most of us gunnies have known for years, but it's always good to see you're not the only one thinking this way.
Making Coffee
So I haven't made coffee at home with a drip percolator in years. I've been using French Presses for at least five years now, the simplicity just seems to make the coffee a better experience if nothing else.
Of course a press requires a much coarser ground than a drip machine, since they use a screen mesh instead of a fine paper filter. With a fine grind, you'd end up with most of the grounds in your cup. The trade off being that you keep more of the natural oils and accompanying flavor notes in your coffee and not trapped in the filter. Means a more delicious cup.
Back on New Year's Eve, I was at a friend's apartment, and he's really into cooking. He has a beautiful, and quite large, marble pestle and mortar on his counter. I don't know why I hadn't thought of it before, perhaps it was the abundance of whiskey in my system, but I had an epiphany in regards to my coffee.
Most electric counter top type coffee grinders are nothing more than a tiny little blender. Simple, but the little whirling blades actually slightly burn the grounds as it does it work, muting and subtly changing the intended flavor. They are also horribly inconsistent and create "coffee dust" that can clog up the screen on a press. The high end burr grinders grind slower, reducing the risk of burning the beans, but they're expensive.
So the next day I'm wandering around town, and manage to find a little marble pestle and mortar on clearance at Target. The mortar (bowl) is about the size of my fist, and it has a nice polished finish over both parts except the end of the pestle, which is nicely rounded, but unpolished, as is the bottom of the mortar bowl, so whatever you're grinding doesn't slide around and not get crushed. Perfect for grinding a few tablespoons of coffee beans.
And all together, they make a fantastic cup of coffee.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Army to OK coloring of weapons.
The Army has given the go ahead to paint guns to blend in better(Army Times). Add this to the decision to adopt Multicam for Afghanistan, and it seems like there's at least some people high up in the chain with a few ounces of common sense.
It will be interesting to see what methods and paints are OKed by the powers that be.
"It sticks out, and we need to give them that ability,” Tamilio said. “We should issue out in the next couple of months an advisory message ... to say, ‘It’s OK to spray paint your weapons, but here is how to do it."
It will be interesting to see what methods and paints are OKed by the powers that be.
ETA: Steve brings up the point that it'll help hide the snipers in plain sight as well, always a good thing.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
I love the smell of burned powder..
..in the early afternoon. Took out the new shotgun, and remembered just how much I came to love how shotguns smell when fired. The plastic shot cup gives it a slightly different note than just brass and lead. Got a good whiff of it when I pulled the gun out of the case just now.
It's amazing just how fast it ate through a 25 round box of 7 1/2 shot, and 10 rounds of 00 buck on top of that. It fires right to point of aim, and with that full choke on there the cardboard was pretty well trashed after a few rounds. So far so good.
Friday, March 12, 2010
I'm not addicted...
Wait, no, I am. I was bored, so I figured I'd run up to Gander Mountain, see what's around, and expand my OC trekking. Normally I prefer giving money to local-ished owned shops (there aren't any for at least 20 miles from here though) but Gander does have a decent amount of used guns and their somewhat recent sign change (they now specify that firearms legally carried for self defense, open or concealed, do not need to be checked or cased, as OC friendly as you can get) has made me a little more friendly towards spending money there, despite previous experiences.
So wandering around, seeing what's there, and notice that a friend of a friend looking at hand guns. Turns out he's there looking to buy his first handgun, and asks if I have any (like I said, friend of a friend...). In his defense he wasn't on my strong side, and I'm not a little guy, so he didn't see the full size 1911 in the tan Serpa on my belt. We talk a little, he's already done a bit of research, and I reassure him that I've heard good stuff about the Springfield XD series, and he starts paperwork on a standard 9mm type. Score one for the good guys, and hopefully I can suck him into the regular range group.
On to my addiction. I've mentioned before that I'm in the market for a semi 12 gauge, so I spent most of my time on the shotgun side of the gun section, and noticing a distinct lack of semis. Drool over the Benellis, way out of my price range. Well, hidden amongst one of the used racks, next to a $1000+ (used) Benelli left handed field gun of some sort, is a pretty decent looking Mossberg 930 for a price I'm willing to pay. Look it over, 24" ribbed and ported barrel, threaded for the accu-choke, and a nice little red fiber optic bead. Very nice finish (well, good condition, just the standard Mossberg park job) and the chamber looks like it's had maybe 100 rounds through it. Track down an employee, fill out papers, and head out the door.
(forgive the mediocre photos, it's dark outside, and my light box is a whopping 2'x2'... long guns don't fit)
It came with a Mossberg 670 XX-F Turkey choke and another one (pictured above) marked PF1-XX-Full, along with a couple bags of stock shims. Guess I'm going to have to do some research, as I know next to nill about shotgun chokes, despite being rated an Expert shotgun shooter by the NRA. (Hey, just 'cause I shoot it good, doesn't mean I know jack about how it works) But overall, not a bad haul for a gun I didn't plan on buying this morning, or this month for all that matters.
Looking at extension tubes now, the ones from Nordic look promising (with the 24" barrel I can squeeze a +5er under there!) and contemplating some other 3-gun type aftermarket parts, like a bigger charging handle and more pronounced safety switch. Any advice on that front is welcome, especially when it comes to chokes. This will be getting setup for 3-gun type use.
Oh, to top off the day, AMC's totally rockin' the Pale Rider.
More decent press.
Of course the "other side" continues to cling to empathetic views that have no real substance or proof, but hey, it's the best they've got.
Anticipation
I shivers with it.
Just sent a 2022 magazine down to Ohio to the folks at Raven Concealment Systems so they can mold me a single magazine holder to match the light compatible holster I have on order for the Sig. Of course, as with any high demand semi-custom product, the wait time is a bit over a month at present.
I do like my Serpa, but I can't have my light on the gun, which kinda sucks in my opinion, and they only make them in black. Black is so 2001 when it comes to tactical stuff. For a little extra, the Raven Concealment stuff comes in Coyote/FDE/tan/mocha/whatever we're calling it this week. More importantly, my belt is brown leather, so it matches better.
I'll be posting more about the stuff when it shows up and I get a chance to put it through it's paces.
BBC + OC in Wisconsin
And even though they're carrying in a grocery store with a camera crew in tow, nobody freaks out. Amazing. (Doesn't appear as though BBC will let you embed videos...) The report seems pretty neutral too, which is a nice change.
I wonder if they let the crew shoot a couple mags.
Also lots of Serpa's. Apparently I'm not alone. They are a pretty good deal though, simple retention and a decent price.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Guns are like E. Coli?
Well, the Brady Campaign thinks so.
Starbucks owns more than 8,800 coffee houses worldwide; including licensees, there are more than 16,000 locations. If the company were to have a policy that, say, resulted in tainted food and drinks that sickened its customers, we would all agree that such a threat should be communicated to the American public.
Well, there is a policy that is just as dangerous.
So I guess just touching a gun will kill you now.
I wonder if Starbucks has any legal ability to get them to back off. It seems that the Brady Campaign has decided that if they won't do what they want, they'll try every little dirty thing to hurt their sales.
Monday, March 8, 2010
New York Times & OC
Here.
I have been noticing that as of late, especially with the Starbucks issue, that it seems to be harder and harder for the media to show OCers in a bad light, and are really making the Anti's look more and more like idiots. I do enjoy that.
Patches
That are quite relevant to the blog. 3.5 inch ones too. I really wish I had come up with the idea a year ago when I was hashing this thing together...
Oh well. I'll probably end up ordering a couple at least, $2 of each patch goes to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Friday, March 5, 2010
Update on the Wisconsin Carry Inc. Vs. Wisconsin
I first mentioned the case here, and the first ruling has come down, and we win.
The school zone issue is still up in the air, but a win is a win. It's good to see Wisconsin Carry Inc. is fighting the good fight, and I'm proud to be a member.
The school zone issue is still up in the air, but a win is a win. It's good to see Wisconsin Carry Inc. is fighting the good fight, and I'm proud to be a member.
More M&P15-22 and Magpul mash-up advice
Another question popped up on ARFCOM in regards to Magpul components on the little .22
The MIAD and MOE series grips are pretty sweet, I like the simplicity and fuller size of the MOE, and since my full size carbine has one, I needed to put one on the Smith.
On the 15-22 the rear take-down retaining pin spring is held in place by the pistol grip since there is no traditional buffer tube or rear plate. No biggy with the standard A2 grip, but the MOE and MIAD grips have some gaps in that area and don't support the spring like the A2 grip. If you're running the MIAD with the large backstrap, all you need to do is get the AR-10 gapper from Magpul, and not only will it fix the retaining spring issue, but it'll fill the gap between the grip and the receiver.
If you're running the MOE, from everything I can find, the gapper isn't compatible. So you need to add a block to the inside of the MOE grip to support the spring. I grabbed some plastic sprue chunks from a Games Workshop kit (hey, it was handy) and glued it in and trimmed it to match up with the top of the grip.
You can't see it from the outside, so I didn't bother coloring the block. I still have the gap between the receiver and the flared top of the grip, but it's purely a cosmetic problem, so I'm not in a hurry to fill that yet, or put much thought into how I'm going to do it, but someday I'll get to it.
You can't see it from the outside, so I didn't bother coloring the block. I still have the gap between the receiver and the flared top of the grip, but it's purely a cosmetic problem, so I'm not in a hurry to fill that yet, or put much thought into how I'm going to do it, but someday I'll get to it.
Starbucks Round-up
Well, a couple things anyway. A Google News search for "Starbucks" gives you an editorial from the University of South Carolina's paper for the first result (plus over 70 more articles about the Brady Vs. Starbucks issue). A pretty pro 2A one too.
I have to think that Starbucks, being the large corporation that it is, put thought into this, and decided that it's not going to hurt their sales enough for this to be an issue. Heck, I'm sure that they've seen an increase the last few weeks with the number of pro-gunners "showing their support."
No matter what states allow, there is no reason to ban the ownership and carry of firearms in this country. Being allowed to openly carry a firearm in public does not make the citizenry violent, and guns only become dangerous when they aren’t handled properly or someone has intent to harm others. Situations can arise where law enforcement is unavailable and the influence and power of a firearm is needed. And guns don’t have to be fired to keep a violent criminal from hurting innocent people. The display of a firearm is quite enough to deter that intent.
I've also been pointed towards a segment from Fox News's "Red Eye"
The host seems pretty cool about it, but his guests (with the exception of the hamster) are what I have come to expect from the media when it comes to guns. The... guy (trying to keep it family friendly here) at 3:30ish is an idiot. Everyone that I know that OCs, including myself, do not want places making a big deal of it and kicking us out. When I stopped at Fleet Farm today I didn't want to have a long conversation with the manager and possibly the SPPD, I wanted a couple boxes of buckshot, some drill bits, and a tackle box to organize my various extra AR parts. Thankfully I was simply able to walk in and get my stuff, like every other time I've been there, and the check-out girl seemed flirtier than normal, despite the full size 1911 riding in plain view on my right hip.
If I wanted to make a big deal of it and get the cops called, I'd get an AK pistol and sling that baby while I'm out shopping...
That hamster, on the other hand, is probably one of the most intelligent commentators I've seen on the news in a gun related story.
(I am also performing a face palm for the guy that showed up with a shotgun... not helping.)
The Wall Street Journal also ran a story today (well yesterday now) in regards to how Starbucks is asking to be left out of things. I agree, they didn't ask for the press, the Brady idiots forced it upon them. Kudos to Starbucks for not caving and telling the Brady people where they can stick their petition. It's their business and they'll run it how they see fit. Thankfully that includes not discriminating against law abiding citizens. Also, thankfully, the poll attached to the article shows most reader's feel the same. (Granted I'm sure there's is a bit of padding going on with linking and whatnot from the gun community, it's not like we've never done that before...)
Some bits-
Allowing customers who are armed with unconcealed guns on the premises "can't be good for business—it galvanizes people, and some of them won't patronize Starbucks after this," said Joshua Horwitz, executive director of the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, a gun-control organization in Washington, D.C.
I've also noted quite a few people suggesting that this decision is placing Starbucks employees in danger.
Indeed, not all baristas agree that the Starbucks policy protects them. "I think the policy shows complete disregard for the safety and sentiments of their workers. The only thing worse than a yuppie upset with how their frappuccino turned out is a yuppie with a gun who's unhappy with how their frappuccino turned out," says Erik Forman, a Starbucks barista and union member in Minneapolis.
Well, it hasn't been an issue before, otherwise they would have had a no gun policy a long time ago. What I wonder is what Starbucks's policy is on employees openly carrying. I also didn't know that they had a barista union...
Of course there's a few rather skewed articles in the mix, I made the mistake of clicking on the editorial from the Los Angeles Times written by some idiot who assumes all OCers just never grew up and still want to be cowboys (good god what would they think if they ever saw a SASS gathering?) Some people make my head hurt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
