Recently, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz issued a controversial statement, saying “Today we are respectfully requesting that customers no longer bring firearms into our stores or outdoor seating areas — even in states where ‘open carry’ is permitted — unless they are authorized law enforcement personnel.”

Why the request? Schultz says more people have been bringing guns into Starbucks over the last six months, prompting confusion and dismay among some patrons and employees. In light of the tragic recent shootings in multiple public vicinities, the company feels as if their stores should try to provide a safe, carefree environment.

Customers feeling as if their Second Amendment right was slipping through their fingers retorted heavily on multiple social networking sites especially Facebook and Twitter.  One of those tweets is reproduced in the picture above.

While some may think “Well why the heck do you need a gun to get coffee?” others reply you never know when you may need protection or to protect others.  One recent mass shooting, in Colorado, was in the most ordinary of places – a  movie theater.

In the past Starbucks refused to agree to a ban on fire arms, even when pressured by restaurants and other public venues agreeing to do it.  Although Schultz points out that this recent statement is a request and not a requirement, the request has angered many guns-rights advocates, who in August had held a national “Starbucks Appreciation Day” to thank the company on its stance of doing nothing in response to pressure to address the presence of fire arms in stores.

A location for one of these “Appreciation Days” was scheduled in Newton, Connecticut. Yes that Newtown, site of a tragic death mass shooting in an elementary school.  Starbucks tactfully closed the shop before the event even happened.

Schultz said the Starbucks Appreciation Day events portray Starbucks as an open-carry advocate. “To be clear: we do not want these events in our stores,” he said in the open letter.

Schultz said the request was not the result of that event, nor was it in response to the mass shootings this week at the Washington Navy Yard. The company does not want to be a platform for political debate.

Schultz says customers with guns will continue to be served, employees will never be put in the position to confront someone with a weapon, and the request does not apply to authorized law enforcement.

After being informed of the controversy surrounding their precious “Grande  sweetened passion tea lemonade with a shot of raspberry syrup” hotspot, students of VHS react in a positive light like senior Emily Gagliostro, “Overall I agree with the request. People aren’t forced to go into Starbucks, it’s a private company. I don’t think it’s an infringement, they can just chose not to go into Starbucks.”

Other students reacted passionately in defense of our second constitutional amendment, senior Steve Wynen gave a carefully calculated statement: “It would also be appropriate if the CEO of Starbucks understood that law-abiding citizens follow the law, while criminals and lunatics do not. Banning armed, law-abiding citizens from your place of business simply invites criminals in. It is this maxim of common sense that the anti-gun lobby seems to forget time and time again.”

Senior Amanda Albelin gets straight to the point. “I agree with the Starbucks guy. There is no need for guns in the home of the sweetened passion tea lemonade.” Starbucks is not concerned about losing customers or investors Shultz says. “I feel like I’ve made the best decision in the interest of our company.”