Man arrested for 'peace' T-shirt
-
But the Mall allowed the sale of the T-Shirt on it's property. Oh wait ... the mall gets revenue off that.
-
l a u r e n wrote: yes a shopping mall is private property but its not private property like someones house is in my opinion ... shopping malls are kind of public property or at least in principle to my mind Free speech becomes a sticky issue when you try to define what is and what isn't offensive. I agree that a mall is a find of public area, but it is still private property. This is an issue for the courts to decide, and I'm sure this lawyer will take it as far as he can.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiThe NY law I found on the web (with a quick reading) supports the mall's right have him arrested for trespassing after being asked to leave. Now the big question is if they had the right to ask him to leave. I really don't see reason why they can't ask him to leave. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
-
NEW YORK PENAL LAW PART THREE--SPECIFIC OFFENSES TITLE I--OFFENSES INVOLVING DAMAGE TO AND INTRUSION UPON PROPERTY ARTICLE 140--BURGLARY AND RELATED OFFENSES http://www.rcdaoffice.org/nylaws/pl/plarticle140.htm[^] Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
OK - whoever did the colour scheme for that page should stand trial. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
OH! Now i get it, you wear a shirt that say's "Peace" in an attempt to provoke a disturbance. Thanks Jason, It's so simple, i don't know why i couldn't understand.
"No matter where you go, there your are..." - Buckaoo Banzi
-pete
-
Why assume the guy is telling the truth? After all, he is being charged with a crime that could land him in jail. Do you think he would actually admit to the gravity of what he might have done? Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
Why assume the guy is telling the truth? After all, he is being charged with a crime that could land him in jail. Do you think he would actually admit to the gravity of what he might have done? Why assume he's lying? What "gravity"? Clearly you skipped an important part of the story: According to the criminal complaint filed Monday See, you have to go with the facts. You can't just make them up to suit your prejudices. And in case you wonder why we only have one side of the story: Calls to the Guilderland police and district attorney, Anthony Cardona and to officials at the mall were not returned for comment.
-
http://www.msnbc.com/local/WNYT/M276307.asp[^] "Signs posted at entrances to the mall say that 'wearing of apparel... likely to provoke disturbances... is prohibited' at the mall. " Hmmm, I wonder why CNN neglected to mention this? Its a stupid rule, but its private property.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiJason Henderson wrote: "Signs posted at entrances to the mall say that 'wearing of apparel... likely to provoke disturbances... is prohibited' at the mall. " Why would anyone think that a shirt that says "Give Peace a Chance" is likely to provoke disturbances? This is the kind of open-ended rule that is turning this nation into a police state: everything is illegal, subject to the discretion of the arresting officers.
-
OK - whoever did the colour scheme for that page should stand trial. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: However, to prove equal and fair treatment, they should also kick out people wearing pro-life, pro-choice, pro-gay, anti-gay, pro republican, pro-democrat, and other similarly reactionary clothing. What if you are gay, republican or democrat? (Yes, there are only three choices ;)) and one of the guards overhear a conversation you have with your friend on the cell phone which may be something which the owner doesn't want you to say at their place. Can they kick you out because of that, or would that be invasion of privacy by the guard? If it is invasion of privacy, then there IS a free speech issue. You can say as much as you want on the phone, but you can't wear a sign saying it. Asymmetric freedom of speech. Is it also possible to refuse people entrance because of ethnicity? Could they kick me out if I decided to wear a jewish outfit? (Hat, black clothing, sideburns, etc) I think it's odd that your government allow the owners of these public places (they do have Welcome signs, hence they must be public, right??) to refuse entrance to certain people based on their own prejudices. I'm ok with the guards removing a person behaving badly, but I don't think wearing a tshirt qualifies as behaving badly unless it's got C4 attached to it. -- Shine, enlighten me - shine Shine, awaken me - shine Shine for all your suffering - shine
If you are talking on a phone in a public place, there is no expectation of privacy. Nor is what you wear that is openly visible to the public a question of privacy. If it was, then everyone who looks at you would be invading your privacy. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
-
Jason Henderson wrote: but its private property. Funny how this changes depending on the incident at hand. A few months back people here were discussing the police in VA arresting people in restaurants before who were sitting at the bar legally drunk. In that argument restaurants were considered public property and therefore the police had the right to arrest because of public drunkeness laws. They are both technically privately owned, but accessible to the public without special permission, so should be defined similarly. BW "We get general information and specific information, but none of the specific information talks about time, place or methods or means..." - Tom Ridge - US Secretary of Homeland Security
-
Jason Henderson wrote: "Signs posted at entrances to the mall say that 'wearing of apparel... likely to provoke disturbances... is prohibited' at the mall. " Why would anyone think that a shirt that says "Give Peace a Chance" is likely to provoke disturbances? This is the kind of open-ended rule that is turning this nation into a police state: everything is illegal, subject to the discretion of the arresting officers.
Jim A. Johnson wrote: Why would anyone think that a shirt that says "Give Peace a Chance" is likely to provoke disturbances? Maybe they don't want a peace march in their mall? Jim A. Johnson wrote: This is the kind of open-ended rule that is turning this nation into a police state: everything is illegal, subject to the discretion of the arresting officers. I agree.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Gandhi -
Jason Henderson wrote: "Signs posted at entrances to the mall say that 'wearing of apparel... likely to provoke disturbances... is prohibited' at the mall. " Why would anyone think that a shirt that says "Give Peace a Chance" is likely to provoke disturbances? This is the kind of open-ended rule that is turning this nation into a police state: everything is illegal, subject to the discretion of the arresting officers.
-
http://www.msnbc.com/local/WNYT/M276307.asp[^] "Signs posted at entrances to the mall say that 'wearing of apparel... likely to provoke disturbances... is prohibited' at the mall. " Hmmm, I wonder why CNN neglected to mention this? Its a stupid rule, but its private property.
Jason Henderson
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - GandhiWhat I'd like to know, is if the guy carrying the "9-11" sign was also forced to leave or arrested. Chris Richardson C/C++ Include Finder[^]
-
>> so get off my back dude, i was no way getting on your back, i think its totaly bogus sorry for the confusing post. i guess i need a element around that last post.
"No matter where you go, there your are..." - Buckaoo Banzi
-pete
-
-
What I'd like to know, is if the guy carrying the "9-11" sign was also forced to leave or arrested. Chris Richardson C/C++ Include Finder[^]
-
What I'd like to know, is if the guy carrying the "9-11" sign was also forced to leave or arrested. Chris Richardson C/C++ Include Finder[^]
If he was not asked to leave, then there would be no reason to arrest him. The silliness here is with the mall. I wish people would leave the police out of it because they were just doing their job. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
-
Let's hope so. There's an infinite possiblity of "offensive" content, so it's like any person in the mall could get someone else kicked out just for wearing something they didn't happen to like. Chris Richardson C/C++ Include Finder[^]
-
-
If he was not asked to leave, then there would be no reason to arrest him. The silliness here is with the mall. I wish people would leave the police out of it because they were just doing their job. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
Well, I was really wondering whether or not he was asked to leave, since it would seem he was in violation of the mall rules. Then, I was wondering if they did ask him to leave, did he, and if not, was he arrested. I have no complaint against the police arresting the guy, since he was breaking the law, but the mall rules are ridiculous. I replied to Jason above, that there seems to be an infinite possibility of "offensive" content or content that would cause disturbances. Chris Richardson C/C++ Include Finder[^]
-
But nobody reads stories "Man arrested for trespassing". It doesn't cater to the stupid. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
Of course you can't arrest someone for wearing a T-shirt, there's no law against specific writings. That's typical "law processing": 1) A does something B does not approve of 2) B is looking for an "applicable" law. Trespassing, or causing public .. (how you say in english? like "Stir up") The event shows: Enough people believe a "Give peace a chance" T-Shirt is punishable by law. These are the more dangerous stupidos IMO.
If you go to war, you will destroy a great country a stoned greek chick to the richest man of the world
sighist | Agile Programming | doxygen