Rush spent some time on this story today. Apparently, two black men entered a Starbucks to “wait for a friend.” They did not buy anything and also wanted to use the bathroom. The manager called the cops.
Starbucks CEO, Kevin Johnson is embarrassed; therefore 8,000 Starbucks locations will close May 29, for sensitivity training.
I cannot imagine taking up space, using a table, chairs, etc. that belong to a restaurant or coffee shop without being a paying customer. This would be even more true if the place was busy and I might be taking up space that rightly belongs to a paying customer.
I guess I was raised differently; not in a cave by wolves.
That's their story, and of course Starbutts jumps on it as a method to achieve mass marketing reach with the story, free advertising other than the lost revenue for the stores but it's part of the "we appreciate the victim of xxx" strategy..
Posts: 24725 | Location: Gunshine State | Registered: November 07, 2008
As I understand it, the supervising officer on the scene and the Police Commissioner, who are both black, say this issue wasn't racist, just simple trespassing by two men who refused to leave, even at the officers' request.
If I were Starbucks, I would get all the information first, then decide whether the incident had any racial component.
Originally posted by TigerDore:...If I were Starbucks, I would get all the information first, then decide whether the incident had any racial component. .
I think they already know it wasn't racial, they are using this as a marketing ploy. But there's a chance it could backfire, attract more "trespassers".
"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women. When it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it....While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it" - Judge Learned Hand, May 1944
Posts: 30668 | Location: UT | Registered: November 11, 2003
My guess is that these were two guys looking to advance an agenda. They had every opportunity to defuse the situation. All they had to do was spend $1 and buy a cookie or shot of espresso and the store would have been happy to have them sit and enjoy it. Or they could have left when the manager asked them to. Or they could have left when the cops asked them to. Instead they chose to get arrested so that they could be national news. And now they are.
Posts: 6084 | Location: FL | Registered: March 09, 2009
Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan: My guess is that these were two guys looking to advance an agenda. They had every opportunity to defuse the situation. All they had to do was spend $1 and buy a cookie or shot of espresso and the store would have been happy to have them sit and enjoy it. Or they could have left when the manager asked them to. Or they could have left when the cops asked them to. Instead they chose to get arrested so that they could be national news. And now they are.
Stop making sense. - David Byrne
_______________________________________________________ despite them
Posts: 13799 | Location: Wyoming | Registered: January 10, 2008
My problem with this is; the manager was following her store's policy, her call to the police was calm and non-racial in her description, and the corporation fired her (likely for the social impact).
I foresee the young lady in question (the manager) seeing a sudden financial windfall for wrongful termination (likely to be settled out of court) when the fact it was the store's policy to make that call and the company was willing to lose upwards of $16M in a effort to maintain a certain social perception of their stores.
Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.
"If dogs don't go to Heaven, I want to go where they go" Will Rogers
The definition of the words we used, carry a meaning of their own...
Posts: 14269 | Location: It was Lat: 33.xxxx Lon: 44.xxxx now it's CA :( | Registered: March 22, 2008
Originally posted by TigerDore: If I were Starbucks, I would get all the information first, then decide whether the incident had any racial component.
.
Starbucks is a liberal owned and operated company making any chance of rationally handling this issue impossible. And I 100% agree this is a marketing stunt. I've never liked anything about the Starbucks' experience and have never purchased a thing from them. This BS will only harden my resolve to never step foot into one of their ridiculous hipster stores.
----------------------------- Guns are awesome because they shoot solid lead freedom. Every man should have several guns. And several dogs, because a man with a cat is a woman. Kurt Schlichter
And, with this little virtue-signalling stunt, the already-high odds against my ever again partaking of Starbucks' products just went even higher.
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living." -- Seneca the Younger, Roman Stoic philosopher
Originally posted by LS1 GTO:...I foresee the young lady in question (the manager) seeing a sudden financial windfall for wrongful termination (likely to be settled out of court) when the fact it was the store's policy to make that call and the company was willing to lose upwards of $16M in a effort to maintain a certain social perception of their stores.
Seems to me there's a good chance you are correct here.
"Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women. When it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it....While it lies there, it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it" - Judge Learned Hand, May 1944
Posts: 30668 | Location: UT | Registered: November 11, 2003
I believe Starsucks has stated they aren't going to change their "anti-loitering" policy, even though they're closing 8,000+ stores one day to browbeat their employees with "sensitivity training."
You can't truly call yourself "peaceful" unless you are capable of great violence. If you're not capable of great violence, you're not peaceful, you're harmless.
NRA Benefactor/Patriot Member
Posts: 2857 | Location: Peoples Republic of North Virginia | Registered: December 04, 2015
Originally posted by fpuhan: I believe Starsucks has stated they aren't going to change their "anti-loitering" policy, even though they're closing 8,000+ stores one day to browbeat their employees with "sensitivity training."
For some reason, I sense that only white men will be capable of loitering.
_______________________________________________________ despite them
Posts: 13799 | Location: Wyoming | Registered: January 10, 2008
Ever notice there isn’t any Starbucks in the ghetto? This is why. Starbucks is a business, black folks don’t buy $5 coffee.
______________________________ Men who carry guns for a living do not seek reward outside of the guild. The most cherished gift is a nod from his peers.
Posts: 1983 | Location: DFW | Registered: December 17, 2007
