Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ABC News)   Mall wants charges against peace t-shirt guy dropped, very badly   ( divider line
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

24293 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Mar 2003 at 2:31 AM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

320 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all

2003-03-06 02:33:40 AM  
2003-03-06 02:34:50 AM  
What shmucks. If I lived near there, I would refuse to ever go to that mall. Meh, got nuthin'.
2003-03-06 02:34:57 AM  
About time...
2003-03-06 02:35:47 AM  
Are these guys alright?
2003-03-06 02:36:57 AM  
This calls for a lawsuit. You don't arrest a lawyer for not taking off a pacifism shirt and get away with it.
2003-03-06 02:37:20 AM  
Kill kittens, not Iraqies.
2003-03-06 02:38:09 AM  

what about iraqi kittens?
2003-03-06 02:40:55 AM  
Well I dunno about other farkers but I find the image of a 61 year old man in a peace t-shirt difficult to kill kittens to. Even Iraqi kittens.
2003-03-06 02:41:59 AM  
Liv4speed1 - Could you have thought of anything more moronic to say?
2003-03-06 02:44:05 AM  
[image from too old to be available]

I think we have a case...
2003-03-06 02:48:19 AM  
Interesting. Corporate rights can now overrule civil rights. I may or may not agree with the guys politics but I would never expect that any corporation ever decide what's disturbing to me and thus protect me from it. I mean it's not like the guy was wearing a Creed shirt.
2003-03-06 02:49:15 AM  
yeah, i thought of something.

03-06-03 02:41:59 AM Andonbray
Liv4speed1 - Could you have thought of anything more moronic to say?
2003-03-06 02:49:48 AM  
The guy was not arrested for wearing the shirt. He was arrested because he was arguing with people, and using the shirt to assist him in causing a distrubance. He was asked to clean up his act, but refused.

He's an asshat. The mall did the right thing. It's all on
img.fark.netView Full Size
2003-03-06 02:51:46 AM  
Well, I think that the thing is unacceptable. I hope the guy sues the mall owners for every penny they have and then donates it to some anti-war group. I feel sick.
2003-03-06 02:51:50 AM  
VinegarJones, you do not have the right to wear whatever you want on private property. While private property rights may offend your Stalinist tendencies, here in America we try to respect them now and again.
2003-03-06 02:57:06 AM  
I live in Albany.. this Mall sucks.. it sucked the life out of the city and moved everything out to its pleasant zoned confines in the burbs.. even still its a farking eyesore.. i hope that the shiatstorm at this mall builds to a frenzy and explodes in blazing fury of anti-mall rage, littered with the corpses of suburban soccer moms and overgrown mallrat security guards..

2003-03-06 02:57:31 AM  
All in favor of not allowing people to wear certain T-shirts at a mall because they may "cause a disturbance", please raise your hand.


Yeah, that's what I thought. There is no need to argue about this story, you'd all just be bickering at each other over trivial crap.
2003-03-06 02:58:32 AM  
Nice, GEAH, I'm glad you're happy living in a country where you ahve to check whether your policical views or fashion tastes are the same as those of some asshat mall manager. At least somebody's happy about all of this...
2003-03-06 03:00:02 AM  
"Welcome to America! This is the greatest nation on earth! We have the most freedom of any citizens anywhere! NOW SHUT THE fark UP AND SUPPORT THE WAR OR WE'LL THROW YOUR ASS IN JAIL! NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW NOW!"

I really don't like the direction this country is headed.
2003-03-06 03:00:44 AM  
GEAH I would like to add that there was no offensive statements, words, images or inappropriate content on the guys shirt. I could understand if he was wearing a shirt with a great big vagina on it or a Creed shirt.
2003-03-06 03:01:27 AM  
I don't get this case at all.

The Smoking Gun has posted the police report from the incident, and I don't see ANYTHING about the lawyer getting arrested for refusing to take off his shirt... appears to be for refusing to stop pestering customers with anti-war diatribe.

Smoking Gun Docs

I'm trying to figure out why the media (including the Smoking Gun, if you read their caption to the docs) wants to turn this into something bigger than it is...
2003-03-06 03:01:40 AM  
Oh and to quote Jello Biafra "It's freedom of speech, just watch what you say."
2003-03-06 03:03:12 AM  
Liv4speed1 - That was a rhetorical question.
2003-03-06 03:03:22 AM  
Malls are places of public accommodation, which differs from private property. The rules are different. You still have to follow the constitution if you want people to frequent your businesses. Unlike your house, which is private property. There you can act like a Nazi asshole all you want, and toss people out to the street.
2003-03-06 03:03:38 AM  
The police report would have been from the statements of the mall security people / managers, who probably wree trying to come up with a half-decent reason to have the guy thrown out. I'd sooner go on eye-witness testimony.
2003-03-06 03:04:09 AM  
If you don't like the mall's policy, don't go there.
Yes I am happy living in a country where private property rights are still enforced.
The mall manager doesn't need a reason to throw someone out.
By your logic, I have the right to hang out in your living room and you can't throw me out.
2003-03-06 03:05:05 AM  
dude.. all that complaint shiat can be EASILY FABRICATED, and probably was.. you dont think that the mall could round up a bunch of Idiots? ( and trust me, i live here we have PLENTY OF IDIOTS around here) and give them movie coupons to lie and say that they were harassed?
Harassment is such a totally subjective concept.. its pointless to leverage something like this in these terms
2003-03-06 03:05:57 AM  
I thought the ultimatum he was given was to remove his shirt or remove himself, not to stop harassing people or leave the mall.
2003-03-06 03:07:40 AM  

You are mistaken.
The KKK would have the right to hold meetings at the mall, if this were so. They do not.
I do not have a right to force a newspaper to print my speech either.
It is private property, end of story.
The right to free speech [and other rights in the constitution] end at other people's property.
2003-03-06 03:07:50 AM  
The mall manager doesn't live there. He invites people in to shop, but then wants to enforce his own political views on the people who go there. The legalities of throwing someone out because you want to aside, the guy is about the biggest farking idiot imaginable.
2003-03-06 03:11:07 AM  
At any rate, if we're going to go the logical extension argument route, would you be saying that it's perfectly OK to throw out black people from the mall because it's private property and he can have whomever he wants kicked out? Near as anyone can tell the guy was just shopping there, as I don't believe the harassment thing for a second.
2003-03-06 03:11:28 AM  
Pogue, SpaceCoyote, Et Al: Sounds like you were O.J. jurors... the local police responding to the scene must be a part of the "cover up" conspiracy. Read their report.

Nowhere in the report does it say that the attorney (or his son) denied that they were pontificating to customers. The police report states that the two were asked to stop bothering customers or leave... the son agreed to stop... the father said he would not stop... and he would not leave.

Remember: the asshat with the t-shirt who was arrested was a friggin attorney.

Funny that the very liberal folks are actually believing the story of an attorney to suit their own spin on this non-newsworthy incident.

Bothers me a lot because I consider myself liberal... and I always balk at idiots (like Limbaugh) who talk about the the "liberal media." Hard to balk with these articles.
2003-03-06 03:12:49 AM  
Harassment is such a totally subjective concept

Is trespassing on private property subjective?

Subjective media, not subjective laws.

Oh, 3/6 is my birthday, so go easy on the flames. Love you all.
2003-03-06 03:12:55 AM  
Does this imply that I could have a African-American teen male removed from a mall because I may associate his fshion sense with gangsters and it disturbs me? Your it's his place and he does what he wants argument holds no water.
2003-03-06 03:13:30 AM  
The fact that malls have overtaken city streets as the 'commons' in most small to medium sized American cities poses a problem if one does not have civil rights when going about his or her business there. That's the solution, privatize everything, so people have no more liberties. Are you reading this, Mr. Ashcroft?
2003-03-06 03:14:35 AM  
Whether he lives there or not is irrelevant. He represents the owners of the property. He is supposed to be acting on their interests. If you own a store, you can still throw me out at anytime for any reason. I can't say "but you don't live here". Really, aren't you just blinded by your hate for corporations? If this was just a mom & pop store throwing the kid out this would not be a story. You are right about the manager probably being a big idiot though.
2003-03-06 03:16:09 AM  

Interesting. Corporate rights can now overrule civil rights. I may or may not agree with the guys politics but I would never expect that any corporation ever decide what's disturbing to me and thus protect me from it. I mean it's not like the guy was wearing a Creed shirt.

This is news to you? Corporate rights have been overriding civil rights for many, many years, dating back to at least the end of the nineteenth century. Open a book, or open your eyes, or something.
2003-03-06 03:16:54 AM  
Why the need to bolface the word 'attourney', there, Reedster? Let's play a little word game, shall we?

Funny that the very liberal folks are actually believing the story of a jew to suit their own spin on this non-newsworthy incident.

Making assumptions of someone's inherent believability like that is kind of silly.
2003-03-06 03:17:11 AM  
Dr.Fey Happy birthday!
[image from too old to be available]
I flamed you!
2003-03-06 03:17:31 AM  

Would it be "OK" to throw black people out?
No I don't think it is "OK" just like I don't think it is "OK" to throw someone out for wearing a peace t-shirt.
But it is and should be legal.
If you don't like it then don't shop there.
By treating people badly/immorally then you only hurt yourself.
I don't believe in legislating morality or thought.
That's PC bullshiat.
2003-03-06 03:20:11 AM  
Actually Reedster , Pyramid managment, the people that run that mall, and their rinky dink security, have about a DOZEN lawsuits pending against them for false imprisonment, and negligence, about 3 years ago, one of their securtiy guards at Crossgates was charged with Sexual assault on a minor, on the mall property.. so dont tell me that these guys arent a huge shiatpile of MORONIC rent a cops who are in way over their heads with this one..

GOD i cant wait for the busloads of protesters tomorrow.. i'm gonna buy a soda and watch the party
2003-03-06 03:20:25 AM  
OK, Begoggle, if I lived in the area I certainly wouldn't shop there. As I don't live in the area, all I can do it draw as much attention to the matter as I can, because I feel it's important. Which is what I'm doing. As for your statement about whether it's legal to discriminate against people in your shop, I sincerely hope you're mistaken.
2003-03-06 03:23:30 AM  
[image from too old to be available]
2003-03-06 03:24:41 AM  
In 100 years you will be living in company housing, eating company food, riding company transport and wearing company approved clothes.

The company food bit will be because the company will pay for your health plan so they will have the right to make you eat healthy approved food in approved amounts and stay healthy to cost them less in health $$$ and time off work due to illness. If you don't like it, you don't have to work for them.

Your choice, right ?
2003-03-06 03:25:53 AM  
SpaceCoyote, and other defenders of this guy:

The police report at the Smoking Gun indicates that the guy was arguing loudly with other customers. On page 2 of the complaint, it sounds like at least one customer was afraid the argument would turn violent.

Assuming this is true, do you still believe the mall had no right to ask him to leave? Or that once he refused to leave after being asked, that they had no right to have him arrested for tresspassing?
2003-03-06 03:26:00 AM  

Thank you. Gratuitist request for satisfaction for recognition received and appreciated.

Me fishing, but delighted nonetheless to have friends from Fark.
2003-03-06 03:26:14 AM  
Hopefully the end result of this will be that the mall dictators and rent-a-cops of the world will realize that people won't just bend to unreasonable requests without a fight, and hopefully they'll think twice before pulling a stunt like this again.
2003-03-06 03:27:25 AM  

You're an idiot.
2003-03-06 03:27:36 AM  
There is precedent that political speech is protected in shopping malls.​l=74

Not that I believe these two were doing anything of the kind. I suspect that if they were arguing with people (and that is very debatable), it was started by the pro-war zealots who routinely call people who believe in peace "traitors".
2003-03-06 03:27:56 AM  
He said his father would wait to see how the mall handles the case before deciding whether to sue.

Ooooooohhhh. The "S" word comes out in the second article I read about this guy.

Displayed 50 of 320 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.