Kind of petty, and stupid, but still don't think it rises to the level of equivalency. My opinion would be the same if it was someone wearing Hillary pin.
Last edited:
-
There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.
So, racism by Starbucks or just two guys who wouldn't buy a cup of coffee?
- Thread starter GAJ
- Start date
Kind of petty, and stupid, but still don't think it rises to the level of equivalency. My opinion would be the same if it was someone wearing Hillary pin.
Essentially a protected class and exactly why religion doesn't belong as a protected class, because it's just something people think, whereas everything else is an attribute outside of a person's control. But, since they're basically peers, then yes, maga hats and color/orientation/etc should be equally protected until we remove ridiculous thoughts from protected classes.
Eldritch
is insensitive
Yup.
except... that whole "public shaming" thing would only work on YOUR generation.... for the millennials that light would signify; "I got one over on the man !"
But also, when the light goes off, it should trigger a staff person to come over and face to face, making eye contact, question their beliefs and politely disagree with their perspective.
ENDGAME!
wazzuFreddo
WuTang is 4 the children
You're right, where is the outrage that people are still supporting that racist Cheeto?
TylerW
Well-known member
You can take off a MAGA hat.
More than that, a MAGA hat is actively trying to communicate a political stance. Having darker colored skin doesn't communicate anything.
Or at least, it shouldn't.
Last edited:
Climber
Well-known member
You might want to get your facts straight before making that claim.
He was asked to leave because he wouldn't take off his hat, a bar policy. He claimed that the MAGA hat was a reflection of his spiritual beliefs and thus protected.
Fox and others completely misrepresented the facts....nothing new.
Fake News, eaten up and swallowed by Fox News viewers.
GAJ
Well-known member
To be fair in the Starbucks train wreck they would have been happy to serve those two guys.
They chose not to buy anything.
Climber
Well-known member
Black men arrested at Starbucks settle for $200K program
Good to see that they didn't get greedy and tried to make it into something positive.
they've got class.
planting the seeds for "change over time" is the way to go to address many social issues
Last edited:
295566
Numbers McGee
This was just for the suit against the city. Which I don't believe did anything wrong in this situation...
Are they still pursuing, or have any intention of creating, a suit against Starbucks?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2008
- Location
- Bay Area
- Moto(s)
- Kawasaki Versys 1000LT,
Work: BMW R1250RT-P
Prior: Honda 600RR Graffiti, Kawi 650R
- Name
- D
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2004
- Location
- Charming
- Moto(s)
- bitchin trike with oxygen
- Name
- Piney
- BARF perks
- AMA #: 2815981
starbucks should just give 'em their own store...... then find some reason to sue them and get the store back
Archimedes
Fire Watcher
Damn I was hoping this would go to court so we could see the return of Caveman Lawyer...
"I'm just a caaaveman, I don't understand your Carmel Machiattos or your Iced Mocha Lattes, but I do know that my clients lost the opportunity to change their lives and become multimillionaires, and for that they are due actual damages of $5.5 million dollars plus trebling for punitive damages, as well as pre-judgement interest at the maximum applicable federal rate of 3.42 percent compounded daily..."
"I'm just a caaaveman, I don't understand your Carmel Machiattos or your Iced Mocha Lattes, but I do know that my clients lost the opportunity to change their lives and become multimillionaires, and for that they are due actual damages of $5.5 million dollars plus trebling for punitive damages, as well as pre-judgement interest at the maximum applicable federal rate of 3.42 percent compounded daily..."
Schnellbandit
I see 4 lights!
The chances there will be a lawsuit that goes to trial against Starbucks is slim. The chances that a lot of money changes hands through some settlement agreement is pretty good.
$200,000 is probably a starting point for Starbucks.
MysterYvil
Mr. Bad Example
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2008
- Location
- Erehwon (Shangri-La)
- Moto(s)
- Alas, they are all in the past
- BARF perks
- AMA #: 2858947
Easiest
Fundraiser
EVER!
I'd have provoked civil servants by not complying with lawful orders every day of the week when I fundraised for Planned Parenthood if I thought the city would roll over and vomit taxpayer dollars. I'd have even thrown in my own buck.
"We are all Heliogabalus, Bill."
295566
Numbers McGee
Exactly my thoughts.
I want to be happy about their settlement with the city. However, the pessimist in me says their lawyers thought they had a shaky case, at best, against the city, and sees Starbucks as the cash cow in this situation. This settlement with the city is a PR stunt for both sides.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2008
- Location
- Bay Area
- Moto(s)
- Kawasaki Versys 1000LT,
Work: BMW R1250RT-P
Prior: Honda 600RR Graffiti, Kawi 650R
- Name
- D
Absolutely!
Karbon
Hyper hoñorary
meh. Accepting the symbolic $1, a pr stunt or not, it's mostly sort of irrelevant in the long run. $200k, can help a lot of young people. And the undisclosed settlement with Starbux, well that's just the free market directing itself.
Last edited: