Diane Craig from Danville, CA. faces arson charges after she set fire to 2 gas stations and a Starbucks to protest high gas prices. Police said they don’t know why she targeted Starbucks. [KCRA] (Thanks to Kristie!)
More From Consumerist
-
Fancy New Taco Bells Hope To Go Upscale With Eatery’s Image
-
Stockton, CA, To Become Largest U.S. City To Declare Bankruptcy
-
Moving Company Picks The Wrong Person To Threaten To Sue Over Bad Yelp Review
-
Beware Of The Not-So-Free Trial At Gold's Gym
-
As ‘Six Strikes’ Policy Rolls Out, BitTorrent Users Just Look For Ways To Remain Anonymous
Protesting high gas prices by reducing the total amount of gas available. Brilliant!
I guess some people call coffee go-juice?
Burning a Starbucks is all too appropriate. Their coffee is burnt shit, so why not their stores?
@SMSDHubbard: Aren’t you cool, dismissing the article entirely and taking a jab at a completely innocent corporate store at an attempt to be clever. Bravo!
Probably a Malkinite…Dunkin Donuts would’ve been next if the cops hadn’t stopped her!
@mikesam: Oh noes! A joke! How insensitive I am to the nice multinational corporation.
The Starbucks arson might have been just another part of her protest against “the state of the economy.” It’s pretty outrageous when so many people are addicted to $4+ caffeinated beverages.
I hope they follow up and report why the Starbucks. Kind of funny that she went after a starbucks. I’d like to know what her reason was for that, what connection was there between Starbucks and high gas prices in her head.
Was the Starbucks located between the flaming gas stations?
@SMSDHubbard: Starbucks will just cry all night to hear you say that, you cad!
why not burn down a starbucks?
So, we are trying to find a logic in someone to set fire to a Starbucks who decided setting fire to gas stations to protest high prices was logical.
I think she threw in the Starbucks burning cause she couldn’t decide which to spend her $4 on a cup of coffee or a gallon of gas. . . . . decisions decisions life sure is tough.
@pixiegirl1: also didn’t want to spend money on sucky aftertaste
odd that she targeted Starbucks, considering their bran muffins actually “give you gas”
A modern day Quang Duc!
Well…sorta.
She should have bought a bike. Would have saved a lot of trouble. As for the Starbucks, I bet there is one on the other side of the street.
Maybe it’s part of an insanity plea.
Hell, I wanna burn Starbucks down. I went in there with a caffine-fiend friend and they were selling Joy Division CDs! Ian Curtis is rolling in his grave!
IS NOTHING SACRED?!
@SMSDHubbard: He’s just mad because he had the eighth comment in the “burnt coffee hurrrr” pool.
@Eldritch: Yeah, “Senses Working Overtime” was better.
Although I’ve gotta hand it to them on their compilations in general.
@cynu414: Should have bought a coffee maker, too.
You know you suck at life when you try to burn down two gas stations, which are by nature filled with combustible material, and still don’t manage to cause any “major structural damage”.
@KD17: Because she’s an arsonist on a budget. High gas prices means she can’t burn down nearly as many buildings.
I Saw this one on CSI: Law and Order. The high gas prices is a red herring, she was after the Starbucks all along, she just figured she’d torch the gas stations and get sympathy with the jury, and hopefully a lighter sentence.
Was Starbucks playing that Shawn Colvin song?
She probably saw the identical prices and got confused.
@cynu414: I’m sure you’re right about the Starbucks across the street, probably three more within four blocks of the one she burned.
She must be going for an insanity plea. She tried to torch a gas station by starting a fire in….. the bathroom…. with a firelog…. as isolated as possible from… the GASOLINE!
All you comedians here should be writing for the Jimmy Kimmel Show.
/sarcasm
i think she burned the starbucks to show that if her car can’t get a $4 drink, neither can the masses.
@B: CSI: Law & Order? You mean Law & Order: Criminal Intent?
Man, I wish I invested in oil when we went to the desert.
This betch, of course, shouldn’t have been setting fire to anything. But targeting a gas station to protest high gas prices is lower than low, since it was probably owned by an immigrant family getting by on very thin margins. Talk about shooting the messenger.
She must have had just enough gas to reach the Starbucks and not the third gas station.
@lukobe: Yup, no lie. Hey, crazy lady: don’t you know Exxon is based in Texas?! Yeesh! Go nuts there – you’ll even pass for a local!
well DUH, coffee is what I use to power my time machine.
I seriously don’t get fanatics like this chick and the guy who recently hacked into Comcast and shut down their email system for a while. These antics ultimately end up hurting the end users of the products–us consumers–and generally only offer a mere mosquito bite worth of trouble to the company itself.
The only real effective way to “get back” at a company is for consumers to stop buying its product. As many products as I have seen come and go, the marketplace is truly a numbers game. Low sales = Bye, bye product. Although boycotting gas is quite impossible to accomplish for most of us.
@AstroPig7: I agree. The fewer gas stations in the area means less price competition means higher prices. Also, higher demand at the remaining gas stations means higher prices. Good job, Diane Craig, you dumb*ss.
Hey Diane, what’s the link there? And where do you buy your drugs that clearly screwed up your brain to think that Starbucks = high gas prices?
Oh wait! I think I figured it out! She targeted a Starbucks because people were *driving* to Starbucks for coffee instead of making their coffee at home. As a result, Starbucks is responsible for high gas prices. That’s it! How silly of me.
Because she’s a nut?
@myotheralt: Nope, merger-mania hits TV franchises.