Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which you can do, the issue was wanting to use the restroom. Otherwise they would have flown under the radar.
No, that wasn't the issue. The men didn't make a scene when they were refused the bathroom. Other customers would have noticed a scene. They sat down at a table to wait on the person they were meeting. They engaged in a quiet conversation. That is why the other customers objected to the police confronting them. The video shows us the other customers objecting. Not one customer has stepped forward to say that these two men misbehaved. Not one.
Why did the manager want them to leave? That's the only salient point to this issue. The fact that they weren't disturbing the business (because if they were, the other customers would have noticed), but were behaving exactly the way people behave at Starbucks, sitting quietly, having a conversation, waiting on a companion to show up, puts the burden on Starbucks to explain why the police were called. And Starbucks is saying that it was a mistake, that it was wrong, that how they were treated deserves an apology from Starbucks.
All your arguments fly in the face of what Starbucks says. Why???
all my arguments? i said they shouldn't have been arrested if they agreed to leave when the cops arrived.. how does that disagree with what starbucks says?
starbucks is scrambling to get out the spotlight and will do whatever it takes to make that happen.
all my arguments? i said they shouldn't have been arrested if they agreed to leave when the cops arrived.. how does that disagree with what starbucks says?
starbucks is scrambling to get out the spotlight and will do whatever it takes to make that happen.
Then we are closer in our positions than it appears.
I say the police shouldn't have been called at all. Which is what Starbucks says.
I agree-but if that is store policy, then it is what it is. I have been denied access to many bathrooms. If white people were being given the bathroom code before purchasing anything then that is a different story, but I have not seen that or heard anyone make that claim. Although there was another video from a Cali Starbucks where that did apparently happen.
Anyway-all I'm saying is that there is more to this story. Businesses in Center City Phila are packed all day with people from every background-it is hyper diverse.
If two white guys asked to use a Starbucks bathroom and were told to purchase something-and were then asked to leave because they sat down and did not make it known they were waiting for someone to order, then it would be a non-story and we would never hear anything about it.
But because these two men happen to be AA-it automatically becomes racially motivated to many. I don't think that is very helpful to the cause-and it actually diminishes real instances of racism and discrimination.
This has been posted multiple times:
"Lauren said another woman had entered the Starbucks minutes before the men were arrested and was given the bathroom code without having to buy anything and that another person in the restaurant at the time of the incident "announced that she had been sitting at Starbucks for the past couple of hours without buying anything.""
all my arguments? i said they shouldn't have been arrested if they agreed to leave when the cops arrived.. how does that disagree with what starbucks says?
starbucks is scrambling to get out the spotlight and will do whatever it takes to make that happen.
Right. Starbucks isn’t trying to win a battle .
I’m sure they probably know it’s bs but they realize the media and SJWs don’t care about the truth.
This shop said no. It's fine to get a coffee while waiting to meet someone. There is no reason they could not have done so. The manager is the authority at the location and they were intentionally defiant to her.
I'm getting tired of people thinking they make the rules in other's homes and establishments. From employees refusing to serve police, to customers who think they make the rules. They want to enjoy certain benefits but don't think there should be any restrictions.
I'm not sure what is going on lately, but more people cannot handle themselves properly in public.
Witnesses say the manager never spoke to the men before calling the police.
I'm just gonna sit back, sip on a Dunkin Donuts coffee, and watch the lunatic liberal left eat each other from the inside out. Watching these people screaming with megaphones at their precious Starbucks employees is just dandy!
Why aren't these same people screaming outside the homes of black on black criminals? Huh? Why isn't BLM concentrating their efforts on their own community? Its a joke. A sick, sick, sad, pathetic joke.
You are wrong. If you shop at a mall you are a potential customer. You are allowed to look around to see if you want to buy anything,
You can't go window shopping at a Starbucks.
You can go in look around to see if anything interests you and leave if you choose not to buy, but when you sit down and refuse to buy something you are not a customer.
cus·tom·er
ˈkəstəmər/Submit
noun
1.
a person or organization that buys goods or services from a store or business.
Yes shopping is a bit different from the restaurant industry. Counter service like Starbucks or Full service like say Red Robin.
But, they weren't arrested for wanting to use the bathroom.
They were arrested by the police because they refused to leave private property when requested even after the police made three requests for them to leave.
Do you believe there should be a law that any person can just sit in at any business as long as they want for any reason?
Allow me to rephrase. Calling the police, who may arrest someone, because that person wanted to use the bathroom and you politely told them they needed to make a purchase to use the restroom and they just sat back down to wait for the rest of their party to arrive isn't okay. It's extreme.
If the gentleman was told he could not use the restroom until he made a purchase and he threatened someone, called someone names, made rude hand gestures, etc... maybe I can see why a woman would call instead of continuing to engage the person. But, there is no indication that this sort of thing happened at all.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Yeah also the white guy didn’t have a camera in her face recording her .
I’m guessing if he just brought up the fact that the other guy was able to use the bathroom before ordering she would of just let him use the restroom .
—-
That’s right, the customer indicated. Ward, realizing the discrepancy, went to the coffee bar to address it with a woman who identified herself as the store manager. She told him to stop recording.
“This is a private business,” she told Ward. Ward kept recording.
“You are actually not allowed to be in here anymore. You need to leave,” she told Ward.
“Is it my skin color?” Ward asked her. “Is it my skin color?”
Right, he just had to have a hissy fit and accuse her of racism. He could have politely asked why this guy hadn't ordered and got to use the bathroom and waited for an answer. If she gave him crap after that then I could see him complaining. I think he wanted a viral video, and because of the incident in Philly it did go viral.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
