TexasCHLforum.com

Bitter Clinger wrote:

cyphertext wrote:

Bitter Clinger wrote:So, you are supposed to hold it until after you receive your drink?

They didn't order a drink. Had they ordered something, this might not have been an issue.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious and avoiding answering the question.

They had no intention of ordering... just loitering.

Loiters should be booted.

This isn't california.

Non spending louts should not be tolerated.

Abraham wrote:Loiters should be booted.

This isn't california.

Non spending louts should not be tolerated.

I actually agree with you (within reason). Folks should eat their meal / drink their coffee and move on. A lot of folks disagree with us, though.

One of my pet peeves is folks who want to linger over their meal at a restaurant. It is not uncommon for me to sit down after others have started eating, and I am able to place my order, eat my food, and pay the check while they are still eating their entrees. This is when I am with my wife. When I am by myself, there is an even greater disparity between myself and the loiterers. I want to tell them "look buddy, move on with the rest of your day / night / week. Other people are waiting for a table." And it's not just California. This tendency to loiter, long after you have had a reasonable amount of time to consume whatever you ordered, is alive and well in Texas.

I fear that we are in the minority, though. At least it would appear that this is the case based on what I have seen. But businesses are free to have whatever policy they choose. As long as they make the policy clear and apply it consistently, I really don't have an issue with it.

Restaurants aren't designated hang out places.

Bars are.

Want to hang out?

Go to bar, but if you think you'll get to stay without buying drinks, you'll be tossed out too.

what... the... heck... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-phil ... SKBN1HO2UF

*sigh*

I am seriously tired of this whole racism nonsense. Starbucks was only enforcing their company policy (no loitering), which they do very consistently without prejudice. Now, they are caving into the whole liberal ideology that injects racism into events that don't have any racial prejudices to begin with.

I agree, eat/drink and move on. If you don’t order anything, move on! There are limited tables.

Questions:
Have they loitered there before?
Where customers complaining?
Bad language or did an employee feel threatened?
Can a LEO not ask someone to leave or move on that makes others feel (put word here).
If a business can’t tell a person to leave, why can it be legal to post a 30.06?

From what I saw somewhere the 2 men were waiting for a 3rd person to show and perhaps at that point they would have ordered. I go out for dinner with friends all the time and we occupy a table and wait for the entire crew to show before we order. Nobody has ever asked me to leave while we wait for our slow poke friends. I guess if they ordered us out and we refused we would be trespassing. I don't go to Starbucks but my understanding is that they pride themselves as a sit down, use their wifi, conduct your business and socialize as need be. The price they charge for coffee I guess they can afford that kind of reputation. I don't know if this was a racially caused event or not but I think that it could be interpreted that way. Finally, there is a McDonalds in Decateur that we always stop on our way to the metroplex with nice clean restrooms. Sometimes we buy food, sometimes not. And restaurants are not just for meals but also much business is conducted after a meal and a drink. When I go out with the wife I try not to abuse my time and make others wait but when I have reserved a table for business purposes I don't feel that I have to rush out because there is a line at the door.

rotor wrote:From what I saw somewhere the 2 men were waiting for a 3rd person to show and perhaps at that point they would have ordered. I go out for dinner with friends all the time and we occupy a table and wait for the entire crew to show before we order. Nobody has ever asked me to leave while we wait for our slow poke friends. I guess if they ordered us out and we refused we would be trespassing. I don't go to Starbucks but my understanding is that they pride themselves as a sit down, use their wifi, conduct your business and socialize as need be. The price they charge for coffee I guess they can afford that kind of reputation. I don't know if this was a racially caused event or not but I think that it could be interpreted that way. Finally, there is a McDonalds in Decateur that we always stop on our way to the metroplex with nice clean restrooms. Sometimes we buy food, sometimes not. And restaurants are not just for meals but also much business is conducted after a meal and a drink. When I go out with the wife I try not to abuse my time and make others wait but when I have reserved a table for business purposes I don't feel that I have to rush out because there is a line at the door.

As with most everything, it is situationally dependent. Starbucks does tend to market themselves as a place to hang out. More of an experience than just a place to drink your coffee and be on your way.

But there are other situations where you really do need to get moving. My wife and I went to a very popular BBQ place in Saint Louis. The line took 2+ hours, and as we were waiting, they periodically crossed things off the white board as they ran out. We eventually got to the fairly small dining area and they were actively shooing people off the tables after they had finished eating. Given the situation, most folks took it upon themselves to eat with some haste so it was only needed in a couple cases that I saw. Basically, someone would come by and clear the table for you. If you didn't take the hint within a few minutes, a manager came by to ask you politely to leave so others could sit down.

In the video, it didn't look like the place was full, and the two guys appeared to be calm, even after they were confronted by police. Witnesses came to the men's defense at the time and later when talking to reporters. Starbucks' CEO has made it clear that the manager's actions were against company policy. So I think it is safe to say that the manager exercised poor judgment. Was this motivated by racism? Who knows. It could be that the manager didn't like men (I think I saw that the manager is a woman), or it could just be that she was having a bad day. Or maybe she ran her Starbucks location like the "soup nazi" from Seinfeld and routinely told everyone who sat down without buying something to get out immediiately. Regardless, the men were also at fault for not leaving when asked. That part is simple. If you are on someone else's property and they ask you to leave, then leave. They could have complained later to corporate if they thought the manager was out of line.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/bus ... black-men/

Starbucks to close 8,000 stores for racial-bias education on May 29 after arrest of two black men

It would be great if the freeloading loiterers boycotted Starbucks!

#BlackCoffeeMatters

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

rotor wrote:From what I saw somewhere the 2 men were waiting for a 3rd person to show and perhaps at that point they would have ordered. I go out for dinner with friends all the time and we occupy a table and wait for the entire crew to show before we order. Nobody has ever asked me to leave while we wait for our slow poke friends. I guess if they ordered us out and we refused we would be trespassing. I don't go to Starbucks but my understanding is that they pride themselves as a sit down, use their wifi, conduct your business and socialize as need be. The price they charge for coffee I guess they can afford that kind of reputation. I don't know if this was a racially caused event or not but I think that it could be interpreted that way. Finally, there is a McDonalds in Decateur that we always stop on our way to the metroplex with nice clean restrooms. Sometimes we buy food, sometimes not. And restaurants are not just for meals but also much business is conducted after a meal and a drink. When I go out with the wife I try not to abuse my time and make others wait but when I have reserved a table for business purposes I don't feel that I have to rush out because there is a line at the door.

As with most everything, it is situationally dependent. Starbucks does tend to market themselves as a place to hang out. More of an experience than just a place to drink your coffee and be on your way.

But there are other situations where you really do need to get moving. My wife and I went to a very popular BBQ place in Saint Louis. The line took 2+ hours, and as we were waiting, they periodically crossed things off the white board as they ran out. We eventually got to the fairly small dining area and they were actively shooing people off the tables after they had finished eating. Given the situation, most folks took it upon themselves to eat with some haste so it was only needed in a couple cases that I saw. Basically, someone would come by and clear the table for you. If you didn't take the hint within a few minutes, a manager came by to ask you politely to leave so others could sit down.

In the video, it didn't look like the place was full, and the two guys appeared to be calm, even after they were confronted by police. Witnesses came to the men's defense at the time and later when talking to reporters. Starbucks' CEO has made it clear that the manager's actions were against company policy. So I think it is safe to say that the manager exercised poor judgment. Was this motivated by racism? Who knows. It could be that the manager didn't like men (I think I saw that the manager is a woman), or it could just be that she was having a bad day. Or maybe she ran her Starbucks location like the "soup nazi" from Seinfeld and routinely told everyone who sat down without buying something to get out immediiately. Regardless, the men were also at fault for not leaving when asked. That part is simple. If you are on someone else's property and they ask you to leave, then leave. They could have complained later to corporate if they thought the manager was out of line.

When asked to leave, you leave

Allons wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

rotor wrote:From what I saw somewhere the 2 men were waiting for a 3rd person to show and perhaps at that point they would have ordered. I go out for dinner with friends all the time and we occupy a table and wait for the entire crew to show before we order. Nobody has ever asked me to leave while we wait for our slow poke friends. I guess if they ordered us out and we refused we would be trespassing. I don't go to Starbucks but my understanding is that they pride themselves as a sit down, use their wifi, conduct your business and socialize as need be. The price they charge for coffee I guess they can afford that kind of reputation. I don't know if this was a racially caused event or not but I think that it could be interpreted that way. Finally, there is a McDonalds in Decateur that we always stop on our way to the metroplex with nice clean restrooms. Sometimes we buy food, sometimes not. And restaurants are not just for meals but also much business is conducted after a meal and a drink. When I go out with the wife I try not to abuse my time and make others wait but when I have reserved a table for business purposes I don't feel that I have to rush out because there is a line at the door.

As with most everything, it is situationally dependent. Starbucks does tend to market themselves as a place to hang out. More of an experience than just a place to drink your coffee and be on your way.

But there are other situations where you really do need to get moving. My wife and I went to a very popular BBQ place in Saint Louis. The line took 2+ hours, and as we were waiting, they periodically crossed things off the white board as they ran out. We eventually got to the fairly small dining area and they were actively shooing people off the tables after they had finished eating. Given the situation, most folks took it upon themselves to eat with some haste so it was only needed in a couple cases that I saw. Basically, someone would come by and clear the table for you. If you didn't take the hint within a few minutes, a manager came by to ask you politely to leave so others could sit down.

In the video, it didn't look like the place was full, and the two guys appeared to be calm, even after they were confronted by police. Witnesses came to the men's defense at the time and later when talking to reporters. Starbucks' CEO has made it clear that the manager's actions were against company policy. So I think it is safe to say that the manager exercised poor judgment. Was this motivated by racism? Who knows. It could be that the manager didn't like men (I think I saw that the manager is a woman), or it could just be that she was having a bad day. Or maybe she ran her Starbucks location like the "soup nazi" from Seinfeld and routinely told everyone who sat down without buying something to get out immediiately. Regardless, the men were also at fault for not leaving when asked. That part is simple. If you are on someone else's property and they ask you to leave, then leave. They could have complained later to corporate if they thought the manager was out of line.

When asked to leave, you leave

Grundy1133 wrote:

Allons wrote:

Soccerdad1995 wrote:Regardless, the men were also at fault for not leaving when asked. That part is simple. If you are on someone else's property and they ask you to leave, then leave. They could have complained later to corporate if they thought the manager was out of line.

When asked to leave, you leave

As more of this story comes out it does look like race discrimination was involved and when asked to leave it is not a lawful order if one is in a protected class and you are asked to leave on the basis of being in that protected class. Just my slant on the story.

My thoughts:

From what I can read this was a "textbook" example of a criminal trespass. I certainly see no fault against the police.
I have read contradictory reports of "Starbucks Policy" regarding one bathroom use and two hanging around while not buying anything. However, It is difficult for me to get worked up about two deadbeats not paying for any drinks then being rude to the cops (according to their supervisor).