Cops Arrest 2 Black Men Sitting In Starbucks For ‘Trespassing’: Video

Because three of my posts were wiped out for dubious reasons let me post again this link demonstrating how the sort of policy
that a conscientious manager tried to enforce in Philadelphia is not racist or racially motivated despite what posters that deal in racial animus
claim. They can't afford to look at this issue honestly. I can.

http://gawker.com/5827354/starbucks-wants-you-laptop-hobos-out
http://www.businessinsider.com/coffee-shops-are-banning-laptops-2013-7

 

Again a couple of opinion pieces don't cut it. Please post where Starbucks claims they are going to stop allowing folks to come in and use their laptops.

 

out for a ride on my motorcycle today stopped for a quick coffee at Starbucks, 8-10 people on their laptops, one business meeting, a couple uni students studying... one of the laptop users a 'white' guy didn't even have a coffee and no one asked him to leave...

 

Oh you just don't do it.

Well one thing for sure, I haven't heard anyone that was at Starbucks that day agree with your opinion of what happened that's for damn sure.

Yea they never go to coffee shops or restaurants. smh.

Basically it's a dumb ass idea. When someone invites you out for dinner do you order, eat and pay and then have them reimburse you as you are passing them out the door.

There you go thinking again. These two young men are college educated.

Funny that you keep saying that, but you have yet to post ONE Starbucks rule that they broke.

Now here is what the CEO says,

It just chaps your ass that the CEO doesn't see these young men as you do as parasites.

Unfortunately none of this fits the asinine crap you have been spewing.

 

Wow amazing how that works.

 

Special corporate policy was instituted especially for central Philadelphia
because of the loitering problems they had there.were so bad. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...stomers-claims-loitering-ongoing-problem.html
People think they can go to a Starbucks in the middle of nowhere for a few minutes, look around and have it all figured out.

 

nope I was there before him and at this same starbucks a 'white' women a regular comes in at lunch time, sits down eats her home made lunch, reads a book for 45 minutes and leaves without ever ordering...and as I've already posted I've also sat for long periods and no one has ever asked me to leave.

 

They brought their own coffee into the store? That is certainly new information.

 

Her name is Holly Hylton, give her a buzz. It's obvious at this point her opinion wasn't the one that counted.

You mean more of the truth you are in denial of.

When did they refuse to order something or did they say they were waiting on someone else to arrive.

[Quote ]They have yet to explain why. Why not order something, anything?
Why refuse to leave. Why force the cops to take you out in handcuffs?[/quote]

Sure they have, watch their various interviews.

Ah so their answers don't satisfy you, I am pretty sure nothing they could say would satisfy you.

See these are the answers that show you are talkin out your ass. Don't sit in a Starbucks sometime and watch what the customers actually do and learn what the establishment actually is.

That statement pretty much says it all.

Who says they were not going to get anything, why is it so hard for you to understand that the man they will work waiting on what's actually buying the coffee. Because they are too young black man does that not compute in that brain of yours.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.time.../starbucks-vague-policies-nonpaying-customers

Actually it isn't.

What's the maximum effective range of an excuse? 0 meters.

 

They refused to order something because they said they were waiting on someone else. The policy at those Philadelphia Starbucks was to
reduce the number of people loitering in their shops.

If the manager requests that you order or leave, it's not your business and not your choice to make. When the police showed up and asked the two big shots to leave they still refused. That's when they were taken out for trespassing.

They could have simply ordered some coffee, when requested, and headed off this whole racist **** up. But they chose to make an issue of this. Not Starbucks..



.






.

 

And the problem with that is.......

They were not loitering, and the man that they were waiting on actually showed up.

It's a good thing the young black men in North Carolina didn't agree with that when they were asked to leave.

.........and then later they were apologized to.....

No the manager could have treated them in the same manner she treated the white customers instead of embarrassing the company.



.

 

Her posts pretty much speak for themselves.

 

They use left as an insult. Cute, huh?
(More juvenile playground ****.)

 

I wonder how many whites were freaking lynched for insulting blacks?

**********************************

According to the Tuskegee Institute, 38% of victims of lynching were accused of murder, 16% of rape, 7% for attempted rape, 6% were accused of felonious assault, 7% for theft, 2% for insult to white people and 24% were accused of miscellaneous offenses or no offense.[117]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_in_the_United_States

 

Great! Then we are even.

 

If that were true then they would have been simply walked outside.

 

Oh ffs.
How many were lynched JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR?
Get back to me when you find THOSE numbers.

 

They were asked to actually purchase something and refused. That's loitering.

As the police were leading the free loaders out the door.
The two facts, when the man finally showed up (just as police arrived, which was conveniently coincidental) and the fact that
the free loaders had been loitering for some time before being asked to purchase something have nothing to do with each other.
There is no cause and effect there. See if you get your awesome mind around that.

So what? What has the one to do with the other?

So what again? How does caving in to political pressure
change the loitering, for which Starbucks formulated special policy to end the problem of dead beats and parasites in their Philadelphia locations?

You have zero evidence she didn't. The bleating anecdotal comments of a few shocked guilty minded white people does not constitute fact but opinion only.

 

Just sitting there (them) and using an excuse (you groping) are vastly different.

 

Mind boggling, huh?

 

Yah, there's no racism yet they are doing seminars on racial profiling.

Bahahahaaahaaahaaa...you people are doing backflips rather than admit there might be racism there.

 

DailyWire? Really? Can I use HuffPo without you bitching about it's bias then? Or Snopes?

 

Are ***** and mf tied to any race? I didn't think so.
He's not offended by the vulgarity....it's the "n" word that is despicable.

 

Interesting. What do you mean by "you people"? I never said there was no racism involved; I said that only one person knows for sure and everyone else is either guessing or being dishonest. These men will receive settlements with the wording "Without admitting guilt..." and having racial sensitivity training is wise PR move considering we live in a society with an itchy trigger finger when it comes to racism claims. That is not an admission of guilt either.

After they closed their real estate deal, it would be interesting to see what the two men would do if there was a squatter on the property.

 

The entire time that the two young black men were there without ordering anything, no-one asked them to leave. But then they went to the Manager and wanted the code for the bathroom. It was then that the Manager informed them that the bathrooms were for paying customers. I assume they gave the Manager attitude. At which point the Manager asked them to either purchase something or leave according to store policy. Again they said nope. We're neither purchasing nor leaving. Manager threatens to call the Police. Again they say nope, not leaving, not buying, and you can call the Police because we don't care. So the Police are called and come. The two squatters refuse the Police and insult them as well. So they get arrested and rightly so. My main point is that were this a case of racism, they would have been singled out during the time they were inside sitting and not purchasing anything. It wasn't until they wanted the bathroom codes that the trouble began. I think the troublemakers are rotten. And the Starbucks CEO is a spineless slimebucket. And I hope at least that the Manager sues them till it hurts.