Leftist Starbucks finds itself in the sites of liberal ire

[_Some Schmo]

I’m still having trouble wrapping my brain around the notion that Starbucks is leftist.

In this context, "leftist" means anyone not outraged by the concept of immigration.

[_Jersey Girl]

I have no idea how the policy was enforced other than what's reported. What I do know is the two men asked to use the restroom, they were told it's for paying customers, they refused to purchase coffee, they were asked to leave, they refused, they were trespassing, and the cops were called.

Buy a cup of coffee and there are no issues. I don't get the black-guy-apologists on this issue.

- Doc

I guess I'm a black guy apologist on the thread, so I'll answer (again). We don't know what the exact conversation was between staff and the two men.

According to reports I've read, one man tried to use the restroom and was declined. The two men took a seat.

They were asked if they wanted to order and they said no.

We don't know if the same staff person handled both interactions. It could have been two separate interactions with two different staff and so there wasn't a "flow" to the exchanges.

"Do you gentlemen want to order?"
"No".

It could have been as simple an exchange as that without any contextual information shared or even a thought on the part of the two men of a NEED to offer contextual information.

The point is... or my point is...is that there were reportedly white customers doing the same damn thing as they were and the only two that were arrested were the two black customers.

Based on what we know, it's racial profiling...how could you not see that?

[Guest]

I have no idea how the policy was enforced other than what's reported. What I do know is the two men asked to use the restroom, they were told it's for paying customers, they refused to purchase coffee, they were asked to leave, they refused, they were trespassing, and the cops were called.

Buy a cup of coffee and there are no issues. I don't get the black-guy-apologists on this issue.

- Doc

I get that, and I don't disagree if that is their actual policy. However I've got plenty of anecdotal evidence that Starbucks is generally pretty okay with loitering (as others have also stated) which is pretty standard practice for basically any coffee shop. This raises a ton of questions about the manager's train of thought around the whole scenario. I think Starbucks response is telling, they fired the manager(?) and said that the situation was handled completely incorrectly, even doubling down with the sensitivity training.

As an aside, I'm with cinepro in that, if the cops followed their protocols on a trespassing call it is hard to blame them in any of this.

ETA: I said Starbucks fired the manager because initial reports I read suggested that was the case. Reading some other articles now I'm not so sure.

[_Jersey Girl]

Why not order a cup of effing coffee and be done with it? They were waiting for the other guy to arrive.

They could have...(I can't believe I'm having to pick apart this crap)

1. Wanted to wait for him to show up to order all at the same time...manners.

2. They were invited by him (a coffee drinker) to meet up there and they weren't planning on ordering at all. They were going to sit there, engage the meeting while he had his coffee. They two black men are Mormons.

3. They weren't sure if he was going to show up so they waited to see if the meeting was still "on".


God, who knows? It's reported (broken record) that there were white customers sitting there without an order.

There were white customers raising hell about why the two men were being arrested.

The other guy arrives and raises mild hell about why the two men were being arrested.

Come on, people. This was BS.

[_Jersey Girl]

As an aside, I'm with cinepro in that, if the cops followed their protocols on a trespassing call it is hard to blame them in any of this.

Did they arrest the two men? If so, did they read them their rights?

[_Xenophon]

As an aside, I'm with cinepro in that, if the cops followed their protocols on a trespassing call it is hard to blame them in any of this.

Did they arrest the two men? If so, did they read them their rights?

I don't have the details on that but personal experience tells me that when it comes to these kinds of smaller crimes they typically don't bother since they aren't planning on interrogating you. I'm sure there are some on the board with more knowledge of that than me though.

[_Res Ipsa]

I’m still having trouble wrapping my brain around the notion that Starbucks is leftist.

It's totally leftist. You should check out their policies, charitable endeavors, and various statements over its history. That said, this should point out that even among leftists you see its ranks full of crypto-racists.

- Doc

Liberal, yes. Leftist? You’ve got to be kidding.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Well. Like god, politics can mean anything to anyone, and words take on whatever meaning we wish. So I'm not sure where to go with the discussion.

- Doc

[_Res Ipsa]

As an aside, I'm with cinepro in that, if the cops followed their protocols on a trespassing call it is hard to blame them in any of this.

Did they arrest the two men? If so, did they read them their rights?

In legal terms, the men were arrested. If I recall correctly, they were not given Miranda warnings.

The police chief apologized for his initial statement that he officers had done nothing wrong, and stated that they had no policy that covered this type of situation.

[_ajax18]

they fired the manager(?) and said that the situation was handled completely incorrectly, even doubling down with the sensitivity training.

I think the manager will have a good case to sue the elites at Starbucks for defamation for calling her racist and incompetent for simply doing what she was more than likely instructed to do by the company. Hit them where it hurts the worst, right in the wallet.

Since they're disparaging her competence as a professional the burden of proof will be upon them to prove that there were white people loitering who were permitted to use the bathroom and hang out and wait for other people without purchasing anything. On top of that you'd have to prove that the police asked white people to leave and that they refused and were subsequently arrested, which we know did not happen. Of course we know the golden rule in civil court. Whoever has the gold makes the rules. I'd be interested to know how much the starbucks elites will lose in attorney fees.