Racist Starbucks drama

L

livespive

Well-Known Member
See and that is where SB will be in trouble. If this goes to court and the witness says that they have done the same thing and were not asked to leave there will be problems no matter if there is a policy for repeat customers or not. They can play discrimination.

WAMO said:
AND THAT COULD BE THE DEAL 9. MANAGERS ARE MORE THAN LIKELY TOLD TO ASK ONCE, TELL ONCE, THEN CALL POLICE AND LET THEM HANDLE IT. BUT SOME OF THE OTHER "CUSTOMERS" SAID THEY HAVE DONE THE SAME THING. WE ALL KNOW IF WE FREQUIENT A PLACE THE STAFF GETS TO KNOW YOU AND MAY NOT SAY ANYTHING. IF THIS WAS THOSE 2 GUYS FIRST TRIP IN THERE AND SHE DIDNT KNOW THEM, SHE MAY HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING POLICY. AND BEFORE ANYBODY HAMMERS ME FOR THAT, YOU ALL KNOW WHEN YOU HANG OUT SOMEWHERE YOU KIND OF EXPECT A LITTLE EXTRA FROM THE STAFF. WE ALL DO.
Click to expand...
 
W

WAMO

Spanking His Monkey
THE PROBLEM WITH THAT IS LIVE, SOMEONE COULD TWIST AND TURN THAT IN JUST ABOUT EVERYPLACE IN U.S. ON A DAILY BASIS. THEY SHOULD JUST TAKE SOME FREE COFFEE COUPONS, THEN HAND THEM BACK WITH A NO THANK YOU, ACCEPT THE APOLOGY AND MOVE ON. NOONE IS PERFECT, NOONE.
 
Greg T.

Greg T.

The Jizz Slinger
After reading the dudes' statements, this could have been solved in either of two ways. Since they were there for a business meeting, I would have to assume they were going to buy something anyway. So, why not just get a coffee sooner than later? Simply using space meant for paying customers is not acceptable. If they had the idea that they were going to have a meeting in there for free, then they should have been removed. If they planned on buying something during the meeting, they could have satisfied the requirements by buying early.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/men-arres...ng-change-114103068--abc-news-topstories.html
 
B

bbfreeburn

Active Member
Greg T. said:
After reading the dudes' statements, this could have been solved in either of two ways. Since they were there for a business meeting, I would have to assume they were going to buy something anyway. So, why not just get a coffee sooner than later? Simply using space meant for paying customers is not acceptable. If they had the idea that they were going to have a meeting in there for free, then they should have been removed. If they planned on buying something during the meeting, they could have satisfied the requirements by buying early.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/men-arres...ng-change-114103068--abc-news-topstories.html
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem to be the real point though. The point, as I understand it is that White folks do that routinely; ie, meet people there and don't always buy anything until the person being met shows up, and nothing is said or done about it. Personally I don't know as I never go into Starbucks. I wonder what would happen if I went down the road a bit to the closest convenience store (which is, as far as I've seen, operated by an all black crew and has an almost all black clientele) and just took a seat. Would I be arrested?

The problem with your scenario is that you are asking innocent people to proactively prove their innocence. That's not the (supposed) presumption in this country.
 
W

WAMO

Spanking His Monkey
BUT BB, HOW MANY OF THE OTHER PATRONS FREQUENT THE PLACE AND ARE KNOWN AND THATS WHY NOTHING IS SAID. AND THE MANAGER ASKED THEM TO BE REMOVED FOR TRESPASSING, TRESPASSING IS AGAINST THE LAW. AND YOUR SUPPOSED PRESUMPTION IS NOT CORRECT. HOW MANY INNOCENT PEOPLE ARE ARRESTED AND HAVE TO PROVE THEMSELVES INNOCENT IN COURT? AND OUT OF ALL THIS, I HAVE NOT HEARD, ATLEAST ON THE DALLAS NEWS, THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED IN ANY OTHER STARBUCKS ANYWHERE ELSE. MAYBE THIS WAS JUST AN ISOLATED MISTAKE. BUT FROM WHAT I HAVE HEARD ON THE NEWS IS THAT STARBUCKS AND THE PHILI POLICE ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING.
 
sevenpin63

sevenpin63

Addicted Member
I also heard from a cop friend of mine that this particular Starbucks has locked bathrooms, because it has had problems with drug deals going down in the bathroom.
 
W

WAMO

Spanking His Monkey
WELL THAT WOULD EXPLAIN AN ARTICLE I READ THEN SEVEN. THE ARTICLE SAID THAT AT THAT STORE THE RESTROOMS ARE KEPT LOCKED AND ARE FOR PAYING CUSTOMERS ONLY. BUT IT DID NOT GIVE THE REASON WHY OR IF THERE IS A SIGN POSTED SAYING THAT.
 
9andaWiggle

9andaWiggle

Addicted Member
Djarum300 said:
Starbucks sucks anyway lol.
Click to expand...
Agree, but still think trying to blame the whole company because of one person's actions is not right (without proof the company is directing the behavior).

As for drug deals in the bathroom... the dealers just need to add $10 to the order to cover their latte - consider it a fee for doing business there! I'm sure the addicts will still pay it! :Roflmao:
 
sevenpin63

sevenpin63

Addicted Member
Don't like Starbucks either, get my Dunkin every morning on the way to work, black 4 sugars.
I don't like all that fancy shit.
 
AlwaysWrite

AlwaysWrite

Addicted Member
livespive said:
Which the cops were half right. They didn’t investigate into the situation. You don’t just take the word of the first story.
Click to expand...
... but the cops didn't HAVE to investigate ... BECAUSE the proprietor has the right to cite trespassing ... after which the cops have an OBLIGATION to remove the individuals.
 
AlwaysWrite

AlwaysWrite

Addicted Member
bbfreeburn said:
Why would anyone buy coffee from Starbucks or anywhere else? Do you like spending too much for your drink?
Click to expand...
Dear bbfreeburn:

That's why I've never purchased anything at Starbucks. In fact, the only time I've ever been in a Starbucks store was during a bowling tournament trip to The Villages, and my doubles partner (who was a regular patronize of Starbucks) treated me to a frozen coffee concoction. But I've never spent so much as a penny on Starbucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top