Wait a minute. The reason is her political belief, is it not?
It’s her bumper sticker, not any belief professed by her. What if she borrowed someone else’s car? Or someone stuck a bumper sticker on her car when it was parked?
If you can’t do your job, you should be fired. If you have odd beliefs that prevent you from doing your job, perhaps you should seek out a different line of work.
Yeah the law of being a human being ! What a damn asshole he is ! If all of
Trump supporters are like this asshole we’re really in for trouble if Trump win in Nov!
In the Raw Story link he claims he did not know she was handicapped and said if he did know he would have stayed parked with her until another tow arrived.
Where did jtur88 say the driver he knows turned down calls because the client is black? Can you point that out to me, 'cause I must have missed it. In fact, I don’t see where it was mentioned that the lady in the OP was black, either.
Business owners do have a right to turn down customers for any reason, as long as they don’t belong to a protected class. I don’t see where that applies in this thread.
No, because it was a hypothetical. jtur88 said a business owner can turn customers away for any reason, so I suggested one that I thought wouldn’t fly.
Then it’s not any reason.
The Tooth didn’t claim that jtur88 said the driver he knows turned down calls because the client is black. jtur88 said the driver COULD turn down a job for ANY reason. The Tooth was questioning that, since the client being black is one possible reason.
As you said yourself:
“Any reason, as long as they don’t belong to a protected class” is not the same as “any reason.” That’s a significant difference, and that’s what you really missed.
That’s too bad; when I’m Emperor of the Known Universe I shall endeavour to make the law a little more symmetrical. Because personally I see “I can’t serve you because I’m a Rosicrucian” as equally discriminatory as “I can’t serve you because you’re a Rosicrucian”.
You’re being obtuse. The driver turned down calls from the state police stating he was too busy. OK, the real reason was that he was pissed off at them for making him go out of his way. He would have no way of knowing the driver’s color over the phone. “I’m too busy” is a perfectly legal excuse for refusing service.
Anyway, it goes without saying that a business owner can’t refuse service on purely discriminatory grounds. Find yourself another strawman.
I’m not being obtuse, I’m challenging the claim that a business owner can turn away customers for any reason.
Allow me to fight the hypothetical. Again, it can go unsaid that you can turn away customers for any reason except for certain protected classes. It can be assumed. Everybody understands it. It didn’t have to be pointed out. A tow truck driver can refuse to tow you because he doesn’t like the bumper sticker on your car. He can refuse to tow you because he’s afraid you might stiff him. He can refuse to tow you because he’s too busy. A restaurant owner can refuse to serve you if you aren’t wearing a jacket and tie. Nobody mentioned race as a valid reason to refuse to serve someone, but that doesn’t even apply in this case, so it’s not worth mentioning.
There is a solution here. Free towing for all. Get Bernie working on that right away please.
Bakers who refuse to bake wedding cakes for gay couples don’t understand it. From jtur88’s claim, I don’t think he understands it either. It did need to be pointed out.
What, she never heard of Uber?
Around here tow trucks tow cars, not people.
I think you’re being too literal. I fully accept cochrane implied caveat about protected classes. This is an irrelevant side topic in the main issue, since nothing here relates to protected classes.
Please explain how what I said is different from what you said. Or, rather, what anybody else said, because you didn’t say anything.
You mean, if a plumber is called to several houses, and he finds a circumstance at each one under which he’d prefer not to work, he can refuse to work on the white people’s plumbng, but cannot decline the black people’s plumbing? And, I don’t remember saying anything in my examples relating to protected classes.
I mean if the reason the plumber gives is that the customer is black, then the reason is not valid. If the reason is that the black customer needs to drain his basement first or some other technical reason before the plumber can do anything, that’s fine. So no, a business owner cannot turn away a customer for any reason. You said one could do so, for any reason, and this is simply not the case.
The plumber can agree to work on the white people’s plumbing and refuse to work on the black people’s plumbing so long as the reason he refuses to work on the black people’s plumbing is not that they are black.
Suppose a plumber has a serious allergy to cats and refuses all jobs in households that have cats. He works on a plumbing job in a white person’s home. But that homeowner has one dog as a pet and no cats. He then gets called to a job at a black person’s home and sees they have a cat and so he declines the job. Legally that’s ok. Still might get sued, but he has a neutral reason for refusing the job.
You can refuse to serve a member of a protected class for reasons unrelated to their membership in the protected class. You cannot refuse to serve them because of their membership in a protected class. Being of a particular race/religion/national origin/handicapped status/sexual orientation is not a free pass to automatically get served in every possible circumstance.
And so a jackass of a tow truck driver can refuse to serve a handicapped woman due to her Bernie bumper sticker.
So you are debating the common everyday casual usage of the word “any”. Guess it’s a fine way to kill time while waiting for the tow truck.
When he agreed to come, she didn’t call anyone else, so the clock starts as soon as he agrees to come. If she had somehow been able to know-- like, if he had mentioned “BTW, I don’t tow people with Sanders bumper stickers, people with “NO to GMO” bumper stickers, people with “COEXIST” stickers with all the little symbols, people who drive hybrids, vegetarians, women without bras, and anyone whose car is literally green,” then she would have known right there that she needed to call someone else.
He knew that there were reasons he might choose to deny her a tow, but he promised to come out anyway. He didn’t disclose the fact the when he got there, she might not qualify to be one of his customers, and let her make a decision based on that. If someone else called for the tow, and he did in fact disclose (which I highly doubt), and didn’t pass the information on to her, then she needs to name that person in her suit as well.
She can be compensated for any lost wages if she missed work, and if she missed a dose of a medication, she can be compensated for some pain and suffering. Then, just having to sit in her car, hoping she wouldn’t get sideswiped, a car which may have had non-functioning climate control, is another factor in pain and suffering.
Now, if he did disclose the fact that he might deny a tow, and she told him to come anyway, then she doesn’t have a case.
This isn’t discrimination against a disabled person, but her disability might come into play in a civil suit, if it exacerbates the “pain and suffering” factor.
Well, abandoning the car is a sure-fire way to get it towed, just not to where she wants it to end up.