Ok, but does Starbucks apply the policy to whites? At will? Or did this particular location apply it to the scary black guys.
I've literally sat in Starbucks waiting for someone and nobody has said anything to me....
Ok, but does Starbucks apply the policy to whites? At will? Or did this particular location apply it to the scary black guys.Somebody who gets it. Those black people, weren't arrested for racism, but for their own stupidity, and refusal to leave the premises. Stupid is as stupid does?
I have too. Craiglist meetings, meetings with an associate, etc.I've literally sat in Starbucks waiting for someone and nobody has said anything to me....
In the absence of any sort of public, binding policy document on all Starbuck's locations, I would instead assume that the choice of whether to ask someone to leave, is down to the mgmt, which would largely be location-specific.
I mean, you can call me racist all you want, I guess, for supporting Starbuck's right to do this, which is what I was taking offense at @esquared ' s POV, that somehow, they should get a pass, EVEN AFTER BEING ASKED TO LEAVE BY THE COPS. (Because "waiting for friends", isn't really loitering. Oh wait, yes it is, if you're not a customer.) I know I'm NOT racist, just because I don't support "social affirmative action for minorities", doesn't make me so. "Taking the knee", doesn't mean that "black people" (insert favorite minority here) don't have to follow the Rule of Law.
I mean, if I were the cops, I probably would have escorted them out, taken them down the street, and unless the mgmt explicitly asked to press charges, I would have just released them, and told them never to set foot in that location again. (Small-town police procedures. I understand, that rarely flies in metro-type locations.)
And no, I'm lazy, I haven't read the linked article, nor the CEO's apology.
I just don't think that this is somehow inherently racist. I'm not a Starbuck's customer, but my experience with semi-loitering (staying for an extended period of time - but buying drinks and food) at dunkin's, has shown me that there's no real universal policy on "hanging out", that it's very much down to location, and the predilections of the local cops.
You want to talk about REAL, REAL-WORLD Racism (with a capital R), try looking at Africa, the ANC (black political party), is essentially allowing and encouraging, blacks, to RAPE, KILL, and STEAL the LAND of "white" farmers. Just because, they're white.
Asking someone to leave a Starbucks, because they're loitering, is not racism.
They should have just gotten a small coffee. I have mtgs at Panera and Starbucks a lot and that’s what I do. Yes I’m black.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I live in an area with a lot of high school and college kids who squat in Starbucks or Panera for the free wifi. I’ve similarly seen the work from home demographic use these spaces as their personal offices. On more than one occasion, I’ve seen management ask these people to leave if they don’t buy something.So when do you think the last time that Starbucks employee called the police when two white people didn't buy anything and said they were waiting for a friend?
"Now, unless you've got proof that Starbucks only kicks out black non-customers, but allows whites to say, there is nothing to see here."
I was waiting for a waterboy to come out here and defend these assholes.
"But DON'T say anything silly like "we all know whites wouldn't be asked to leave" like it's a verified fact. Prove it. Otherwise we're just searching for racism where it doesn't exist."
Who said that? Not me. I asked a hypothetical question. I said, when do you think the last time that Starbucks employee called the police when two white people didn't buy anything and said they were waiting for a friend?
.
LOL.You want to talk about REAL, REAL-WORLD Racism (with a capital R), try looking at Africa, the ANC (black political party), is essentially allowing and encouraging, blacks, to RAPE, KILL, and STEAL the LAND of "white" farmers. Just because, they're white.
Asking someone to leave a Starbucks, because they're loitering, is not racism.
I know it's stated the cops asked them to leave three times but refused, but why were they asked to leave?
Law against waiting for someone in a starbucks?
.
Law against waiting in Starbucks, McDonalds, Wal-Mart, Target, banks, nail salons, karate dojos, gas stations and EVERY OTHER BUSINESS IN THE COUNTRY. You, as usual, have it bassackward. This isn't a story about police oppressing minorities. It's only a story because the minorities were the ones causing trouble. If it was two white guys who were arrested for loitering in a business after ignoring a legal request to leave then the clueless bleeding hearts wouldn't notice or care.
Would help if half the people in this thread acknowledged the general principle that private businesses can enforce loitering laws (even against blacks). The other half should do their part by acknowledging that if you’re a business owner and go exercise that right, then you’re going to be subject to racism claims; especially in an instance like this where it seems racism is the most likely cause.
I have too. Craiglist meetings, meetings with an associate, etc.
But I generally 1) have spare change, and 2) buy a drink while I'm waitng. I guess that's just the way I see things.
Maybe Starbuck's management at that location, was afraid that "waiting for friends", meant that the "black community" was planning on staging a protest at that location? I've heard of that happening.
I meet up with old coworkers pretty much weekly for lunch at different restaurants. There's been multiple times where one of us gets there first and stands around for 10-15 minutes lookin on our phones just waiting for the others to show up. Not once has any of us ever been kicked out because we weren't paying customers, standing around. And as soon as everyone is there, we all purchase food and sit down.I've waited up to 30 minutes in public establishments before without the cops being called, then again i'm not black. I don't know why some people in this thread are assuming these guys wouldn't buy anything, maybe they were going to buy some starbucks coffee once their friend arrived and the starbucks employee just wanted them gone before that which would be dumb. Doubt a white person would get treated by the same employee as such.
I've waited up to 30 minutes in public establishments before without the cops being called, then again i'm not black. I don't know why some people in this thread are assuming these guys wouldn't buy anything, maybe they were going to buy some starbucks coffee once their friend arrived and the starbucks employee just wanted them gone before that which would be dumb. Doubt a white person would get treated by the same employee as such.
Ok, but does Starbucks apply the policy to whites? At will? Or did this particular location apply it to the scary black guys.
I've literally sat in Starbucks waiting for someone and nobody has said anything to me....
I have no doubt that at some locations this would happen. I also have no doubt there are others it wouldn't.And what would Starbucks do if it was busy, other people waiting for tables and you refused to order or vacate the spot you were sitting when asked? Give it a try, I bet you don't get a free pass because you're white. They'll call the police on you too and if you then refused to leave you'd be arrested too.
A public accommodation is a place that offers goods and services to the general public such as a restaurant that is open to the public. Federal and state laws protect designated groups from discrimination in places of public accommodations, based on the premise that everyone is entitled to enjoy the goods and services of the public accommodation on an equal basis.
Discrimination in Public Accommodations
The U.S. government has a public policy to promote equal rights for all citizens. One way to encourage this idea is to actively discourage discrimination against members of protected classes (such as racial minorities, women, and the disabled). To prevent discrimination in public accommodations, the government enacted certain laws at the federal, state, and sometimes local levels. Specifically, the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, and religion.
Limitations on Public Accommodations Laws
Although the public accommodations laws are designed to prevent discrimination and are intended to promote fairness and equality, they do have certain limitations. For example, many laws allow for the removal or exclusion of a person who displays offensive behavior or is a direct threat to public health or safety. For instance, store patrons can be subjected to a bag check, or some other security measure, but only if the same rules apply to all patrons equally.
Whites are relatively unlikely to perceive prejudice (against either Whites or Blacks) under conditions of uncertainty. For example, Inman and Baron (1996) asked college students to rate the traits shown by actors in a series of vignettes that described ambiguously racist actions. Whites were less likely to label potentially racist acts as instances of prejudice than Blacks were, regardless of the target’s race. In signal- detection terms, the threshold at which members of traditionally advantaged groups make attributions to prejudice may be rela- tively high (cf. Barrett & Swim, 1998), both because these in- dividuals do not encounter bias very often and because the implications of prejudice are limited for them (Schmitt & Branscombe, 2002). These findings suggest that Whites are relatively insensitive to subtle cues of prejudice, regardless of the race that is targeted. Thus, we predicted that they would not experience cognitive disruption after exposure to ambiguous prejudice. Rather, we expected that Whites, in contrast to Blacks, would experience substantial disruption when exposed to blatant prejudice. Because overt racism is relatively rare (McConahay, 1986), Whites do not tend to develop the coping skills that would buffer them from cognitive disruption in such situations.