Starbucks Revisited: Any changed minds?

If the man was treated differently because of his skin color .. that's clearly ugly and wrong. If he is simply acting in the same manner as others similarly situated and the store manager singles him out as black .. then the store manager needs to go.

On the other hand, I can not imagine the idea that I have a right to sit in somebody's business .. occupy their tables and seating, avail myself of their wifi, AC and other amenities .. without any sort of purchase or consideration as a customer? Who has this right (white, black or blue)? And further .. that I have a right to refuse to leave upon being requested to do so by an employee (and subsequently by uniformed police) .. still with no offer to purchase any item sold by the store?

Apparently the men in the video feel they have a right to do these things .. but I have strong doubts.
So, no .. I haven't really changed my mind to any great degree .. in the wake of "subsequent events."

asked to leave, even though they hadn't bought anything.

And people sit in Starbucks all the time using their wifi, ac and other amenities. That's Starbucks' business model.

Here's how I handle this. "Yes, I'm meeting a friend here. I'm sorry for any inconvenience. He/she should have been here by now .. but I would be happy to order an xyz while I'm waiting.

I've never in my life assumed I could seat myself in a business that I wasn't patronizing. I'm sorry but I just don't think it's a thing.

She called the police on them anyway.

I can't believe you're trying to defend that manager's actions or suggest it was these young men's fault that she treated them the way she did.

And yes, this IS a thing - at least for people who get treated like this regularly only to be told by some white people that it's just not "a thing" because if they had only talked nicely to the racist white lady in charge, she wouldn't have called the police and had them hauled off to jail for not buying a cup of coffee.

To people who have to put up with this day in and day out it is definitely a thing. I guess you haven't been paying attention.

It's baffling that people STILL defend it here.

We've so lost our way over the years here.

"Why, if *I* were there *I* would have done thus and so. If they had just done what *I* would have done, none of this would have happened" because we all know that the only reason black men are ever treated badly is that they don't behave themselves as well as white people.

"I can't believe you're trying to defend that manager's actions or suggest it was these young men's fault that she treated them the way she did."

There was nothing even suggesting this in the post you responded to. My post outlined (one possible) path of polite behavior and (hopeful) resolution. As with, perhaps, an offer to purchase an item in return for usage of store amenities?

And .. what I said I did not believe was a "thing" (fairly clearly and explicitly) was seating yourself at a business's tables and chairs .. with no intention of purchase. If you have grown up to think this is a right .. then, yes, we do disagree on that.

He was waiting for a friend so they'd have hot coffee at the same time. This is very common.

defuses the situation.
(on the other hand, if you've been there for 20-30' .. friend still hasn't showed up .. it's time to place your order. otherwise you're just camping out.)

and she called the police. Were you part of the discussions then?

I can’t believe you would keep insisting that if only these young black men had been more "polite" and offered to do something that no white person in the store was required to do (and which they actually did offer to do), that would have prevented the store manager from having them arrested. In other words, like too many other people, you put the blame on THEM for the racist manner in which they were treated and not on the people who singled them out for treatment not accorded to white people doing the exact thing they were.

And yes, from a legal standpoint, if a store invites people to come in and use its amenities and has no stated or posted policy requiring that guests must buy something within minutes of entering the premises before they may use said amenities, and allows everyone who came in previously to use those amenities without purchasing anything, then people do indeed have a right to come in and sit down without immediately making a purchase and they also have a right not to be arrested and jailed for trespassing when ordered out of the restaurant as the white people who were also in there having purchased nothing look on.

Even Starbucks and the police acknowledged that when they disciplined the manager and dropped charges. The question is why are you still making a bogus, tone-deaf argument that not even the people who engaged in the wrongdoing dropped two years ago?

Your user name offers a hint here.

That being said, I don't do Starbucks. EVER. Their coffee is crappy and I don't drink the 5,000 calorie sugar bombs either.

If I get coffee out, I go to a local place.

This was yet another example of how black men are treated as criminals.

It was bad before and has escalated under trump. The woman that called the police at Starbucks? She is your typical Karen who we keep seeing more of when black people walk, cookout in the park, unlock their front door, do their jobs, write BLM on their OWN retaining wall, well...frankly just exist.

That T-Shirt, perfect and true. Sigh.

When they had done nothing of the kind.

They were just sitting there.

Sound familiar?

Very familiar.

highly ranked democratic state senators/congresscritters need to be published and put on people's phones in their contacts.

EVERY SINGLE TIME a member of the public sees this kind of police brutality/profiling, people need to start smiling and dialing, and give the powers that be over these officers enough grief that they finally give in and start training these assholes!!! Let one person take the video, maybe two, and everyone else needs to call their bosses, the elected officials.

Looks like he won a settlement so obviously they were wrong.

He could easily have died that day.

Easily.

I went to college there.

The most hated person in the world (besides Richard Nixon) was the police commissioner, Frank Rizzo. How he ever made it to that position, I'll never know. A sadistic lout, he took great pleasure in hearing that his cops beat people over the head with their nightsticks.

He soon ran for mayor as a Democrat. I was so disgusted that he was even nominated, I voted for his opponent. It was my first vote ever, and the one and only time in my life I ever voted for a Republican. I don't regret it to this day. He soon switched parties anyway, and went to hang with "his friend," Nixon. He was soon gone, anyway, when it was discovered he was building a $400,000 house on a $40,000 salary.

The manager was quickly removed and fired by middle management after prompt investigation. There was no question of whether Starbucks would protect this behavior. Starbucks' COO, I believe it was, was a black woman. The white male CEO also felt it best to make a very strong statement affirming Starbucks' commitment to all its customers.

And overall, DUers had immediately already leaped in with that typical DU outrage at first mention of this incident. Whoever you remember voicing initial questions or doubts would have been promptly leaped on. As usual.

This syndrome is not always entirely admirable, so let's at least give credit to DUers where, in retrospect, we knew from almost the very beginning that it was very appropriate.

The same now also for DUers' unflagging commitment to equality since then, including our enormous, proud support for the marches this summer. Just wish I wasn't very at-risk with an 80-year-old husband and didn't dare march myself. I virtually never drive to Tampa or Orlando, but for a magnificent national coming together like that I would have. Had to settle for just being among the 77% of all Americans who supported the marches.

Now, if you like, we could speculate about whether that manager and those officers have changed their minds, which we all know really needed changing.

You might have saved yourself some time and effort.

and emphasizing bad in whole populations, denying when not ignoring the good. Quite the contrary.

When we're thinking of how to be better people, we'd do a lot worse than just trying to be the person we think others should be.

another angle. But the higher we set our standards for others, the harder it can be for us to meet them. Sometimes impossible.

The post itself is gibberish and completely off-topic.

For example, what does “I see no virtue in looking for and emphasizing bad in whole populations, denying when not ignoring the good” have to do with whether a store manager was correct to have a black man arrested when he didn’t buy a coffee in Starbucks?

Maybe you could reword it to better express your viewpoint and how it relates to the topic at hand?

Me too.

Since I felt a crowd who initially assumed the police behavior was justified would fail to appear and answer, I thought perhaps we could discuss another issue that affects all of us: Our own behaviors and attitudes toward others -- not just among that missing crowd, but all of us. If you're not in the mood to think about that, okay. It's not what you posted for.

But these are not new ideas, and everyone does understand them. Some good people manage to live them most of the time. Can we agree that if more try to do it better we will have the world we say we want for our children? Where people are no longer stupidly and meanly judged and condemned by the color of their skin?

Cannot imagine spending multi-bucks on one of their sugar shakes. Or spending good money for a black coffee. My French press is great.

I'm wondering if thosewho thought Rayshard Brooks was "dangerous" and "potentially lethal" still agree with their intitial assessment.