You said earlier that there's probably a clause saying they can't sell adult items, but I'm guessing it's not as specific as that. Also, if someone feels that something could potentially cause a riot, then I'm pretty sure you could do something about selling something in your mall that could potentially cause a riot as well. Not all leases are set in stone. Until something comes out that the manager played it out like your scenario (which I doubt), then I'll continue to think he's a money-grubbing scumbag who only cares about his values after the money's already been spent.
Come on Max, a mall isn't the same thing as your front lawn. And I don't care whether the courts agree with you or not. The courts also said abortion is legal...are you OK with that? Didn't think so.
$15 for a shirt he may or may not have known was being sold in his mall? yeah..money grubber. again...even if he did know it was being sold in his mall, does he not have a right to say i don't want people wearing it in the mall? this kind of issue has been tried and retried in the courts over and over again...outside of West Oaks Mall there is a sign that specifically says the mall has the ability to judge the character of any message on your clothing...that protests aren't allowed...they discourage this kind of thing for obvious reasons.
why is a mall different?? what interest do i have in my own lawn that even comes close to a mall's interest in its own mall? in it's own business? bottom line...you think malls should not be allowed to do this? you can wear a big shirt that says "f@@@ you" in the mall, and they're powerless? it's their freaking mall!!!! they own it!!!
You know Max that's just really stupid. Wearing a give peace a chance t-shirt needs to be reserved for an appropriate place? How about reading a book on peace at the food court? You wanna throw someone out for that too? Tell them they need to read that in an appropriate place because we don't want any schmucks starting a fight with them over giving peace a chance? That is ridiculous. I'm sure they ban Anaheim Angels t-shirts too because they don't want any Yankees fans starting any fights in the mall. In fact everyone must wear a solid colored shirt at that mall because of the potential for fights breaking out. A t-shirt is an appropriate item for the mall, a lawnmower is not. Give peace a chance is not offensive speech. That's a really crappy analogy. Whoops...
Okay....scratch the lawnmower idea and replace it with crotchless panties from Fredericks of Hollywood.
Do you not see a difference between a shirt that says "Give Peace a Chance" and "**** You"? There needs to be some common sense here, and this mall owner, if he told them to do this, is showing none. If he's going to get offended by something like this, I suggest another line of work. Well, if you can't see the difference between a mall (which I doubt was built without any public money) and your front lawn, you must have some crazy public gatherings in your front lawn.
I was going to say the same thing, I don't think anyone especially a man can walk through a mall with a teddie on that they bought in the mall. Even though, I hate to do it, I'm going to have to agree with Madmax on the simple fact that its a very grey area. At the same time, if he brought a Civil Suit against the operator of the Mall and won, I wouldn't have a problem with that either.
I'm pretty sure it's illegal to walk around the mall with your cooch or schlong hanging out. Actually, here's an interesting question. If the mall owner said it was OK, could people do that? Or do you think they'd be arrested?
This is idiotic. Period. Were there any signs in the entrance that said "Peace Lovers Not allowed'? Where were the rules posted saying that "John Lennon quotes will not be tolerated here"? What if someone wore a shirt that said "Kill Sadaam" or "Nuke the Bastards!"? Would they have been asked to remove the shirt or leave? Sounds like a double-standard to me. It makes absolutely no sense that you cannot display what you bought in the very place that you bought it. Johnheath was right. The security guys were over-zealous and let their own opinions dictate their actions. I mean, really, all this over a John Lennon quote?! What has become of this country?
That article was so generalized I can't really see how anyone can be so stuck on one point or another. How many times has the mall done this? What is the nationality of the lawyer? How was he acting with the shirt? Where is the shirt presented in the store? etc. Way to many questions still out there.
you guys are right...i'm wrong. the first amendment trumps over private property rights everytime. i was nuts for thinking the owner of a mall could make decisions like this about his own mall. the mall SHOULD be owned by the state anyway. that way, it is the government that's taking this action...so then, it's all unconstitutional anyway. then, when a fight gets started, we should all hold the mall responsible for not maintaining a safe enough environment. we'll sue them and then b**** when they raise rates for leases in their mall, thus driving up the prices of the products sold there. it's all unconstitutional...in fact, anything that is ever done that wrongs me in any way is unconstitutional, no matter who was responsible for it.
i totally don't understand what your bottom line is? is it that the guy is stupid? if so, fine...just like i think the girl who turns her back on the flag is stupid...but can't deny her right to do it. or are you saying, like you seemed to be saying when you said the courts get it wrong sometimes, that this should be changed...that the law should keep mall owners from enforcing these sorts of restrictions? which is it? or is it both?
Madmax, support the property right of the mall if you want, but please think. warped idea? let me guess who's side you'd take when someone gets in a fight at the mall, gets punched and then sues the mall for not maintaining a safe environment. your fantasyland approach to the world is cute...but it is entirely impractical Apples and oranges. How is peacefully wearing a t-shirt in a mall like getting in a fight? So no Dallas cowboys shirts in a Houston mall because you might get punched by a Texan fan. by the way...the first amendment says "the government shall make no law abridging free speech...." please tell me how that is applicable here, glynch. I should let you withdraw this duck, but do you know that the "speech" in free speech is not just verbal utterances or sound. It could be a billboard or a t-shirt. my ideas come from those of locke and jefferson....not from marx...i realize that makes them warped from your viewpoint. Now anyone who thinks the guy should be able to wear the t-shirt is a communist. Can anyone see why Dick Armey and other Republicans who believe in freedom are joining the ACLU?
It is sad that so many people don't understand why this is not a free speech issue. I will give you a clue Glynch- government force was not involved.
this is too easy: 1. glynch, typically mall management is concerned about reactions from political speech on shirts...reactions from other customers...i've been involved in cases where entertainment complexes have been sued for not maintaining a safe environment after the fact in a situation like this. after some fool picks a fight with someone else there because of what's on his t-shirt...that's how it's relevant. 2. ummmmm...the spoken word vs. the written word wasn't my point...it was the "government" part that i was concerned with. this is a mall...a private owner...enforcing a rule at his mall. this is not the government doing that. he was arrested for trespass after he was told to leave, i would assume. they did not arrest him for wearing a t-shirt. NO BILL OF RIGHTS ISSUE AT ALL!!! 3. yeah, glynch...private property rights are worthless...it's all about me being able to wear whatever shirt i want wherever i go. it's all about me constantly being in protest...as if anyone else gives a damn...i have an inherent right to protest whenever and wherever i want, right? WRONG!
I agree. Your really overreaching here, MadMax. What if your child (a teenager, for example) had done the same thing and had the same thing happen to them? Your saying you would react the same way? I find it hard to believe that anyone would agree that this was A-OK. The fellow BOUGHT the t-shirt at the same place he get's thrown out of for wearing it?? And all it says is "Give Peace a Chance"? Your having spasms in the knee, MadMax. Knee-jerking happenin' left, right and center. Having a bad day?
I don't think anything should happen to the mall owner outside of any boycotts or protests to his business. Of course, if the mall was built with any public monies, I have an even bigger problem with this, and would possibly support a lawsuit. Hell freedom of speech (to a certain extent, sorry if I don't think "**** you" is the same as "Give Peace a Chance") to me is one of the most important things in this country, so I'd probably support a civil suit anyway. I think he should maybe make restitution to this guy and probably open his mind a little bit, but other than that, I don't think he should be shut down. From what I know of this story (and I concede that there may be more than we know), he sounds like an idiot. I was combating the idea that a mall is like someone's living room, cause it's not (regardless of what the courts say). For one thing, you don't have complete strangers hanging out in your living room or front lawn. Malls in our society have become like parks or movie theatres or any other place people go to socialize. I have a problem when some idiot manager (or security guards) decide that someone can't wear a shirt that says something along the lines of "Give Peace a Chance" That, and the assertion that this shirt could cause a riot, but selling it would not. That, and if you really felt that something like that shirt (please) could cause a riot, then you could probably legally demand the vendor to stop selling the shirt. Let me ask you this. What if a mall manager saw you wearing a DMB shirt while you were with your son, and he didn't like it, wanted you to leave, then had you arrested. Would you chalk it up to property rights? I hope not.
thanks for your concern....i think calling this a constitutional issue is a knee jerk reaction...that was the crux of my response. was the mall owner/manager an idiot for doing this? sure...he probably has created a ton of bad press for himself. was he entitled to do so as a private property owner?? absolutely, he was. the guy didn't get thrown in jail for wearing the shirt...that's where the mistake in rationale seems to be here....he got thrown in jail for trespass...likely after he was asked to take the shirt off (presumably he had one he wore in that he could have worn instead)...and then, after refusing that, refused to leave. had he left or just taken the shirt off, this wouldn't be a story today. so he's the rosa parks of tshirt wearers, i suppose...t-shirt wearers unite!
