A black father claims he was ‘racially profiled’ and ‘refused service’ at an arts and crafts store when buying paint for his son because staff allegedly assumed he would undertake an ‘incidence of graffiti’.
Of course, it was because he was racially profiled. Or maybe not.
But Hobbycraft says it was because he could not provide ID for an age related product.
On the one hand, this is ridiculous, because he is clearly over the relevant age, but on the other, if that’s their policy, it’s got bugger all to do with race.
Louis Gray, from Cardiff, alleges he was refused service at his local Hobbycraft store on Saturday when trying to buy spray paint with his four-year-old son so that he could have a bike helmet in ‘a new colour to be like his idol’.
Mr Gray said: ‘I was buying spray paint, to ironically spray my 4-year-old’s bike helmet a new colour to be like his idol. You need to be 16 to buy spray paint in the UK, 16! Cool I accept that, but that’s in place to stop ‘incidences of graffiti’, in my opinion very different to gambling and alcohol.’
You stupid, stupid prick. You never spray paint a helmet. It damages the plastic and degrades the helmet’s ability to do its job. How moronic do you have to be? In this instance, daft policy or not, Hobbycraft did this moron’s son a favour.
We need more incidents of these “Darwin award” candidates not less.
Sure, his son doesn’t deserve to have a wanker of a father but I’m willing to miss out on the next premier league footballer, DJ or rapper.
A lot of shops tell their staff to ask for ID for anybody who looks under a certain age, e.g. 25 or 30. I’ve seen photos of 15 year old illegal immig… sorry, asylum seekers who look older than he does.
Also, the thing about graffiti is simply the reason why they ask. So someone was just explaining this. But no, bwah, racism.
Cycle helmets have a thin polycarbonate shell but the part that provides protection is made from expanded polystyrene. I’m pretty sure that the solvents in spray paint would dissolve it. So I would say that the pair of them are too immature to buy paint. Kid’s cycle helmets are pretty cheap, it would make more sense to just buy one in the desired colour.
Yes, the solvents would degrade it. I had a student come in with a helmet that she had resprayed with a rattle can. The thing was polycarbonate and the solvents would have rendered it useless. Fucking idiots.
How do you ‘ironically’ spray paint a helmet to look like another?
Oh for f**k sake the kid was 4. What do you think he was riding a Harley? Spray painting his helmet wouldn’t make any difference, criticize something worthwhile for gods sake.
No, you are completely wrong. Cycle helmets have vents in them so the spray paint would definitely get onto the polystyrene lining and completely destroy it. If you don’t believe me grab a piece of expanded polystyrene packaging and try painting it with a spray can and then watch what happens to it.
Helmets are designed for a purpose. Spray painting them will cause the material to degrade, completely nullifying any benefit the helmet might have. So my criticism is perfectly valid, thanks all the same, and I will criticize whatever I damned well choose..
You lot don’t seem to get it. It doesn’t matter if the paint destroys the helmet, for a four year old peddling round his garden it makes no damn difference. Your criticism is petty and ridiculous – talk about making a mountain out of a molehill.
I get it perfectly well. Kindly refrain from telling me what I do or do not get. There is nothing wrong with either my understanding or the point I made. It was perfectly valid and I stand by everything I said. Kindly refrain from telling what I may or may not criticize.
The main point is that ALL spray paints are classed as Age Restricted, not by the retailer but by the Government. Failure to ascertain the age of the purchaser if they appear to be under the age of 25, makes the individual cashier liable to a fine of up to £50,000 and the business subject to a similar fine.
I am such a cashier and have refused may times to sell an age restricted item.
Don’t feed the troll.
The only appropriate response here is not to engage with the infantilised attention whore.
It’s a stupid rule, but there are serious consequences for the individual shop assistant who breaks it and for his employer.
They are innocent until proven guilty.
The black grifters might have the shrieking sewer on their side, but in this case they don’t have the actual law or public opinion (not that the latter counts – but there are signs that it might be starting to).