theres the cigarett method too, getting an A student to buy it for me

like i say, i respect him as a man with conviction but not as a bussinessman

Kudos to REM10, asdf, and parrish for predicting it above.

That sign won’t protect you from legal liability when you refuse the wrong person for the wrong reason.

“No, is isn’t *exactly* any person for any reason, but it is close enough.”

It’s not even close. You can continue to equivocate if you wish, but the point of my posts in this thread is NOT that business owners don’t have any discretion in determining who they service but rather that they cannot legally refuse service to “anyone for any reason” as has been erroneously claimed.

Note: I do *not* encourage discrimination for any reason. But a business is not a public area. It is private property. Many people mistakenly believe that because a store is open to the public, it is “public property” and thus I have to let them be in my store. Yes, there are laws that tell me that I can’t refuse service to a specific protected class of people, but just because I have a business does not mean that just anyone has a right to enter my store or that I cannot expel them if I decide that they are not a customer that I do not want to serve. Of course some exemptions do apply – such as an officer of the law with a search warrant, or my landlord for reasons spelled out in my lease, but that is nitpicking.

That is NOT the same incorrect assertion as was stated above which was refusing service to “anyone for any reason.”

“You have every right to say just who is allowed into your home, and it is the same with your business.”

It is NOT the same with a home as with a business. With a home it is much closer to “anyone for any reason” with few exceptions such as law enforcement officers with valid warrants as antidiscrimination laws do not apply. However a business which serves the public cannot just refuse service to anyone for any reason and must play by the rules of the jurisdiction in which it operates.

parrish says:

After being a manager/district manager for Gamestop for ten years I can say this “He’ll be fired by the end of the month”

I Agree, Gamestop is a business. My statment is true.

@Armpit – You dont know my situation or my age. I have a College Degree, an awesome job, an education “thank you very much”. I have played games since the Atari and played ever since, Your dumb comments dont apply. I already have have a Career, Education and probaly make more $$ than you do. As for the gamestop guy, he wont be in the job very long. Maby you can get his job. dont be so ignorant to judge. get a life.

It has NOT been butchered by InvaderGir and Dude because they are simply DEAD WRONG. However, it does certainly explain why there are still many discrimination lawsuits filed against U.S. businesses so many years after such laws were enacted because their ignorant employees (such as InvaderGir and Dude)still don’t understand that a business CANNOT legally refuse service to anyone for any reason.

As I wrote above, I am NOT stating that this manager’s sales policy is absolutely illegal discrimination. However, the enforcement of this policy could certainly result in illegal discrimination if a pattern of denied service to certain protected groups results from it.

You are an imbecile, and have obviously never even read about a discrimination lawsuit in the U.S. let alone been a party to one. To educate yourself instead of shooting off your ignorant mouth, I suggest you enter the words “discrimination lawsuit refused service” into Google and start reading some of the results.

“In the real world that means they can refuse service to whom ever they please, when ever they please, anti-discriminatory laws do not apply in all situations you can shake a stick at….it is not against the law to refuse service to anyone.”

That is simply dead wrong. Here is an example of a recently filed suit against Denny’s for refusing to serve some Arab customers.

http://www.nbc6.net/news/4423935/detail.html?rss=ami&psp=news&CFID=1962150&CFTOKEN=30522360

And, before you think these people won’t win or be successful, in 1994 Denny’s settled a class-action lawsuit brought by by black Secret Service agents and California students who were refused service for 46 million dollars.

“The company I work for denies the sale of services and goods all the time on price points”

That is a moot point as it is not relevant to the discussion. I am talking about refusal of service which us based upon or results in illegal discrimination.

“I work for one of the top 10 advertising and safety incentive companies in the US. You don’t think we got there by lowering our standards.”

If your company got there through the use of illegal discrimination, it won’t be there for long. Why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and name your company? I have some colleagues who do this type of litigation, and they are always looking for violators with deep pockets.

Bravo.

The guy is laying down the line – grades before games (Mmm – catchy, no?) – and is sticking to it – which is more than almost any other store owner would do (the no swearing is just common sense, and the no falling pants should really be enforced at the government level… what is the POINT of having your pants fall of your hips? If your going to do that, why bother putting them on in the first place?!)

Anyway, just wanted to voice my support for this gentleman, despite apparently uneducated people arguing the fact that it’s a breach of anti-discrimination laws. (That argument has been very well butchered by InvaderGir and Dude. ^^)