Arrested for being black in Starbucks
- Thread starter rafterman
- Start date
Nor will there be any unless the manager admits her motivation for engaging the two guys. But while there are certain times people playing the race card are clearly stretching it, do you really believe race wasn't a factor. Whether it was the manager who asked the two to leave for a garbage reason or the cops who arrested and held them for a nothing reason, there clearly was some racist overtones. Do you think the exact same thing would have happened if the two guys weren't black? In most other situations, the manager doesn't bother and while the cops had the right to intervene it should have ended when the guys agreed to leave. There was no reason to arrest them. People need to exercise a little judgement and clearly very little was used in this situation.
O
OnTheWayOut
Perhaps this will shed some light on the racial discussion. Having grown up and lived most of my life near Philly I learned early in life to embrace AA folks and count many as lifelong friends.
To my amazement blacks now outnumber whites in Philly. I knew there a LOT of blacks, just not to this degree. Given the fact they are the majority, and have been nearly equal in number for decades ...... I don't see racism as a huge issue in the area. Which makes anyone with common sense expect that the manager most likely was not racially motivated in their decision. Seems all those white folks leaving Philly are the bigots, leaving more reasonable folks to coexist.
http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/le...ve/philadelphiapopulationethnicchangespdf.pdf
To my amazement blacks now outnumber whites in Philly. I knew there a LOT of blacks, just not to this degree. Given the fact they are the majority, and have been nearly equal in number for decades ...... I don't see racism as a huge issue in the area. Which makes anyone with common sense expect that the manager most likely was not racially motivated in their decision. Seems all those white folks leaving Philly are the bigots, leaving more reasonable folks to coexist.
http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/le...ve/philadelphiapopulationethnicchangespdf.pdf
From what I have seen on CNN which included a person who recorded the incident.
The two guys were waiting for a third person who arrived at the time of the arrest. In fact I think the guy who was late was white and asking the cops "what did they do?"
I don't know about you guys but I have been to countless places where I say something along the lines of "no thanks, I'm waiting for a friend.... I'll order something when they get here"
The two guys were waiting for a third person who arrived at the time of the arrest. In fact I think the guy who was late was white and asking the cops "what did they do?"
I don't know about you guys but I have been to countless places where I say something along the lines of "no thanks, I'm waiting for a friend.... I'll order something when they get here"
+1. Never had any issue anywhere.
For those protesting that this wasn't about race, I would love an explanation from you about the training all employees were required to undergo. Pretty sure that proves it.
Ha ha.
That proves shit.
All it proves is that Starbucks pushed the panic button because they are terrified at being labelled as racist in any way shape or form. Playing the "racist card" has become the go to response when any non white person feels put upon. It's predictable and it's boring. Starbucks doesn't like the word racism associated with it.
What is needed is a company policy on allowing (or not allowing) people to hang out in the store and use washrooms whether they buy something or not. For example if Starbucks puts in place a policy that says, "all members of the public are allowed to use the washrooms whether they purchase anything or not without question" . It's very clear and easy and staff now know that their stores are a public toilet. End of story.
Similarly, a policy that says, "all members of the public are allowed to sit in the store, whether they buy anything or not, for as long as they like, doing anything they like"
I think this would be crazy myself, however, it is clear and their are no "save and excepts" requiring interpretation on the part of staff.
'twas hilarious reading the words of those falling over themselves to justify what happened. Talking about "buy something so that would be the end of it," especially when the White ones didn't have to do any of that in order to stay. Even the White ones there were like "WTF"
Good to know there are still fair minded people in the privileged class. Nothing will change unless they remain fair minded, and grow in number.
Good to know there are still fair minded people in the privileged class. Nothing will change unless they remain fair minded, and grow in number.
Nonsense.
I'm lily white and I have been in situations where I have been told I have to buy something.
Hell, I can remember situations where I needed change and gone to a variety store and asked for them to change paper into coin and have been told no, I had to buy something. I usually buy a pack of gum.
It has nothing to do with race.
While being white doesn't guarantee you will always get away with murder, citing a few instances where you were treated equally doesn't prove anything as there are plenty of times where you will get preferential treatment and in most cases, won't even know it.
I just read an opinion piece in the Globe that said indigenous and black people are more likely to be charged with Marijuana possession - 5-10 times. Now, just because a few white people come forward saying they were charged, doesn't mean there isn't systemic racism.
Uh huh.
Did they have the marijuana in their pocket to a point where they were breaking the law or not? If they were framed because they were black, then I'd agree with you. But if they did the crime, then so be it.
Besides, that wasn't my point. My point is very simple. Starbucks and other businesses are running a business. They are not charities. As such, they are free to set their own policies and if their policy says you need to buy something in order to sit in the place, or use the washroom, then that is their right and it's reasonable. If they choose to set a policy that anyone and everyone is free to sit in the store as long as they like and not buy anything and use the washrooms to boot, then that is their right as well as the purveyors of the establishment. (But they won't be in business very long.) So be it. It's my choice to agree to their rules, or to leave. It's really quite simple and there is nothing discriminatory about it.
My point is that I have been asked to buy something in the past if I wanted to frequent the establishment, I've been told that if I want change, then I need to buy something to get change. I remember one time going in my youth going to an outdoor patio in Yorkville one summer evening with a couple of friends. I'm not a big drinker, but I liked going to bars from time to time. I was with my friends and I ordered a coke and the waitress scowled at me and told me that a coke was going to cost whatever high price it cost. The implication was that I was broke-assed and that was why I was ordering a coke and not alcohol. I sensed her attitude right away and responded that the price was no problem, and I was ordering a coke because I was driving my friends home that night and maybe I didn't want to be an asshole and drink and drive. (All of which was true.) Anyway, she must have thought about it and she came back and apologized and gave me my coke on the house.
So maybe it wouldn't have killed the 2 black guys at Starbucks to buy a lousy cookie between them for 2 bucks. I really don't see the big deal being asked to buy a cookie. You're going to eat the cookie in the end. And everyone ends up happy. Starbucks sells a cookie, you eat a cookie and everyone lives happily ever after. But no.
It's just silly already if people think that that is somehow racist.
If I was the manager who had been fired, I would be suing Starbucks right now for unfair dismissal (Unless of course they have a policy of letting anyone and everyone sit there all day without buying anything, in which case, too bad for the manager.)
*sigh* Who cares about your experience. There were white people at that VERY Starbucks doing the same damn thing as the two guys, and weren't harassed. They stepped up to the plate.
It had everything to do with race.
Please post links backing up your statement that there were "white people at that very same Starbucks doing the same damn thinking"
Here you go. The woman that recorded this says it was a common thing there.
https://twitter.com/missydepino/sta...ladelphia-police-starbucks-arrests/index.html
Fascinating. The fact we immediately reach for a "race" explanation and that this is even a story, is testament to the degree to which our society has lost the plot. Did the manager err in calling police, maybe. We probably won't ever know. In fact we won't ever know the whole story, but to me it just seems like another example of the kind of virtue signaling and moral panic that seems to exemplify mainstream thought on every issue that touches race or gender.
These two fellows refused to make a purchase, refused to leave and then (according to the police), also refused the police request for them to leave and made smart ass comments to the cops ("you're just a 45 000/year civil servant").
If two white fellows had behaved in exactly the same way, we wouldn't even be having the discussion.
These two fellows refused to make a purchase, refused to leave and then (according to the police), also refused the police request for them to leave and made smart ass comments to the cops ("you're just a 45 000/year civil servant").
If two white fellows had behaved in exactly the same way, we wouldn't even be having the discussion.
Just to go back to that point about marijuana, it is almost certainly a case of discrimination. Say the amount was 10X - are there 10X more black people than whites? No. Are there 10X more black marijuana smokers than whites? No. What the charges stem from is (1) more searches of black people than white people and (2) choosing to charge the person when the marijuana is found. Of course (in most cases) the person is probably guilty but there is a double standard of treatment.
Similarly, many ladies state they've been let off by cops when stopped for a traffic offense. Many people who know or have family members who are police claim they too have been let off. I know a "famous" person (well known in some circles) who was doing well over 150 on the highway and was let go. So when I or somebody I know gets charged for a traffic offense, you think we are wrong in being upset since a bunch of others always get off? It's not fair.
Discrimination occurs when different people are treated differently under the same circumstances. There is little doubt in my mind that there are probably a few others who have loitered about in Starbucks and didn't end up in police detention. That is discrimination. And yes, while in principle the manager was correct - they asked the two to leave and they didn't so perhaps calling the police was justified, I'm sure (1) a few others if every asked would have made the same scene and refused to buy and (2) the police wouldn't have arrested them and held them for an excessive period. There are plenty of non-violent minor crimes that people and law enforcement overlook because they really aren't serious or worth the effort. Yet it always seems some people are continually harassed by police for these crimes, especially black and indigenous people.
Again, citing a few examples where you received the same treatment serves little purpose unless you can demonstrate that others received different treatment. Have others entered the store asking for change and been given it without having to make a purchase?
Do you really think two white guys would have ended up in police custody just the same? I've seen a few people in different situations making a scene at a store/restaurant - police are never involved. Given the idea that being arrested for not making a purchase in Starbucks is in itself newsworthy as it's clearly overkill, I'm sure a story or two would have made the news if the same thing happened to anyone.
I have never been to Northern Ontario or anywhere West (prairies, BC). But I know a few people who have and they say the racism they see displayed towards indigenous people is appalling. I wouldn't be surprised if something similar has happened or would happen if the two guys were indigenous instead of black and the Starbucks was in certain parts of Canada.
Precisely
They were not arrested for not making a purchase in Starbucks. They were arrested for not leaving private property, when asked, politely, three times.
Correct but it stemmed from not making a purchase. And I think most people would either be dumbfounded or even a bit belligerent in the same situation, let alone two black guys who might immediately think the actions were unjustified. The problem is that many of us have no idea what it's like to be discriminated against repeatedly because of color. I imagine when these situations arise, the first thing the victim thinks is they are being accosted because of their color.
I remember once sitting in a fairly busy restaurant where I'd reserved a table for 12. Only 3 people showed up on time and it took 30-45 min for the remainder to show. I just drank water and waited to order. Wasn't given the 3rd degree about waiting for others. Obviously not the same situation but most people aren't anal about it.
