JC Callender
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2013
- Messages
- 6,477
- Reaction score
- 3,270
- Location
- Metro Detroit
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
It looks like two black men wanted to use the restroom at Starbucks and were denied because they weren't purchasing anything. They then sat down and were asked to leave since they weren't making a purchase and they refused. The police were called and asked the men to leave and they again refused, so the police arrested them. Now there's a public outcry of racism, but what if that particular Starbucks has a problem with people loitering our conducting business without making purchases and they're taking up valuable space that could be used for paying customers, wouldn't that be a problem? Wouldn't if be fair to expect someone to purchase something when using their establishment?
Philly's mayor, defending the two black men, says that Starbucks is "not just a place to buy a cup of coffee, but a place to meet up with friends or family members, or to get some work done", but is it really up to the mayor to assume that Starbucks should provide an office or hang out place free of charge or purchases? Maybe the mayors office and home could be a place for the public to meet up with friends and get some work done? And is it really impossible to see that two white guys could be asked to leave as well under the same circumstances?
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-on-controversial-arrest-of-2-black-men-in-ph
What do you think?
It looks like two black men wanted to use the restroom at Starbucks and were denied because they weren't purchasing anything. They then sat down and were asked to leave since they weren't making a purchase and they refused. The police were called and asked the men to leave and they again refused, so the police arrested them. Now there's a public outcry of racism, but what if that particular Starbucks has a problem with people loitering or conducting business without making purchases and they're taking up valuable space that could be used for paying customers, wouldn't that be a problem? Wouldn't if be fair to expect someone to purchase something when using their establishment?
Philly's mayor, defending the two black men, says that Starbucks is "not just a place to buy a cup of coffee, but a place to meet up with friends or family members, or to get some work done", but is it really up to the mayor to assume that Starbucks should provide an office or hang out place free of charge or purchases? Maybe the mayors office and home could be a place for the public to meet up with friends and get some work done? And is it really impossible to see that two white guys could be asked to leave as well under the same circumstances?
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-on-controversial-arrest-of-2-black-men-in-ph
What do you think?
Melissa DePino, who posted the video, wrote, "The police were called because these men hadn't ordered anything. They were waiting for a friend to show up, who did as they were taken out in handcuffs for doing nothing."
In the video a man is seen telling an officer that he was meeting the two men there and asking what they did to warrant police being called.
I probably would've just purchased a coffee if I were them. They were waiting, so why not.
I don't really see the issue with Starbucks' actions here. Then again, usually when I run into a nearby gas station to use the restroom during a trip or something, I usually don't tend to buy anything after.
What do you think?
They were waiting for a friend to arrive who got there while they were being handcuffed, according to numerous witnesses at the store.
When I go into my local Starbucks there are tables full of people using Wi-Fi and not drinking coffee.
Not being a Starbucks guy, I'm a little ignorant of the Starbucks etiquette, in fact I find the whole thing a bit intimidating, and I can never figure out how to order an extra large without being looked down on by a snobby brewista for not saying "Venti"...hehe...so I took this story at face value and initially thought "No, that's not right, you shouldn't be able to loiter in a place of business, no matter who you are".
But, in reading the comment from your linked article, which states ""All the other white ppl are wondering why it’s never happened to us when we do the same thing.", I'm left thinking that if waiting around for friends is something that happens, and if there is a gap between how white people are treated and black people are treated in this location, then they should be on the hook for explaining why, or apologizing, which Starbucks has done.
Can any hardcore Starbucks fans comment on how the store they frequent handles this kind of scenario, where people are waiting for others to join them?
Not being a Starbucks guy, I'm a little ignorant of the Starbucks etiquette, in fact I find the whole thing a bit intimidating, and I can never figure out how to order an extra large without being looked down on by a snobby brewista for not saying "Venti"...hehe...so I took this story at face value and initially thought "No, that's not right, you shouldn't be able to loiter in a place of business, no matter who you are".
But, in reading the comment from your linked article, which states ""All the other white ppl are wondering why it’s never happened to us when we do the same thing.", I'm left thinking that if waiting around for friends is something that happens, and if there is a gap between how white people are treated and black people are treated in this location, then they should be on the hook for explaining why, or apologizing, which Starbucks has done.
Can any hardcore Starbucks fans comment on how the store they frequent handles this kind of scenario, where people are waiting for others to join them?
Depends on how busy the store is.
Like all places.
I have seen places if people were done to leave so they could sit people waiting.
All they had to do was get in line and order a coffee.
It looks like two black men wanted to use the restroom at Starbucks and were denied because they weren't purchasing anything. They then sat down and were asked to leave since they weren't making a purchase and they refused. The police were called and asked the men to leave and they again refused, so the police arrested them. Now there's a public outcry of racism, but what if that particular Starbucks has a problem with people loitering or conducting business without making purchases and they're taking up valuable space that could be used for paying customers, wouldn't that be a problem? Wouldn't if be fair to expect someone to purchase something when using their establishment?
Philly's mayor, defending the two black men, says that Starbucks is "not just a place to buy a cup of coffee, but a place to meet up with friends or family members, or to get some work done", but is it really up to the mayor to assume that Starbucks should provide an office or hang out place free of charge or purchases? Maybe the mayors office and home could be a place for the public to meet up with friends and get some work done? And is it really impossible to see that two white guys could be asked to leave as well under the same circumstances?
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-on-controversial-arrest-of-2-black-men-in-ph
What do you think?
they're taking up valuable space that could be used for paying customers, wouldn't that be a problem? Wouldn't if be fair to expect someone to purchase something when using their establishment?
I feel the same way when I'm at the grocery store paying cash for my stuff and the person in front of me just used an EBT card
It looks like two black men wanted to use the restroom at Starbucks and were denied because they weren't purchasing anything. They then sat down and were asked to leave since they weren't making a purchase and they refused. The police were called and asked the men to leave and they again refused, so the police arrested them. Now there's a public outcry of racism, but what if that particular Starbucks has a problem with people loitering or conducting business without making purchases and they're taking up valuable space that could be used for paying customers, wouldn't that be a problem? Wouldn't if be fair to expect someone to purchase something when using their establishment?
Philly's mayor, defending the two black men, says that Starbucks is "not just a place to buy a cup of coffee, but a place to meet up with friends or family members, or to get some work done", but is it really up to the mayor to assume that Starbucks should provide an office or hang out place free of charge or purchases? Maybe the mayors office and home could be a place for the public to meet up with friends and get some work done? And is it really impossible to see that two white guys could be asked to leave as well under the same circumstances?
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-on-controversial-arrest-of-2-black-men-in-ph
What do you think?
Yeah, I embarassed the **** outta myself the first time I went to Starbucks.
When I'm waiting for someone to show up at Starbucks, I tend to buy something to drink while I wait.
Not being a Starbucks guy, I'm a little ignorant of the Starbucks etiquette, in fact I find the whole thing a bit intimidating, and I can never figure out how to order an extra large without being looked down on by a snobby brewista for not saying "Venti"...hehe...so I took this story at face value and initially thought "No, that's not right, you shouldn't be able to loiter in a place of business, no matter who you are".
But, in reading the comment from your linked article, which states ""All the other white ppl are wondering why it’s never happened to us when we do the same thing.", I'm left thinking that if waiting around for friends is something that happens, and if there is a gap between how white people are treated and black people are treated in this location, then they should be on the hook for explaining why, or apologizing, which Starbucks has done.
Can any hardcore Starbucks fans comment on how the store they frequent handles this kind of scenario, where people are waiting for others to join them?
lol...ya, I'm not a good Starbucks customer. I almost introduced face to counter when trying to get a coffee in Niagara Falls from a snooty barista that couldn't help but correct me on the size thing on a particularly hung over morning after a night of debauchery at the casino...lolz...
And yes, I would buy a coffee too...I buy a drink when I use a gas station restroom, too...lol... People tell me I have a problem. But as I said to Lud, not so much about that as it is about consistency of treatment between customers. If the no loitering thing applies evenly, I've got no problem with it. If it doesn't, then there are more questions to ask.
I've never had any problem using a restroom without buying something. White privilege, I imagine.It looks like two black men wanted to use the restroom at Starbucks and were denied because they weren't purchasing anything. They then sat down and were asked to leave since they weren't making a purchase and they refused. The police were called and asked the men to leave and they again refused, so the police arrested them. Now there's a public outcry of racism, but what if that particular Starbucks has a problem with people loitering or conducting business without making purchases and they're taking up valuable space that could be used for paying customers, wouldn't that be a problem? Wouldn't if be fair to expect someone to purchase something when using their establishment?
Philly's mayor, defending the two black men, says that Starbucks is "not just a place to buy a cup of coffee, but a place to meet up with friends or family members, or to get some work done", but is it really up to the mayor to assume that Starbucks should provide an office or hang out place free of charge or purchases? Maybe the mayors office and home could be a place for the public to meet up with friends and get some work done? And is it really impossible to see that two white guys could be asked to leave as well under the same circumstances?
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-on-controversial-arrest-of-2-black-men-in-ph
What do you think?
It looks like two black men wanted to use the restroom at Starbucks and were denied because they weren't purchasing anything. They then sat down and were asked to leave since they weren't making a purchase and they refused. The police were called and asked the men to leave and they again refused, so the police arrested them. Now there's a public outcry of racism, but what if that particular Starbucks has a problem with people loitering or conducting business without making purchases and they're taking up valuable space that could be used for paying customers, wouldn't that be a problem? Wouldn't if be fair to expect someone to purchase something when using their establishment? Philly's mayor, defending the two black men, says that Starbucks is "not just a place to buy a cup of coffee, but a place to meet up with friends or family members, or to get some work done", but is it really up to the mayor to assume that Starbucks should provide an office or hang out place free of charge or purchases? Maybe the mayors office and home could be a place for the public to meet up with friends and get some work done? And is it really impossible to see that two white guys could be asked to leave as well under the same circumstances? What do you think?
Right?
Since when is it a huge social blunder by not ordering in Italian? :roll:
A bit too pretentious for my very shallow and limited, "its just coffee" intellect.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/14/us/philadelphia-police-starbucks-arrests/index.html
I have gone to restaurants literally hundreds of times where I had to wait for someone and I have never been asked to leave.
But, then again, I am white
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?