• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Oakland Business Bans Cops

conarb

conarb

REGISTERED
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
3,505
Location
California East Bay Area
This is in Oakland's Fruitvale District, it's in the same district the Ghostship fire occured, but about a mile north east of the Ghostship.


  • NBC Bay Area said:
    hastamuertecoffee :
    Click to expand...
    NBC Bay Area said:
    Last Friday February 16th a police (OPD) entered our shop and was told by one of our worker-owners that “we have a policy of asking police to leave for the physical and emotional safety of our customers and ourselves.” Since then, cop supporters are trying to publicly shame us online with low reviews because this particular police visitor was Latino. He broadcasted to his network that he was “refused service” at a local business and now the rumblings are spreading.
    We know in our experience working on campaigns against police brutality that we are not alone saying that police presence compromises our feeling of physical & emotional safety. There are those that do not share that sentiment - be it because they have a friend or relative who is a police, because they are white or have adopted the privileges whiteness affords, because they are home- or business- owning, or whatever the particular case may be. If they want to make claims about police being part of the community, or claims that race trumps the badge & gun when it comes to police, they must accept that the burden of proof for such a claim is on them. OPDs recent attempts to enlist officers of color and its short term touting of fewer officer involved shootings does not reverse or mend its history of corruption, mismanagement, and scandal, nor a legacy of blatant repression.

    The facts are that poc, women, and queer police are complicit in upholding the same law and order that routinely criminalizes and terrorizes black and brown and poor folks, especially youth, trans, and houseless folks.

    For these reasons and so many more, we need the support of the actual community to keep this place safe, not police. Especially in an area faced by drug sales and abuse, homelessness, and toxic masculinity as we see here on this block. We want to put this out to our communities now, in case we end up facing backlash because as we know OPD, unlike the community, has tons of resources, many of which are poured into maintaining smooth public relations to uphold power. It will be no surprise if some of those resources are steered toward discrediting us for not inviting them in as part of the community.¹
    Click to expand...
If they ban cops what about building inspectors and fire marshals? What if they display "whiteness" or "toxic masculinity"? Are we in anarchy yet?


¹ https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/loc...fuses-to-Serve-Police-Officers-476352703.html
 
Guess they may get a slow response to a robbery??

Have seen that happen around here, and the good citizens kind of rebelled against the business
 
cda said:
Guess they may get a slow response to a robbery??

Have seen that happen around here, and the good citizens kind of rebelled against the business
Click to expand...

CDA:

There is outright rebellion here, the state has refused federal drug enfocement for years, now immagration enfocement, Governor Brown is leading the rebellion:

Kunstler's Blog said:
That crusty ole rascal, Gov. Jerry Brown of California, seems to be enjoying his sunset journey into Civil War Two or maybe the destination is more like Blade Runner (since we know that history only rhymes but does not repeat). Anyway, it’s not a good place. The once-golden state begins to look something like what one federal official recently called — dare I say it? — a shithole.

A mix of used hypodermic needles, human feces, and other trash litters the streets and sidewalks in a large section of downtown San Francisco, a local news outlet reported Sunday night. It’s a problem that has grown by epic proportions in recent years and has many concerned for the health and safety of some the city’s youngest residents….
— The Blaze
But that’s not how we roll in this exceptionally greatest of great polities. After all these years, it’s hard to avoid concluding that Americans just prefer melodrama to any other form of behavior, including problem-solving. Melodrama is colorful, fun, and absorbing. It’s just another kind of show business for a people conditioned to see everyday life as a TV series they star in. So kick back and enjoy the homeless show, because its more entertaining than doing the right thing.

Likewise, the sanctuary city show, a shamelessly sentimental exercise in virtue-signaling at the grand scale, larded with little bits of dishonesty, such as the tag “undocumented” for people here illegally, as though their status was the result of some clerical error. Gov. Brown declared war, more or less, on the federal government last week after a fracas in Oakland where mayor Libby Schaaf rode through town like Paul Revere crying that the ICE teams were coming to make arrests. That riled Attorney General Jeff Sessions enough to start filing lawsuits against this nonsense.

But the Department of Justice faces a big quandary. How are they going to make a big stink over enforcing US immigration laws while they ignore US drug laws vis-à-vis the twenty-nine states that have legalized marijuana use in one way or another? In a number of these states, marijuana production is now a major industry, with substantial political influence. AG Sessions has made noises about cracking down on the marijuana trade, but he hasn’t done a damn thing about it because he can’t. The state tax revenue alone is too large to be meddled with, never mind popular opinion.¹
Click to expand...

I was invited to lunch Thursday by two attorneys who I have done expert work for, I'm retired now and have let my $82,000 a year insurance lapse so I refuse any work:
  • A Probate/Trust attorney who has a real problem distributing estates, nobody wants any buildings with potential building or ADA violations, every beneficiary wants cash or equities to avoid potential illegalities in buildings, and he is legally bound to notify all about potential problems.
  • An Insurance Defense attorney, he defends people sued when they turn the suits over to their insurance companies (yes, even some homeowners' policies do cover such litigation), he's a big Trump supporter and wanted to discuss if we have to obey any of these state laws if the state is refusing to obey federal law.


¹ http://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/another-quandary/
 
conarb said:
CDA:

There is outright rebellion here, the state has refused federal drug enfocement for years, now immagration enfocement, Governor Brown is leading the rebellion:
....
wanted to discuss if we have to obey any of these state laws if the state is refusing to obey federal law.
Click to expand...

I don't see why he should have to obey any of the state laws. If the state can refuse to obey federal laws it certainly seems to follow that the citizens can refuse to obey state laws! Of course I'm sure your governor might see it that way but....
 
Personally, I don't want to go into a business where I am not welcome and am happy to support others. Probably important to note that it would appear as though the officer was there as a customer, not in an official capacity.

It is well established in Canadian law that even if one party is negligent in their duties does not give you leave to be negligent in yours.
 
We know in our experience working on campaigns against police brutality that we are not alone saying that police presence compromises our feeling of physical & emotional safety.
Click to expand...
Just wait and see how your feelings of physical and emotional safety change when there are no police around to protect you from the very thugs you advocate for with your SJW campaigns!
 
tmurray said:
Personally, I don't want to go into a business where I am not welcome and am happy to support others. Probably important to note that it would appear as though the officer was there as a customer, not in an official capacity.
Click to expand...
These people will sue you for discrimination if you refuse to serve a man wearing a dress. But they find nothing wrong with themselves refusing to serve a man--or a woman--wearing a uniform.
 
In Canada, it comes down to if you are an identifiable minority. I don't think political affiliation or employment would be seen the same as a religion, race, gender, or sexual orientation y the courts here.
 
tmurray said:
In Canada, it comes down to if you are an identifiable minority. I don't think political affiliation or employment would be seen the same as a religion, race, gender, or sexual orientation y the courts here.
Click to expand...
Which begs the question, why? Clearly, race and sex are biologically inherent immutable physical characteristics of a person, determined at conception by one's genetic material. But sexual orientation is a behavioral characteristic, and religion is a purely personal choice. How is one's political ideology any less valid than one's religious convictions or choice of sexual identity, both of which are mutable?
 
Michael.L said:
Which begs the question, why? Clearly, race and sex are biologically inherent immutable physical characteristics of a person, determined at conception by one's genetic material. But sexual orientation is a behavioral characteristic, and religion is a purely personal choice. How is one's political ideology any less valid than one's religious convictions or choice of sexual identity, both of which are mutable?
Click to expand...

To put it simply because the courts say so. Case law has indicated a divergence in how each is handled.
 
tmurray said:
To put it simply because the courts say so. Case law has indicated a divergence in how each is handled.
Click to expand...
Courts are nothing more than people. Like you and me. I'm always surprised when people grant them so much reverence (I'm speaking generally; not specifically at you, Tmurray). The laws of man are mutable. And often wrong.
 
Michael.L said:
So you're saying that sexual orientation is not behavioral? What is it then?
It might help if you consider which organ a person uses to decide with whom they wish to copulate. (Hint: It's not below their waist.)
Click to expand...
Might help to do research
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx
American Psychological Association
"...psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed...."
 
mark handler said:
Might help to do research
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx
American Psychological Association
"...psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed...."
Click to expand...
Might help to read what I actually wrote. I stated that sexual orientation is a behavior. In other words, it's not an inherent physical trait. Choice and change were never mentioned by me, only by you.

Edited to add: Mark, you've taken us way off topic. My post was never intended to launch a debate as to whether sexual orientation is or is not a choice. I simply stated that sexual orientation is a behavior (not a physical characteristic), something every rational person should be able to agree on.
 
Last edited:
Michael.L said:
Mark, you've taken us way off topic. My post was never intended to launch a debate as to whether sexual orientation is or is not a choice. I simply stated that sexual orientation is a behavior (not a physical characteristic), something every rational person should be able to agree on.
Click to expand...
Which has nothing to do with Oakland Businesses Banning Cops
 
Conarb, I'm curious, is there a federal law that requires state and local cops to enforce federal laws on immigration or any anything else? I know only the federal government can make laws on immigration so I can only guess that only the federal cops can are required to enforce it.
 
Yesterday we went to Mothers' Day Dinner on Grand Avenue in Oakland, Grand Avenue was formerly 4 lanes with diagonal parking on both sides, they have modified it to be two wider lanes with wide bike lanes, as we pulled into one of the diagonal parking spaces a bicyclist crashed to the street and was unconsious, I had to tell my wife and son to stay away and not help, we are not under any legal obligation to do anything and might get sued if we do try to help, my son went over anyway and helped him up and started testing his reflexes, he claimed that a yellow Mercedes pulled in front of him to park, the Chinese guy in the Mercedes said he didn't see the bicyclist coming, it wasn't his fault.

Once inside the restaurant I looked for the mens' room, the only thing I saw was a large EXIT sign in the back, once back there I saw two identical doors with two tile mosaic signs with white tile backgrounds and the letters "WC" in black mosaic tile, I had to think they are classifying singage as "art work" to use freedom of experssion as a way to get around both ADA and LGBTQ signage, I picked one and went in, inside there was nothing but a toilet and one end, a sink with an adjacent blow dryer at the other, nothing else, no mirror, no tissue dispenser.

Does it appear to others that ADA and LGBTQ are merging? Even the ADA signs on some doors have stick figures merged into half sexes.
 
Rick18071 said:
Conarb, I'm curious, is there a federal law that requires state and local cops to enforce federal laws on immigration or any anything else? I know only the federal government can make laws on immigration so I can only guess that only the federal cops can are required to enforce it.
Click to expand...

I've never looked into it but I don't think so, the issue here is that the state and cities are ordering local cops not to cooperate with federal officals, so if the local cops arrest an illegal for DUI say, they are then refusing to turn them over to the Feds for prosecution on their immigration violations, even blocking the Feds from entering the jails and state courthouses to arrest them.

The underlying issue here is the Democrats pushed motor-voter on the basis that they are here and driving anyway, by giving them drivers' licenses we can force them to get insurance. When motor-voter passed there were lines wrapping around the block at at least two DMV offices I regularly pass, I kept looking because 2.5 years ago I had to renew my license and at 80 you have to physically go in to prove you can still see and maybe even think. Finally, I called and made an appointment to avoid the lines, I filled out a motor-voter form and there was a question asking under penalty of perjury if I was a citizen of the United States, then there was a question as to whether I wanted to register to vote, all one has to do is answer yes to both of those questions and you get a drivers' license and you pick a party to register in, that's why Calfiornia voted Democratic so overwhelmingly during the last election.
 
misinterpretation.png


Source: https://xkcd.com/1984/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top