1. no case -- no foreseeability...and they were not the proximate cause of his damages...had he simply taken the shirt off or left the store, this wouldn't be an issue. 2. i agree...he should raise hell about it in the press if he feels that strongly about it. bad PR is a very appropriate response to this sort of thing.
What about the flip-side Max? Is the same true for the pro-war crowd? Are pro-war shirts banned also? It is PC-ism because this was not an issue until now. They sell the shirts there at the mall. I'm pretty sure there have been others who have worn clothing or accessories that promoted peace. Can patrons not have peace-sign patches on their jackets? Can they not wear peace sign earrings? Can they not wear other quotes by John Lennon such as: "Imagine all the people living life in peace..." "Well, I don't wanna be a soldier mama, I don't wanna die" "I've had enough of reading things By neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians All I want is the truth Just gimme some truth" They created a rule and didn't bother to tell anyone. Nor did they outline what the rules are. That power obviously was left to the minimum-wage earning rent-a-cops. It may not be illegal but it's just wrong. That's all I'm saying. Stop arguing the legality of this. You are right, but that's not the issue (with me, anyway). My issue is how far can and will this go? They've already told teachers to not discuss the anti-war side of things, or at least to watch out how they present that side of things. Bottom line is that this is a knee-jerk reaction to the impending war with Iraq and possibly North Korea. They are saying that they will not allow thoughts that differ to that of our non-elected president. Next thing you know, they will ignore the voice of the people and start letting the supreme court decide who our presidents will be. Oh, wait.......
sorry.. but i don't see how you tell me to avoid looking at the legality of it when others are saying the law should be changed...that it's unconstitutional...and that it jumps you to b****ing again about the election of 2000...not a whole lot of coherence to work with. you're asking for fairness...i'm saying you need to take that up with the mall owner...and then if you're not met with satisfaction, boycott frequenting his mall...go to the press and tell the story...then we'll see how fair he thinks it is. i'm not saying the guy did the right thing...just that he had a right to do it.
I am willing to bet that you have seen cases with less standing, that eventually made $$$ for the plaintiff. I can easily see the store coughing up $2000 and a public apology, just to forgo the bad PR this case would generate.
What else is it then? They told him to remove the shirt because they were worried about potential backlash from another group of people that think differently. They condemned one group to save the feelings of another. Sounds like PC-ism to me.
that may be true. however, insurance companies are getting much tougher on these kinds of claims...they're trying to get away from the "we know we'd win in court, but we'll pay you anyway" mentality that has driven up premiums. also..for small stores like this (i'm assuming he didn't buy this shirt at an anchor type store)...there's no such thing as bad PR.
it isn't about saving feelings...they're a business, SC. a business. they're trying to promote an atmosphere where you're not met with political protest as you walk through. previously we've seen this more with shirts with profanity or lewd/disturbing pictures. they're trying to create an atmosphere and prevent a problem...that's it. and they have an economic interest in doing so. it's not about pc...it's all about money/business.
Ooooooooooouuuuuuuuucccchhhhh! A well timed, left jab, caught me fully unaware. You owe me a new coffee to replace the one I just spilled Back on topic. I don't think Max's arguments have anything to do with what was written on the T-shirt. Just that the Mall can deem it, or anything else (excepting discriminatory practices), unfit for their 'private' space. The arrest was for trespass -- not anti-Americanism. I'm not fully comfortable with this position, as I've stated. Legally, I just don't see this as a war/no war issue. I also think it's stretching to connect this to the teacher issue or asking how far "they" will go - as if "they" were some oppressive big government imposing its will. But I do like your dig at the '00 election.
I understand MadMax's legal arguments and think they are correct. However...in a country where you can get millions for spilling coffee over yourself...who knows .
millions which were reversed on appeal, as i understand it...no one ever reports the reversals of damages on appeal...they only talk about the jury awards.
I think there's more to the story than what is said in that original article. How safe is it to have 100 people protesting inside your mall? Group Protests N.Y. Peace T-Shirt Arrest 32 minutes ago Add U.S. National - AP to My Yahoo! http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=519&ncid=519&e=1&u=/ap/20030305/ap_on_re_us/mall_activists_6 By DAMITA CHAMBERS, Associated Press Writer ALBANY, N.Y. - About 100 people descended upon a suburban mall Wednesday to protest the arrest of a man who wore a peace T-shirt while he shopped. No arrests were reported. The group marched through Crossgates Mall at noon. At one point, there was a confrontation between one of the marchers and a man carrying a sign that read "9-11." Stephen Downs, 61, was charged with trespassing in a mall after he refused to take off a T-shirt that said "Peace on Earth" and "Give peace a chance." Mall security approached Downs, and his 31-year-old son, Roger, on Monday night after they were spotted wearing the T-shirts at Crossgates Mall in a suburb of Albany, the men said. The two said they were asked to remove the shirts made at a store there, or leave the mall. They refused. The guards returned with a police officer who repeated the ultimatum. The son took his T-shirt off, but the father refused. "I said, `All right then, arrest me if you have to,'" Downs said. "So that's what they did. They put the handcuffs on and took me away." Downs pleaded innocent to the charges Monday night. The New York Civil Liberties Union said it would help with his case if asked. Police Chief James Murley said his officers were responding to a complaint by mall security. "We don't care what they have on their shirts, but they were asked to leave the property, and it's private property," Murley said. A mall spokeswoman did not return calls Tuesday seeking comment. Monday's arrest came less than three months after about 20 peace activists wearing similar T-shirts were told to leave by mall security and police. There were no arrests.
i think you might be right...more evidence could work against any of the parties involved here. all of this argument so far is based on this limited information we have from this story. one time i was with a group of friends at a mall...for some goofy reason we decided it would be funny to walk in a line...there were about 10 of us. the security guards kicked us out. we argued back, but ultimately left, thus sparing ourselves the troubles this attorney ultimately got into. instead, we went to my house and watched the rockets lose to the lakers in the first round of the playoffs (91 i think)
Like I said, I understand that no laws were broken. I understand that private business owners can pretty much make their own rules. I understand that the arrest was not "officially" about the t-shirt. But it all started with the t-shirt. I suppose it would also be acceptable to approach a fat lady wearing a halter top and mini-skirt and tell her to go change her clothes or leave the mall because her appearence could be offensive to some. It just concerns me that this could happen over a shirt that is offensive to no one, except maybe war mongers. If the shirt had said "Give Peace a Chance... or go **** yourself", then that would be different. Like I said before, I have to wonder if a person wearing a shirt with a bald eagle dropping a bomb on the Middle East would have prompted the same action. We don't have all the facts but it appears to be some sort of double-standard.
how does it "appear" to be a double-standard? you're lacking in information to call it a double-standard. we don't know what the guy would do with a shirt that appeared to be pro-war. so it only appears to be a double-standard because you want it to be a double-standard. so i guess in the same way, it appears to me you have a double-standard. had this been a pro-war shirt, you wouldn't have these concerns at all. i mean, going on the information i have from you so far.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46365-2003Mar5.html Group Protests N.Y. Peace T-Shirt Arrest By DAMITA CHAMBERS The Associated Press Wednesday, March 5, 2003; 2:55 PM About 100 anti-war demonstrators marched through a mall Wednesday to protest the arrest of a shopper who wore a T-shirt that read "Peace on Earth" and "Give Peace a Chance." "We just want to know what the policy is and why it's being randomly enforced," said Erin O'Brien, an organizer of the noontime rally at the Crossgates Mall. Protest leaders were scheduled to meet with the mall's manager after the rally. Calls to mall officials were not immediately returned. On Monday, Stephen Downs, 61, and his son were asked by mall security guards to remove their peace-slogan shirts or leave. Downs' 31-year-old son, Roger, took off his shirt. But Downs refused. The guards called police, and he was charged with trespassing and pleaded innocent. Police Chief James Murley said: "We don't care what they have on their shirts, but they were asked to leave the property, and it's private property." The men had had the T-shirts made at a mall store and wore them while they shopped. so... 1. two people...one takes off his shirt, as instructed...the other doesn't...they ask him to leave...he refuses...he's charged with trespassing. 2. how in the world would the mall know about the shirts beforehand if they were MADE specifically for the persons who then put them on and walked around the mall? information we didn't have before, but again, this isn't the mall intrinsically ratifying the the sale of these shirts. they had no clue.
