Starbucks closing stores after 2 black men arrested

Even once it checked out it doesn't matter, they still weren't customers.

 

Uhh yeah. That is pretty much the definition.

What does this have to do with the price of coffee in Starbucks?

a. What does it matter if the person arrived before, during or after? This is completely irrelevant
b. They could have become a paying customer before it became an issue. Obviously they never intended on being a customer.
c. Nobody is refuting their story. Again, 100% irrelevant.

Why is this relevant? The story isn't about two black guys being asked to leave starbucks by employees. its about them being arrested. Further, this is a national story. Starbucks employee is going to apologize regardless of who's right or wrong, because race baiters like yourself will encourage escalation on this non issue.

The police commissioner initially stated the officers did what was right and it was their job to remove people from businesses if they refused to leave. I have noticed you ignored this initial statement. The police commissioner not only apologized, but implied that its the officers job to know businesses polices and therefore should not only act as law enforcement, but also act as judges. This is completely ridiculous. Officers should never back down in fear of retaliation.

Regardless of my skin color, I am going to obey an officer. If I have conflict, I will escalate the issue once I am free from the officers power.

In your race baiting 'white nurse' example (assuming you are referring to this particular incident), the nurse did choose to ignore the officers request and she was arrested, just like these two black men in Starbucks. If you think two men loitering and being asked to leave is the same as a nurse refusing to disregard her legal obligation to patient privacy, then by all means, remain ignorant.

Two completely different incidents with two completely different outcomes.

 

What apparent purpose is acceptable? If I give you a reason for standing around, am I no longer loitering? For example, can I stand outside a convince store and state my purpose is to deal drugs, or harass and beg customers for money.

You sir, are a complete ...

 

The 2 stated their purpose.

Regardless,

"...he wasn't aware that it was normal for people to spend a prolonged period of time in Starbucks without making a purchase, and said he believed the officers did not know that as well. “This is apparently a well-known fact with Starbucks customers,” he said. “Not everyone is aware that people spend long hours in Starbucks and aren’t necessarily expected to make a purchase.”

In general, if something is being vowed NOT TO HAPPEN AGAIN, it means it is WRONG. They did something wrong hence, the PR.

 

It was an illegitimate purpose since that purpose had nothing to do with being a customer. When there is a policy that non customers have to leave, which there was at that store, if you aren't a customer, you are loitering.

 

Sorry, that was not a bait. It was specific to someone who has a doctrine about following orders (legal or otherwise) but for some reason, flip-flops in the nurse case. If I can edit, I will remove the word "WHITE".

 

Not necessarily. It just means the alternative option isn't as ideal. Same logic applies to settlements. Doesn't mean every defendant that settles is guilty, it just means that there may be a worse outcome if you let it play out.

If Starbucks changes their policy to allow any customer to use their establishment for whatever purpose, I can see a lot of employee backlash in the future. Starbucks's hospitality will get abused and the employees are not trained or paid enough to deal with it.

 

Sorry, Wrong Answer.

Starbucks mission:

"OUR VALUES
With our partners, our coffee and our customers at our core, we live these values:

• Creating a culture of warmth and belonging, where everyone is welcome."

https://www.starbucks.com/about-us/company-information/mission-statement

Everyone.
Show me, as I have asked repeatedly before, the codified policy that excluded these two gentlemen.

Mission Statement = Constitution

I agree there will be some business practicality run around to this, THIS CASE IS NOT IT. Hence, the apologies of the CEO and Commissioner and subsequent store closure for re-orientation.

 

Sorry, accurate answer. You can post all of the damage control BS you want, but it's obvious what the rules of the store were, and they aren't abnormal rules for businesses in densely populated areas. I suggest you travel more if you don't realize that.

 

Are you arguing with the definition? Take your case to Merriam-Webster. It is in quotes for a reason.

 

Has someone posted a link to that fact that non-customers have to leave that particular store?

 

If it is ABSOLUTELY existing and obvious, can you show the codified policy now that will justify the case for the 2 gentlemen? It has been 2 days or so.

I have shown you the starbucks' link that contradicts your supposed starbucks' policy. Does it really exist or you are making it up?

Stop defending starbucks' action when they themselves admitted they are in the wrong. It looks silly.

 

It comes down to if you believe the woman or not. It's a common policy, and given that the restroom had a code and the store manager said that was the rule.....I mean, there's not really a reason to not believe her.

 

There's no way you are being serious.

 

Trailer park Bobbo telling people to travel more LOL. Precious.

 

Where am I supposed to go?

 

This is the lamest skirt around.

1. divert to sexist
2. divert to misogynist
3. divert to travelling
4. Then this???

Show the absolutely existing CODIFIED policy which is the crux of my argument with you and the 2 gentlemen's predicament. Your position contradicts the company's VERIFIABLE stated mission, The CEO does not stand for the "policy" which you stubbornly insist exist in that location. Prove me wrong.

Starbucks will close 8,000 outlets to orient their staff so that this incident will never happen again. Maybe because it's wrong, maybe, a tad maybe?

PR 101: You don't do damage control and PR moves for GOOD DEEDS. Let that sink in for a moment.

 

The direction this thread went and the never ending loop you guys are talking in was the most predictable thing ever. Bobby wins again.

 

Unless this was all planned out as some think it was, im sure no one want to be arrested or harassed by police while waiting to meet up at a coffee shop. Ah ha, I’ll show that manager by getting arrested. Right.

What I think is that you can always listen to authority even when you feel you’ve been wrong. Play it safe. Or, you stand up to authority when you feel you’ve been wrong, even risking being arrested. I would play it safe, but if I decided not to, I would do it peacefully, like these two did.

 

What is the time frame where someone goes from potential customer .. . .to loiterer?

I mean - You enter a restaurant . . . how long do you have to put in your order before you are considered no longer a potential customer?
20 minutes?
10 minutes?
2 minutes?

Rocket River