Portland cafe shows officer the door

[shesulsa]

The place has a policy where if a customer is uncomfortable with "your kind" then they may request a collective member (worker) to ask you to leave ... and then ... you need to leave. It doesn't matter if you're wearing a shield, a purple shirt or a Chewbacca costume.

I would invite anyone critical to pose as a homeless person on the streets of Stumptown and find out how wonderfully they are treated by Portland's finest. But then ... you'd have to care about humanity a little more to want to understand it.

Maybe it doesn't matter.

For a place that doesn't do publicity, I doubt this was a publicity stunt and I daresay their policy likely keeps them out of a heap of trouble ... then again, so do their patrons.

It's a shame that so many people have had bad experiences with police - it's such an important, misunderstood and thankless job.

 

[Bruno@MT]

I think this would be illegal in Belgium. a shop owner is not allowed to turn people away for generic reasons because of anti discrimination laws. I.e. you can't say 'no cops' but you could say 'not THAT cop' but even then you'd have to have a valid reason to turn him away. 'Because I don't like his face' is not one of those.

The only exception would be if it is a private club. Private clubs can pretty much do as they please, but then they can't behave like a public place either. For example, pubs can (county regulation) have a mandatory closing hour. If at that time the owner locks his door, then his pub is no longer a public place but a private place, and he can say that it's a private party.

 

[punisher73]

As far as I know, he was within his legal rights...or at least consistent with how they are applied elsewhere. "Choice of occupation" is not a protected class in the U.S. Civil Rights code...neither is being a smoker, for that matter.

Disagree a bit about supporting the worker's decision. I support his freedom, but I don't care for his judgement. I could legally show a 16 year old dude one helluva good time, but think I'd be called.....something other than someone that is exercising their individual freedoms.

Some states, 16 is legal. Again, shows you how arbitrary "morality" and "legality" can be.

 

[punisher73]

Just playing devil's advocate here.

1) The shop had no problem allowing the officer to come in and spend money.

2) They only had a problem when he stopped to talk

So, it wasn't an issue of a private business refusing service to someone, they gladly took his money. They were just greedy people who want to have a certain image, so if you go and spend money...ok. Chat with other paying customers...not ok.

 

[shesulsa]

Just playing devil's advocate here.

1) The shop had no problem allowing the officer to come in and spend money.

2) They only had a problem when he stopped to talk

So, it wasn't an issue of a private business refusing service to someone, they gladly took his money. They were just greedy people who want to have a certain image, so if you go and spend money...ok. Chat with other paying customers...not ok.

Uh...no. The shop welcomes everybody. But if someone says something, then you need to go. It happens before sales, during sales, after sales.

It's just SOOO easy to put far more into it than there really was, I'm sure.

 

[David43515]

Uh...no. The shop welcomes everybody. But if someone says something, then you need to go. It happens before sales, during sales, after sales.

It's just SOOO easy to put far more into it than there really was, I'm sure.

So did I understand you to say that the shop is collectively owned and that any member of the collective (or was it any customer) wants you out all they have to do is say so? How is that any different than the lunch counters in the south during the civil rights movement? From where I sit it still smacks of discrimination. The only difference is that jobs aren`t a protected status. So if a customer sees a priest and wants them to leave is that discrimination against a Catholic (which would be protected because of religious status) or is it descrimination against his job choice (which is not protected under the law)?

To me the most foolish part of the whole discussion was when the shop owner said that if he were being robbed he would call on his neighbors for help instead of the police. I`m sure they`ll get right on that.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Cartman: Hippies.They're everywhere. They wanna save the earth, but all they do is smoke pot and smell bad.

 

[Archangel M]

Cartman: Hippies.They're everywhere. They wanna save the earth, but all they do is smoke pot and smell bad.

Changing the world by discrimination. One coffee drinking cop at a time.

 

[Carol]

So did I understand you to say that the shop is collectively owned and that any member of the collective (or was it any customer) wants you out all they have to do is say so? How is that any different than the lunch counters in the south during the civil rights movement? From where I sit it still smacks of discrimination.

It absolutely does. Because that policy means that if "Juan" has an issue with black people and doesn't want to drink his coffee with a black girl in the shop, all "Juan" would have to do is ask a member of the "collective" to make the black girl go away, and the black girl will be given the heave-ho.

That's illegal.

And yeah, if its middle class white men, that's just as illegal.

 

[David43515]

It absolutely does. Because that policy means that if "Juan" has an issue with black people and doesn't want to drink his coffee with a black girl in the shop, all "Juan" would have to do is ask a member of the "collective" to make the black girl go away, and the black girl will be given the heave-ho.

That's illegal.

And yeah, if its middle class white men, that's just as illegal.

That`s kinda what I thought. Thanks for clearing that up. I thought it was just me.

 

[MJS]

I still think the clerk was in the wrong. I'd be willing to bet anything that if this were a black man, we'd have the ACLU, Jesse and Al, banging heads to 'get justice' for the wrong doings of the store clerk. *rolls eyes*

 

[Empty Hands]

I still think the clerk was in the wrong. I'd be willing to bet anything that if this were a black man, we'd have the ACLU, Jesse and Al, banging heads to 'get justice' for the wrong doings of the store clerk. *rolls eyes*

Doing the same thing to a black man is illegal, remember? Doing so to a police officer (or a doctor or an NFL linebacker) is not.

Ressentiment strikes again!

 

[shesulsa]

I see.

So y'all think that "We reserve the right to refuse service to ANYONE" should be illegal?

Here is a link to their safer-space policy.

I suppose discriminating against everybody is still discrimination? I'm not sure I agree, though it's obviously easy to favor the police (they have a tough job I wouldn't want) over "pot-smoking hippies."

Hm. Where's that discrimination line again?

And for the record - if the policeman saw someone in the shop he knew was a violent mentally ill homeless wreck and wasn't comfortable with that person's company - he could have asked for that person to be asked to leave ... and the homeless, mentally ill, violent individual would be escorted out.

Even better? He wouldn't even have had to use his status (nor his utilities) to do so.

Peace out.

 

[chaos1551]

Here is a link to their safer-space policy.

The conforming non-conformists strike again.

 

[shesulsa]

To me the most foolish part of the whole discussion was when the shop owner said that if he were being robbed he would call on his neighbors for help instead of the police. I`m sure they`ll get right on that.

While I don't disagree with you - I'd still rather call the police - The Portland/Vancouver metro area has been hit with budget cuts to law enforcement, fire, search and rescue, etcetera. There are areas who get quick response times and other areas that do not. I'm sure this particular incident won't help this shop nor the neighborhood much.

Please know - I hate to say this - I hate that this is a reality ... but it IS a reality here.

 

[Archangel M]

While people (including cops) may like to bandy about the "well lets see how fast we respond to calls at that shop" line...any cop who really would do that shouldn't carry a badge.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I see.

So y'all think that "We reserve the right to refuse service to ANYONE" should be illegal?

Here is a link to their safer-space policy.

I suppose discriminating against everybody is still discrimination? I'm not sure I agree, though it's obviously easy to favor the police (they have a tough job I wouldn't want) over "pot-smoking hippies."

Hm. Where's that discrimination line again?

And for the record - if the policeman saw someone in the shop he knew was a violent mentally ill homeless wreck and wasn't comfortable with that person's company - he could have asked for that person to be asked to leave ... and the homeless, mentally ill, violent individual would be escorted out.

Even better? He wouldn't even have had to use his status (nor his utilities) to do so.

Peace out.

Discrimination is discrimination.

There's a difference in my mind between asking someone who is disruptive and causing a scene to leave, and someone who quietly walked in, made a purchase and was having a polite conversation to leave.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Discrimination is discrimination.

There's a difference in my mind between asking someone who is disruptive and causing a scene to leave, and someone who quietly walked in, made a purchase and was having a polite conversation to leave.

ok, I read their policy.

Causing a worker or patron discomfort or distress for any reason (including violating our Safer Space Policy)

So....if the employee is uncomfortable because you are a martial arts instructor, they can throw you out.

If they are intimidated by a fat person, or a chick with huge boobs, or a guy with bulging biceps, or the winner of the BillG Lookalike contest, you can be asked to leave.


So, lets see if I have the full image.

A cop in full uniform swaggers in, top 4 buttons popped so his chest fuzz is sticking out like a nerd in summer school. He's got his firearm in holster, causing more than 1 vegan hippie to soil themselves in terror because "guns r badd". While Officer Swagger orders his drink, one that causes more than a few shocked gasps, probably from the evil insistance on whole milk rather than soy, one brave soul gets up the nerve to approach the tovarich on duty.

"it's a ....a ...a.... cop! I'm frightened! I'm carrying. Help me!!!"

Immediately, Tovarich Goodbody leaps into action, and all 98lbs of him approached the horrible Officer Swagger, now deep in what must be a prolatarian plot to raid the vegan beansprout raw off later that week. Knees knocking, and pants moistening from the panic he was barely keeping in check he gave his order.

"Pppppplease, llllleave. Yyyyour scscscareing mmmmmme." he whimpered.

"Excuse me?" Replied Officer Swagger, straining to hear the mumbled comment over the out of tune New Age music playing in the background.

"Ppplease leave nnnnow. We d.d.don't like cccops here."

"Ok." came the reply, causing Tovarich to soil himself, as he stood waiting for the cop to pull out his night stick and violate his body. Eyes closed, he waited, but all he heard was the door close.

A few minutes later, one of the tofueaters peeked out from under the table where they had dove in a panic and gave the all clear.

Another crisis averted, Tovarich headed to the back to change his all natural cotton undies to something dryer...and somewhat less soiled.


Am I right?

 

[chaos1551]

I am intimidated by a chick with huge boobs, but I certainly wouldn't ask them to leave.

 

[Carol]

I see.

So y'all think that "We reserve the right to refuse service to ANYONE" should be illegal?

There are many restauranteurs and the like that have signs of that precise verbage. If they run afoul of the law, it is not because of their sign. It is because of their actions. Perhaps there is caselaw prohibiting the use of such a sign, I don't know...but I couldn't find such an example with a quick google.

If they put up a sign saying "Whites Only", the methinks that would be a flagrant violation of the law.

I suppose discriminating against everybody is still discrimination?

Discrimination on protected classes in places of public accomodation is illegal. One can't have a place of public accommodation that excludes women with the excuse of "that's OK, there are some men we don't like either."

I'm not sure I agree, though it's obviously easy to favor the police (they have a tough job I wouldn't want) over "pot-smoking hippies."

I don't think you're the first person that feels that the U.S. Civil Rights Law shouldn't apply when it interferes with what a person wants.