titus wong wrote:
Of course not. Observing social customs is one thing; taking off my hat because it supposedly obscures my face from camera surveillance is another. But you seem to be deliberately confusing the two in an attempt to win this argument. Coffeeshops don't ask you to remove your hat inside because it's polite to do so. They're not trying to win any politeness awards and it's ridiculous to assert that they are.
Dude, if you want to read your first 2 replies in this thread and then the subsequent replies to ppl anwering you, I think you'll find it was you that started crossing the 2 topics into one. The reason for the hat rule is for security, that's it. If you choose not to understand the legitimacy of that reason it's up to you. But within minutes of having the rule enforced upon you, your mind was already made up. 'discombobulated'... in laymans terms, you were pissed off because you'd just been yelled at. The cameras are pointed at the doors, not at the stoners chilling out. Only some coffeeshops do it because only some need to, location, size, local patrons, profits on premises and council/police involvement due to 'issues' together make up the reason why. Other types of business do what
they need to in order to secure their business. A high class restaurant will not only ask you to take off your hat, but may ask you to put on a jacket and a tie before you're allowed in and that's got nothing to do with security or cameras at all. 'House rules' don't always make sense or seem right to everybody, but that doesn't mean they're wrong or stupid. The fact that you use a department and jewelry store together, shows what I'm referring to. Open floors and large spaces with multiple cameras compared to one room without a guard or automatic lockable doors and only one camera, require different approaches to security and just because you 'don't get it' doesn't mean it's dumb. Especially considering you're in a weak minority that feels it is and have a problem. Like all businesses, if you don't like what they do....then don't go there.
titus wong wrote:
Furthermore, I don't take exception to the "no-hat" policy per se, but the fact that coffeeshop patrons are being surveyed in the first place. The increased security would make sense if in fact coffeeshops were targeted more frequently by criminals. If not, asking coffeeshop patrons to remove their hats is tantamount to assuming that they are in fact, an inherently riskier segment of the population that warrants increased surveillance. The fact that the customers in coffeeshops are asked to do this and not in other tradeshops is blatantly discriminatory and constitutes social profiling.
You just seem to like repeating yourself while contradicting at the same time. You know nothing of the patrons of Amsterdam coffeeshops other that what you see when your here only holiday. Considering a percentage of coffeeshops are actually run by criminals, having cameras on your door is a sure way of both keepin cops happy and arseholes out. If you don't like it and don't go back to these shops, well then I guess the latter must've worked. When McDonalds sell G13 Haze burgers, expect cameras on the door and a 'no hat' policy to be implimented.
titus wong wrote:
Oh good, then you're agreeing with me that the "no-hat" policy is a completely unnecessary and a waste of time, as you have your regular patrons to subdue any troublemakers. Thanks for proving my point. Good for Nes.
I'm not agreeing the policy is unnecessary because we don't have much trouble at work or hassle from the authorities, but if we did and we were still a coffeeshop. There'd be a camera on the door and you'd be asked to take off your hat when you came in.
titus wong wrote:
Whatever rituals and taboos may be codified within a particular religion does not mean that individuals will necessarily observe them, so it's perfectly reasonable to assume a Sikh might show up in a coffeeshop. I know many Christians who don't go to church on Sunday, covet their neighbor's wealth, etc., and they go to coffeeshops too. What about an orthodox Jew wearing a yarmulke? If one showed up in a coffeeshop, would he be asked to remove it?
When religious ppl get hypocritical but still want to wave their religious freedom at me then yes I would. Businesses should have the right to enforce their rules on anybody if it's in their own best interests and not against the law. Considering religion is a fukt up idea that one day will be seen on the same par as believing in the tooth fairy, whatever laws are attached to it are only tempory.
'Cameras are everywhere'
titus wong wrote:
You brought up this point before and seem to be reveling in the fact that cameras are monitoring your every move. If you're comfortable with being a sheep, then fine. It's my right to speak up when I think my personal liberties are being encroached on and I hope others will continue to do so.
I want to thank you for posting the pretty pictures although I'm not sure what they indicate. You seem to be advocating a state-controlled society. I'm happy to be on the other side.
Enjoy the soma.
I'm not advocating or reveling in anything related to this topic, just explaining or indicating if you prefer, with visual aids....you're too fuking late, it's already here. Bitch all you like about it, but it's probably all you'll ever do.
Don't worry, this pretty picture has nothing to do with the new world order. Just what it feels like talking to you.....you're welcome!.
