Except that the people that were actually there said that they weren't being unruly or rude. Nothing in the video would suggest that either, as they react pretty calmly to being arrested.
except they didn't leave the store as requested. sounds to me like they were trying to make a fucking statement.
ill be all nice when the cops get here while the phones are out, but i aint leaving the store when asked because i dont feel i have too because i have authority over the store manager apparently...
I personally would have left or bought something, but that's not what I was discussing or quoting.
The guy I quoted assumed they were "being unruly and rude" and is basing it on nothing other than their appearance. People that were there, said they were just quietly waiting for their friend. They're supposedly real estate brokers or something, but people on here have referred to them as hoodrats. I wonder why?
But if I am a store manager and I ask a patron to leave and they refuse...regardless of how politely they refuse my request that's acting as aggressive and unruly.
Politely refusing a request certainly is not aggressive.
aggressive
əˈɡrɛsɪv/
adjective
adjective: aggressive
ready or likely to attack or confront; characterized by or resulting from aggression.
"he's very uncooperative and aggressive"
synonyms: hostile, belligerent, bellicose, antagonistic, truculent;More
Politely refusing a request certainly is not aggressive.
aggressive
əˈɡrɛsɪv/
adjective
adjective: aggressive
ready or likely to attack or confront; characterized by or resulting from aggression.
"he's very uncooperative and aggressive"
synonyms: hostile, belligerent, bellicose, antagonistic, truculent;More
If you are asked to leave a restaurant and you say no, you're being hostile and aggressive. Simple as that.
Can't believe I'm agreeing with @Tiny on this one...
Hostile, maybe, but that's not the word that was being used. How is "politely refusing" aggressive? I'm just going by dictionary definitions here.
Like I said, I would have left or just bought the cheapest thing on the menu until my friend got there.
Hostile, maybe, but that's not the word that was being used. How is "politely refusing" aggressive? I'm just going by dictionary definitions here.
Like I said, I would have left or just bought the cheapest thing on the menu until my friend got there.
It's aggressive because it is a polite and sensible request that you are not obliging to, and you are now limiting their reducing to physically having to remove you (or call the cops to come and arrest you).
I disagree. I hope you don't find that too aggressive
There ya go.
You don't know.
It's a none issue until you do.
All I read is a story where the manager asked two patrons to leave the store and they refused. They don't have that right. If you are asked to leave a store and you refuse I consider that a hostile act and the police need to be called because I as a manager have the right to remove you from the premises. You as a patron do not have a right to argue my authority.
Now if those two men left the store on their own as asked and investigated and noticed that the store manager wasn't asking whites that were loitering to leave...then they would have an argument I could get behind.
REFUSING TO LEAVE ONCE ASKED is the issue I have with these two attention seeking assholes. They don't own starbucks. they don't manage starbucks. they responsibility in this situation as members of society was to leave once requested to do so. failure to do that simple fucking task is aggressive and combative.
Question, wouldn't a manager legally need a delegation of authority for a manager to have the legal authority to remove anyone?
I understand that this is probably one of those 1,000's of laws we pretend don't exist, but if the law is the law, shouldn't we all have to follow whatever the law actually says?
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a phone call from the owner can serve as a delegation of authority, and this hurdle would be easily cleared, but I bet they didn't actually do that.
Question, wouldn't a manager legally need a delegation of authority for a manager to have the legal authority to remove anyone?
I understand that this is probably one of those 1,000's of laws we pretend don't exist, but if the law is the law, shouldn't we all have to follow whatever the law actually says?
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a phone call from the owner can serve as a delegation of authority, and this hurdle would be easily cleared, but I bet they didn't actually do that.