Two black men arrested at Philly Starbucks for trespassing

[ajn678]

So, not capable of an honest answer then.

Goodbye.

You've been lying in this entire thread. Adios!

 

[veritas1]

Because Starbucks is run by apologizing spineless bastards.

Like every other business in the country almost, they've been co-opted by the PC police. If two white guys had been arrested under the identical circumstances, we never would have heard a peep. It's quite simple. If a business has a policy of having to buy something to use the bathroom or the tables, then that's the policy. You follow it or risk arrest for loitering.

 

[jonny5]

Hey, it's the USA - at least they weren't shot on sight for being black.

Anyhow, being arrested after two minutes in a shop - not stealing or being difficult customers was bad enough and not reason enough for being arrested. The manager overreacted and lost her job, the police over reacted rather than calm things down and their chief has apologised so you lose I'm afraid.

So does America because that's the nation you are.

Refusing to leave a business is a reason for being arrested. The customers overreacted and were taken away by police, so they lost. Everything in america is about race and people using race to divide each other and make things worse. Because thats the nation we are.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Refusing to leave a business is a reason for being arrested. The customers overreacted and were taken away by police, so they lost. Everything in america is about race and people using race to divide each other and make things worse. Because thats the nation we are.

Like every other business in the country almost, they've been co-opted by the PC police. If two white guys had been arrested under the identical circumstances, we never would have heard a peep. It's quite simple. If a business has a policy of having to buy something to use the bathroom or the tables, then that's the policy. You follow it or risk arrest for loitering.

SOOO much dishonesty but it's par for the course here. Ignoring a poster who projects his own behaviour onto me I'll make these observations.

1) Company policy needs to be applied uniformly. "Whether they're dressed in suits, whether they're dressed in baggy pants, whether they're dressed in sweatpants, the policy has to apply across the board, equally and fairly,'' says Edward Troiano, owner of Knight Security, a Manhattan-based firm that provides protection services primarily at events and event spaces.

2) Feel free to find a couple of white men who are asked to leave for doing exactly the same thing that black people are allowed to do on a business premise.

3) Over-react??? WTF is wrong with you?

 

[Maccabee]

I've never had any problem using a restroom without buying something. White privilege, I imagine.

I'm black and I never had an issue either. But I never hang around long enough to be noticed anyway. I go in, do my business, and head out.

 

[jonny5]

SOOO much dishonesty but it's par for the course here. Ignoring a poster who projects his own behaviour onto me I'll make these observations.

1) Company policy needs to be applied uniformly. "Whether they're dressed in suits, whether they're dressed in baggy pants, whether they're dressed in sweatpants, the policy has to apply across the board, equally and fairly,'' says Edward Troiano, owner of Knight Security, a Manhattan-based firm that provides protection services primarily at events and event spaces.

2) Feel free to find a couple of white men who are asked to leave for doing exactly the same thing that black people are allowed to do on a business premise.

3) Over-react??? WTF is wrong with you?

WTF is wrong with you? Can you not have a civil debate? Shall we call the police?

 

[KLATTU]

SOOO
1) Company policy needs to be applied uniformly.


?

Says who?
A company can apply it any way they want, legally.
And they can selectively enforce it based on circumstances.

 

[veritas1]

SOOO much dishonesty but it's par for the course here. Ignoring a poster who projects his own behaviour onto me I'll make these observations.

1) Company policy needs to be applied uniformly. "Whether they're dressed in suits, whether they're dressed in baggy pants, whether they're dressed in sweatpants, the policy has to apply across the board, equally and fairly,'' says Edward Troiano, owner of Knight Security, a Manhattan-based firm that provides protection services primarily at events and event spaces.

2) Feel free to find a couple of white men who are asked to leave for doing exactly the same thing that black people are allowed to do on a business premise.

3) Over-react??? WTF is wrong with you?

Nothing I said is dishonest. I simply stated facts. I also nowhere said that company policy should not be applied uniformly. Also, you haven't a clue about how many white people are asked to leave business premises every day across the country.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

WTF is wrong with you? Can you not have a civil debate? Shall we call the police?

LOL. Nice one. Your US police would shoot me dead just for being British let alone anything else.

Says who?
A company can apply it any way they want, legally.
And they can selectively enforce it based on circumstances.

Oh yeah, let's go round the snowflake's alt-right circle and ask why then a major corporation ends up apologising, sacking the manager and probably paying millions in training.

Nothing I said is dishonest. I simply stated facts. I also nowhere said that company policy should not be applied uniformly. Also, you haven't a clue about how many white people are asked to leave business premises every day across the country.

I invited you to find me an example rather than give me opinions. As for your dishonesty, :lamo

 

[KLATTU]

L


Oh yeah, let's go round the snowflake's alt-right circle and ask why then a major corporation ends up apologising, sacking the manager and probably paying millions in training.


mo

Uhmm, it's called liberal pandering.

If they did sack that manager, they are going to be paying out millions in a wrongful termination suit.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Because Starbucks is run by apologizing spineless bastards.

Uhmm, it's called liberal pandering.

If they did sack that manager, they are going to be paying out millions in a wrongful termination suit.

That idiotic argument was made a page ago. I love the alt-right snowflake approach to anything like this.

Hysterical.

 

[ajn678]

That idiotic argument was made a page ago. I love the alt-right snowflake approach to anything like this.

Hysterical.

Alt-right.... Haha you are hilarious. Hilariously wrong.

 

[veritas1]

LOL. Nice one. Your US police would shoot me dead just for being British let alone anything else.



Oh yeah, let's go round the snowflake's alt-right circle and ask why then a major corporation ends up apologising, sacking the manager and probably paying millions in training.



I invited you to find me an example rather than give me opinions. As for your dishonesty, :lamo

You're long on personal attacks and extremely short on substance. BTW, white people being asked to leave business premises is rarely made into a national controversy. That's why quickly finding an example is not very easy. The left doesn't take up the causes of white people in similar circumstances. But, of course, you knew this. So much for who's dishonest.

 

[veritas1]

Alt-right.... Haha you are hilarious. Hilariously wrong.

Infinite chaos is a good term for most leftist thinking. He chose wisely.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Infinite chaos is a good term for most leftist thinking. He chose wisely.

You're long on personal attacks and extremely short on substance.

Um-hum... Obvious projection is obvious.

BTW, white people being asked to leave business premises is rarely made into a national controversy. That's why quickly finding an example is not very easy. The left doesn't take up the causes of white people in similar circumstances. But, of course, you knew this. So much for who's dishonest.

Getting your excuses for failing to back up lies in as early as possible.

Alt-right.... Haha you are hilarious. Hilariously wrong.

You failed two pages ago and were dismissed. Nothing has changed.

 

[jonny5]

LOL. Nice one. Your US police would shoot me dead just for being British let alone anything else.

Thats what I thought.

 

[jonny5]

You're long on personal attacks and extremely short on substance. BTW, white people being asked to leave business premises is rarely made into a national controversy. That's why quickly finding an example is not very easy. The left doesn't take up the causes of white people in similar circumstances. But, of course, you knew this. So much for who's dishonest.

Just ignore him from now on. No point in engaging.

 

[ultmd]

Nothing I said is dishonest. I simply stated facts.

"Facts" that you cannot seem to back up. In other words........baseless opinions.

Also, you haven't a clue about how many white people are asked to leave business premises every day across the country.

And you do? Please, post some evidence. Stop talking about your fake "facts", and present some real ones, please. Your entire argument seems to be based upon nothing more than you own personal sense of grievance, mixed with an unhealthy dose of white victimhood.

You're long on personal attacks and extremely short on substance.

Just a breathtaking display of hypocrisy. If he's "short on substance", what the heck are you? You've provided NOTHING of substance to back up your opinions (which you dishonestly describe as "facts") in this thread.

BTW, white people being asked to leave business premises is rarely made into a national controversy. That's why quickly finding an example is not very easy.

:roll: Nonsense. In the REAL WORLD, everyone understands that the REAL reason why there are not many (if any) examples of white people being handcuffed and arrested (not simply "asked to leave") in situations like the Starbucks story is because..........white people are NOT arrested for sitting and waiting for a business meeting at Starbucks. Most rational people understand this. So the problem here is not "Political correctness". The arrests were an outrageous miscarriage of justice, and most people understand that. The real problem here is just more misplaced white resentment and victimhood from people like you who (quite literally) MAKE UP "facts" to re-affirm their existing biases and prejudices.

The left doesn't take up the causes of white people in similar circumstances. But, of course, you knew this. So much for who's dishonest.

Unlike "the Right", "the Left" doesn't promote fake news, lies and conspiracy theories as "the facts the media won't tell you", etc. It's no small coincidence that Americans who rely upon conservative media sources for their news score at the very bottom (even below Americans who don't read or watch ANY daily news sources) on tests of basic current events.

 

[veritas1]

Um-hum... Obvious projection is obvious.



Getting your excuses for failing to back up lies in as early as possible.



You failed two pages ago and were dismissed. Nothing has changed.

Your contention that white people never get tossed out of businesses is utterly laughable. How many white people do we have? How many business establishments do we have? There are millions and millions of interactions daily. Of course white people get asked to leave places. Any claim to the contrary is childish gibberish. It's also amusing and rather sad that you call other people "liars" simply because you don't agree with or can't refute what they say. Very weak indeed.

 

[veritas1]

"Facts" that you cannot seem to back up. In other words........baseless opinions.



And you do? Please, post some evidence. Stop talking about your fake "facts", and present some real ones, please. Your entire argument seems to be based upon nothing more than you own personal sense of grievance, mixed with an unhealthy dose of white victimhood.



Just a breathtaking display of hypocrisy. If he's "short on substance", what the heck are you? You've provided NOTHING of substance to back up your opinions (which you dishonestly describe as "facts") in this thread.



:roll: Nonsense. In the REAL WORLD, everyone understands that the REAL reason why there are not many (if any) examples of white people being handcuffed and arrested (not simply "asked to leave") in situations like the Starbucks story is because..........white people are NOT arrested for sitting and waiting for a business meeting at Starbucks. Most rational people understand this. So the problem here is not "Political correctness". The arrests were an outrageous miscarriage of justice, and most people understand that. The real problem here is just more misplaced white resentment and victimhood from people like you who (quite literally) MAKE UP "facts" to re-affirm their existing biases and prejudices.



Unlike "the Right", "the Left" doesn't promote fake news, lies and conspiracy theories as "the facts the media won't tell you", etc. It's no small coincidence that Americans who rely upon conservative media sources for their news score at the very bottom (even below Americans who don't read or watch ANY daily news sources) on tests of basic current events.

Oh, where to start. Again, how do you know the number of white people arrested under similar circumstances? In the millions of business interactions every day, do you think that NO white people ever get arrested? While the manager has been thrown under the bus by company management, she was following company policy and did what she thought was correct. Yet, she loses her job because the people in question were black. The claims that she never would have called the cops if they were white, are merely rank speculation.

I also have to respond to this fear and victimhood nonsense. You guys pull this out of your fetid bag of tricks at the drop of a hat anytime someone complains about PC culture running roughshod over people. The fact is that PC has utterly taken hold in business, in the media, in education and elsewhere to the point that people are afraid to say much of anything for fear of offending some person or group and then having to be punished themselves. This is little better than how people have to live under totalitarian dictatorships yet you support it. That is why liberalism is anything but liberal. It's all about restrictions, constraints and punishments. It is a danger to true liberty which involves freedom of thought, speech and conscience. When people have to start worrying about "microaggressions" then we really have become a twisted society far from what we were founded as. Oh, and please don't come back with this "you want black people back in chains" crap. That is the refuge of someone incapable of serious debate.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

Your contention that white people never get tossed out of businesses is utterly laughable. How many white people do we have? How many business establishments do we have? There are millions and millions of interactions daily. Of course white people get asked to leave places. Any claim to the contrary is childish gibberish. It's also amusing and rather sad that you call other people "liars" simply because you don't agree with or can't refute what they say. Very weak indeed.

OK, we've gone round the bush twice and I think you need a reminder of exactly what I asked as your reading comprehension has utterly failed you.

"Feel free to find a couple of white men who are asked to leave for doing exactly the same thing that black people are allowed to do on a business premise."

Maybe I could explain it this way - two black men do exactly what other white customers do - but get police called and are arrested. I invited YOU to find me "two white men do exactly what other black customers do - but get police called and are arrested."

One white guy arrested for doing exactly the same thing black customers are doing but are not arrested / harassed by police. Now, I expect you to return to ad hominem or excuse making as that seems to be your argument but I am ambitious in hoping you'll surprise me.

 

[roguenuke]

OK, we've gone round the bush twice and I think you need a reminder of exactly what I asked as your reading comprehension has utterly failed you.

"Feel free to find a couple of white men who are asked to leave for doing exactly the same thing that black people are allowed to do on a business premise."

Maybe I could explain it this way - two black men do exactly what other white customers do - but get police called and are arrested. I invited YOU to find me "two white men do exactly what other black customers do - but get police called and are arrested."

One white guy arrested for doing exactly the same thing black customers are doing but are not arrested / harassed by police. Now, I expect you to return to ad hominem or excuse making as that seems to be your argument but I am ambitious in hoping you'll surprise me.

You would have to find someone who is white who also refused to leave when asked, then refused to leave when police asked, and then did not get arrested. There are factors here on how the situation went that those who were asked to leave need to take responsibility for. I have posted a link that shows that white people have been asked to leave, but the difference is their actions because they did leave before police were called. That is the difference in the situations, not the color of skin or race, but their reaction to the request to leave, regardless of their feelings about that request.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

You would have to find someone who is white who also refused to leave when asked, then refused to leave when police asked, and then did not get arrested. There are factors here on how the situation went that those who were asked to leave need to take responsibility for. I have posted a link that shows that white people have been asked to leave, but the difference is their actions because they did leave before police were called. That is the difference in the situations, not the color of skin or race, but their reaction to the request to leave, regardless of their feelings about that request.

This is the post the person I quoted stated - "If two white guys had been arrested under the identical circumstances, we never would have heard a peep."

I'm asking for that exact same case to be proven. That's all, several others agreed with him so others must believe it happens and media ignore it. Sooooo, I want to see examples.

 

[veritas1]

This is the post the person I quoted stated - "If two white guys had been arrested under the identical circumstances, we never would have heard a peep."

I'm asking for that exact same case to be proven. That's all, several others agreed with him so others must believe it happens and media ignore it. Sooooo, I want to see examples.

I see, so i'm supposed to find two white guys arrested for refusing to leave a Starbucks or similar establishment after the police show up. Why? That wasn't the claim. White people get arrested for refusing to leave places all the time. A Google search can easily establish this. My claim that a similar arrest as this one involving white people would get scant coverage, is true. Yet, you take lack of coverage as evidence that such arrests never happen. Just go find the crime page for any city and you'll see numerous arrests, many of which involve white people on public premises.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

I see, so i'm supposed to find two white guys arrested for refusing to leave a Starbucks or similar establishment after the police show up. Why? That wasn't the claim. White people get arrested for refusing to leave places all the time. A Google search can easily establish this. My claim that a similar arrest as this one involving white people would get scant coverage, is true. Yet, you take lack of coverage as evidence that such arrests never happen. Just go find the crime page for any city and you'll see numerous arrests, many of which involve white people on public premises.

No, you changed the terms of your claim.

I've wasted bandwidth waiting for an honest response and have none so I have to dismiss your claim as a lie and falsehood. You, are equally dismissed.