Turned table - LEO gets the boot from cafe

[LMTD]

The owner is an idiot, not really much debate about that at all.

The owner has now purchased the building and will be turning the up stairs into a co-op flop house of sorts.

Despite opinions to the contrary, if you open your business to the public, you have made that choice. Choosing not to serve ANY law abiding citizen whom is not consciously trying to harm your business (aka soliciting in any manner) should allow for instant revocation of your business license for a publicly open establishment.

I have no issue with one having a private business with private access making whatever rules they seek, but when you choose to be public IMHO you have given permission to accept one and all. The owner clearly has defined that the officer is welcome, but the uniform is not which indicates what? He is willing to discriminate against objects kind of like folks whom discriminate against guns. Folks whom discriminate against guns are EXACTLY the same, they may have had a bad experience with a gun so they believe no one should ever have one. This joker had a bad experience with a cop and ops to discriminate against all of them in uniform.

I do not need or want police involvement in my life, I do not want a LOT of people involved in my life, I do not open my door to the public inviting them into my life. I do not feel this establishment has any more right to toss the cop or anyone else like the homeless and strongly feel that if they opt to do so, their public access permit should be taken away.

IMHO this is a question of freedom and to truly have freedom you have to be willing to grant that freedom to those you disagree with the most to live civilly and equally with respect and honor for each other.

 

[LMTD]

I have never once seen an instance where a situation was improved by the cops being called. I guess it happens occasionally... on TV.

All sarcasm aside, I really think it is GREAT when the cops are called on child molesters and such.

I think a huge number of folks that are in prison deserve to be there for various reasons, murder, rape, beatings etc including jokers that steal others coin.

To my knowledge there is not another path to prison that does not involved the police at some level, they are not perfect by any means and there are some stupid laws for them to enforce, but the blanket theory that all cops suck is really kind of lame. To imply that they just make all situations worse or as you said fail to improve, I know a lot of ladies at various shelters that would disagree with you after getting a ride from an officer to a safe house etc.

 

[VW_Factor]

The owner has now purchased the building and will be turning the up stairs into a co-op flop house of sorts.

Despite opinions to the contrary, if you open your business to the public, you have made that choice. Choosing not to serve ANY law abiding citizen whom is not consciously trying to harm your business (aka soliciting in any manner) should allow for instant revocation of your business license for a publicly open establishment.

I have no issue with one having a private business with private access making whatever rules they seek, but when you choose to be public IMHO you have given permission to accept one and all. The owner clearly has defined that the officer is welcome, but the uniform is not which indicates what? He is willing to discriminate against objects kind of like folks whom discriminate against guns. Folks whom discriminate against guns are EXACTLY the same, they may have had a bad experience with a gun so they believe no one should ever have one. This joker had a bad experience with a cop and ops to discriminate against all of them in uniform.

I do not need or want police involvement in my life, I do not want a LOT of people involved in my life, I do not open my door to the public inviting them into my life. I do not feel this establishment has any more right to toss the cop or anyone else like the homeless and strongly feel that if they opt to do so, their public access permit should be taken away.

IMHO this is a question of freedom and to truly have freedom you have to be willing to grant that freedom to those you disagree with the most to live civilly and equally with respect and honor for each other.

I reserve the right to refuse service to ANYONE. Kthx.

 

[HandyHamlet]

Despite opinions to the contrary, if you open your business to the public, you have made that choice. Choosing not to serve ANY law abiding citizen whom is not consciously trying to harm your business (aka soliciting in any manner) should allow for instant revocation of your business license for a publicly open establishment.

No shoes no shirt does not a lawbreaker make. Yet every business MUST have their license revoked post haste!

:banghead:

 

[LMTD]

I am actually a little surprised to see a marxist generate such support from 2a proponanents but I guess the red and black was not enough of a refrence point for most to see.

 

[tittiger]

I think it would be great if the police did not respond to anything at my business they almost never solve crimes anyhow.
Years ago you would go to the prosecutor for the country and if in the course of the investigation he needed the sheriff
to serve papers or make and arrest he would make that happen.

We the people are supposed to defend our selves not the police. Police as we know them today did not exists for much of the history of this country. And it is well settled law that police do not have a legal obligation to protect anyone.

Also I think that this would draw more people to the business. If i were close I would patronize a place where I would not have to deal with or look at storm troopers.

 

[LMTD]

No shoes no shirt does not a lawbreaker make. Yet every business MUST have their license revoked post haste!

:banghead:

Not sure where you are from, shoes and shirt is a public health code law.

 

[HandyHamlet]

Dagobah.

 

[marshaul]

Despite opinions to the contrary, if you open your business to the public, you have made that choice. Choosing not to serve ANY law abiding citizen whom is not consciously trying to harm your business (aka soliciting in any manner) should allow for instant revocation of your business license for a publicly open establishment.

Genuine advocate for liberty, this guy.

I have no issue with one having a private business with private access making whatever rules they seek, but when you choose to be public IMHO you have given permission to accept one and all.

Evidently, this establishment is not open to the public, although the criteria for admission are easily met by most decent people.

I do not feel this establishment has any more right to toss the cop or anyone else like the homeless and strongly feel that if they opt to do so, their public access permit should be taken away.

And the Brady Bunch strongly feel that you do not have any more right to carry a gun for self-defense. Obviously they are right as well, since feelings are the arbiter for right.

If it's not a huge problem, can you mail me your guns? I would love some more. Thanks.

IMHO this is a question of freedom and to truly have freedom you have to be willing to grant that freedom to those you disagree with the most to live civilly and equally with respect and honor for each other.

IMHO this is a question of freedom and to truly have freedom you have to be willing to grant that freedom to those you disagree with the most to control their private property as they see fit..

All sarcasm aside, I really think it is GREAT when the cops are called on child molesters and such.

Oh, I didn't realize that the officer in question was bravely engaged in the imminent arrest of a child molester, until he was foiled by the dastardly marxist (owning a coffee shop isn't very marxist, btw).

To my knowledge there is not another path to prison that does not involved the police at some level, they are not perfect by any means and there are some stupid laws for them to enforce, but the blanket theory that all cops suck is really kind of lame. To imply that they just make all situations worse or as you said fail to improve, I know a lot of ladies at various shelters that would disagree with you after getting a ride from an officer to a safe house etc.

Well, it's a shame your knowledge is so limited.

Obviously, you've never heard of a constabulary, and private prosecution.

I am actually a little surprised to see a marxist generate such support from 2a proponanents but I guess the red and black was not enough of a refrence point for most to see.

Nice try to win the argument with what is, in effect, an ad hominem attack.

The issue is not his political leanings, in actual fact or after interpretation by you.

The issue is the propriety of his controlling access to his private establishment/place of business.

 

[marshaul]

I think it would be great if the police did not respond to anything at my business they almost never solve crimes anyhow.

+1

Years ago you would go to the prosecutor for the country and if in the course of the investigation he needed the sheriff to serve papers or make and arrest he would make that happen.

+1

We the people are supposed to defend our selves not the police. Police as we know them today did not exists for much of the history of this country. And it is well settled law that police do not have a legal obligation to protect anyone.

+1

Also I think that this would draw more people to the business. If i were close I would patronize a place where I would not have to deal with or look at storm troopers.

+1

 

[LMTD]

Nice try to win the argument with what is, in effect, an ad hominem attack.

The issue is not his political leanings, in actual fact or after interpretation by you.

The issue is the propriety of his controlling access to his private establishment/place of business.

Look at his web space and decide for yourself on the marxist, it is not like it is hidden at all.

I have no issue with anyone controlling their private establishment right up to the point they choose to make it open to the public. When you open it to the public, you CHOOSE to change the rules, no one FORCED him to open it to the public, for all I care he could have it as his own little personal marxist hang out and require the political affiliation of every person to indeed be of his choosing and it is none of anyone's business.

Saying cops can come in but they can not be in uniform is just like saying CCW is fine you can have your gun, but no one can see it.

It is also quite clear he is a hypocrite as he had no problem taking the uniformed officers money and serving him coffee in the first place.

You are welcome to celebrate whatever you like including cop bashing, its popular these days, rock on, I am sure you are someone's hero.

 

[VW_Factor]

I think you are getting your personal feelings about someone else's feelings get in the way of something here..

It is my freedom to refuse service to anyone. Isn't that really what the issue is here? Some people are upset by that? F that. No one is forcing you to support that business or its owner or his feelings.

 

[ChiangShih]

...When most cops are dirty and two faced. ...

Not cool man.

 

[Festus_Hagen]

Not cool man.

It's on par with the Mo. section of this board, though .... :banghead:

 

[marshaul]

I think you are getting your personal feelings about someone else's feelings get in the way of something here..

It is my freedom to refuse service to anyone. Isn't that really what the issue is here? Some people are upset by that? F that. No one is forcing you to support that business or its owner or his feelings.

+100

 

[LMTD]

I think you are getting your personal feelings about someone else's feelings get in the way of something here..

It is my freedom to refuse service to anyone. Isn't that really what the issue is here? Some people are upset by that? F that. No one is forcing you to support that business or its owner or his feelings.

No, I am not getting personal feelings involved at all.

If you CHOOSE to serve the public then man up and serve the public instead of trying to impose your own petty concerns on others whom have not broken any laws or tried to solicit your customers away, its real simple.

If you do not want to serve all members of the public because of your own petty prejudices, then do not open your business to the public, its pretty simple.

Prejudice is just that and it never changes, if you want to exersize your right to do so I have no problem with it, rock on I do, but I also do not open to the public.

Opening your doors to the public and then trying to pick and choose your clientele is pretty much the very basis of the pussification of this country.

This is a story about an idiot whom opened his doors to the public and then went on a whine about what the person that walked in was wearing, boo freakin hoo, cop or hobo makes no difference to me, just because you like the fact that it was a cop does not make it right or a difference, the owner is still an idiot and a hypocrite and has no business running a public business. Perhaps one day he will really grow a set and just serve folks coffee but I doubt it.

 

[marshaul]

No, I am not getting personal feelings involved at all.

If you CHOOSE to serve the public then man up and serve the public instead of trying to impose your own petty concerns on others whom have not broken any laws or tried to solicit your customers away, its real simple.

If you do not want to serve all members of the public because of your own petty prejudices, then do not open your business to the public, its pretty simple.

Prejudice is just that and it never changes, if you want to exersize your right to do so I have no problem with it, rock on I do, but I also do not open to the public.

Opening your doors to the public and then trying to pick and choose your clientele is pretty much the very basis of the pussification of this country.

This is a story about an idiot whom opened his doors to the public and then went on a whine about what the person that walked in was wearing, boo freakin hoo, cop or hobo makes no difference to me, just because you like the fact that it was a cop does not make it right or a difference, the owner is still an idiot and a hypocrite and has no business running a public business. Perhaps one day he will really grow a set and just serve folks coffee but I doubt it.

Calm down, buddy. I realize this issue upsets you.

You seem to have your panties in a wad over "open to the public". I'm not sure why you think "open to the public" means a person must allow anything and everything.

First of all, I don't see how you can continue to call the place "open to the public", when it clearly has limited admission. The criteria are loose (just a dress code), but they exist nonetheless.

Furthermore, are you quite certain that I could find no behavior which, while legal, would warrant my rejection from a hypothetical coffee shop owned by you?

What if you owned a coffee shop. Imagine you wanted to make your coffee shop a family-friendly establishment.

Now, imagine I come in your coffee shop swearing, wearing metal shirts with phrases like "Jesus is a c**t". Perfectly legal.

Are you comfortable with being forced to keep me around?

What about places which require formal attire, but are otherwise open for any to patronize? Are they any less "open to the public" than is a place which disallows police uniforms? Should they be disallowed from maintaining such a policy? If not, how do you differentiate?

Back in the real world, if one is not a member of a protected class, one may be "discriminated" against.

If a place objected strongly to my t-shirt, they would be free to ask me to leave.

As for "boo freakin' hoo", you're the one crying about a property owner exercising his rights. The proprietor in question didn't whine and cry, he simply asserted his rightful authority. Later, he did try to explain himself. I'm not sure what fantasy country you live in where "open to the public" = no rules at all, but I'm glad that we don't live in it. Perhaps one day you will really grow a set and be comfortable living in a society where people think differently, have rights, and can act on their thoughts by exercising their rights.

How is this an imposition upon you? By what right do you challenge his proprietary discretion? The onus is on you, and you haven't argued your case, other than becoming upset and irrelevantly chanting "open to the public!!!".

 

[LMTD]

Calm down, buddy. I realize this issue upsets you.

Furthermore, are you quite certain that I could find no behavior which, while legal, would warrant my rejection from a hypothetical coffee shop owned by you?

What if you owned a coffee shop. Imagine you wanted to make your coffee shop a family-friendly establishment.

Now, imagine I come in your coffee shop swearing, wearing metal shirts with phrases like "Jesus is a c**t". Perfectly legal.

Are you comfortable with being forced to keep me around?

.

It seems you have missed several points, I will try and help you out so perhaps you can look at my position if you so choose.

1. I do not get angery, upset, disappointed or any type of emotional response more or less at all, but certianly not from an internet forum.

2. I know for a fact that you not only could, it is quite possible that you would demonstrate a behavior that would lend itself to me tossing you out of a business I was operating, I have never tried to imply otherwise.

3. This is core to why I would NEVER license a business open to the public, if you did not manage to have your pants up when you walked in the door you would be told to GFO, if you objected to my firearm on my side you would be told to GFO, if I just decided I suddenly did not like you I would tell you to GFO.

4. I do not think it is right for me to do such things, I think you have the right to wear your pants on your freakin head if you want to and I should have no say so what so ever.

5. I think if you CHOOSE to license a business under the state for operations open to the public, you should be held to the same standard as the state and have no business what so ever imposing your views on legal citizens or questioning their behavior/action/belief because YOU made the choice. Because I DO believe exactly what I have stated I would NEVER choose to operate a business licensed open to the public, the guy I am being critical of DID make that choice.

I like freedom for ALL people and do not consider the business owner of a public establishments rights more important that anyone else's, you do, its about that simple.

I expect the government and any licensed subest of that government to treat ALL persons equal, with respect, and no imposition what so ever on the rights of the individule, since I would have 0 intention of doing so I would never put myself in the position of having to do so by choice.

Now I know you do not agree and that is perfectly fine, it does not make a difference or make me happy/sad/mad or anything, it just is what it is and I do not expect it will change. You value the owner of the business's rights at a higher level than you do others, I simply do not because of the owner choosing the path he did.

 

[marshaul]

5. I think if you CHOOSE to license a business under the state for operations open to the public, you should be held to the same standard as the state and have no business what so ever imposing your views on legal citizens or questioning their behavior/action/belief because YOU made the choice.

Why?

I would point out, that in no state of which I am aware, does business licensing contain an "open to the public" provision which prevents proprietors from kicking out those viewed as disruptive or harmful to business. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Protected classes, on the other hand, are protected even in establishments which are not open to the public.

I expect the government and any licensed subest of that government to treat ALL persons equal, with respect, and no imposition what so ever on the rights of the individule, since I would have 0 intention of doing so I would never put myself in the position of having to do so by choice.

So, the government forces license on businesses, and in doing so renders them a subset of government? What is this, communism?

Now I know you do not agree and that is perfectly fine, it does not make a difference or make me happy/sad/mad or anything, it just is what it is and I do not expect it will change.

Fair enough.

You value the owner of the business's rights at a higher level than you do others, I simply do not because of the owner choosing the path he did.

I simply don't see how "opening" something "to the public" gives patrons all kinds of rights they wouldn't have on normal private property.

 

[Freedom First]

I am actually a little surprised to see a marxist generate such support from 2a proponanents but I guess the red and black was not enough of a refrence point for most to see.

Yep. Lot's of folks missed that. These children in adult bodies would be dead or imprisoned in most marxist countries. They would not be allowed to be "who they are..." and would be forced to comply to the demands of the police state at the point of a gun.

I have wondered if America is becoming or is a police state. I am sure many here will say it already is. Personally, I think that as long as we are still able to exercise the First Amendment's gripe clause and beat "our" governement back, we still have a chance of saving what remains of America. When that option is totally lost then America will also be truly dead.