Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 12:12 PM 3/6/2003 -0600 The Fool wrote: For example, if I wore a T-Shirt bearing the slogan Abortion is Muder in bright red letters, and the mall authorities asked me to remove my shirt, I don't think that either you nor The Fool would be posting an article here about my freedom of expression. Beep. Given that such an article would neither bash President Bush, nor copyrights. I think that its a reasonable prediction.Indeed, given that such incidents happen in schools every couple months Anyhow, didn't somebody just say something about ad hominems having no place here? You are the only one making ad hominims here. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
In a message dated 3/8/2003 6:47:10 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You are the only one making ad hominims here. But he's not alone. Our good Dr. Brin has been trying to sell more greens, reds, greys, and ivories in his nov oh, excuse me. That's an ad hominid. William Taylor --- Marshmallow Philosophy: The best thing to pull out when you see a flame. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
At 09:59 PM 3/6/03 -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote: - Original Message - From: The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bullshit. It that on your T-shirt? If so, perhaps I can recommend a good laundry detergent, as well as suggesting that one stay out of pastures . . . -- Ronn! :) Almighty Ruler of the all, Whose Power extends to great and small, Who guides the stars with steadfast law, Whose least creation fills with awe, O grant thy mercy and thy grace, To those who venture into space. (Robert A. Heinlein's added verse to the Navy Hymn) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
At 02:53 AM 3/6/2003 -0600 The Fool wrote: http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNewsstoryID=2326548 Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt Tue March 4, 2003 07:55 PM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - A lawyer was arrested late Monday and charged with trespassing at a public mall in the state of New York after refusing to take off a T-shirt advocating peace that he had just purchased at the mall. According to the criminal complaint filed on Monday, Stephen Downs was wearing a T-shirt bearing the words Give Peace A Chance that he had just purchased from a vendor inside the Crossgates Mall in Guilderland, New York, near Albany. It seems to me that a Mall is private property, and thus they have a right to avoid the creation of confrontation on their property. I suppose that he can argue that a Mall is essentially a created public forum. but that argument seems like a stretch.I wouldn't be surprised, nor would I be upset, if a court bought that argument from him - but my guess is that the Mall is private property, and thus, their rights will be upheld. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, John D. Giorgis wrote: It seems to me that a Mall is private property, and thus they have a right to avoid the creation of confrontation on their property. I suppose that he can argue that a Mall is essentially a created public forum. but that argument seems like a stretch.I wouldn't be surprised, nor would I be upset, if a court bought that argument from him - but my guess is that the Mall is private property, and thus, their rights will be upheld. How about the argument that the shirt did not create or stand to incite any confrontation, but that the mallcops' decision to be self-appointed brownshirts created the only actual confrontation? Marvin Long Thug life maru Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) http://www.breakyourchains.org/john_poindexter.htm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
Of course, the _actual criminal complaint_ (as opposed to the propaganda from activists) tells a slightly different story: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/crossgates1.html Gautam __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 9:17 AM Subject: Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt Of course, the _actual criminal complaint_ (as opposed to the propaganda from activists) tells a slightly different story: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/crossgates1.html Gautam The stories that I read indicated everything but them stopping other shoppers. I think the jury is still out on that unless the mall security guy's story is substantiated by other shoppers. In many cases mall security guards are police wannabes who don't have the qualifications to become a deputy sheriff. (I'm not saying those qualifications are low..we have a young guy at our church who just became one.) Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Gautam Mukunda wrote: Of course, the _actual criminal complaint_ (as opposed to the propaganda from activists) tells a slightly different story: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/crossgates1.html Interesting - there's a dispute of fact, it seems. The complaint suggests the two men were actively stopping other shoppers. In none of the news stories I've read, however, do the mall cops actually repeat that allegation. They just allege that other shoppers were disturbed by the shirts in some vague way. If the real offense was that the men were harrassing people physically, why were they not asked to leave for that behavior instead of being asked, at first, just to remove the shirts? It looks like the charges have been dropped: http://www.msnbc.com/local/WNYT/M276307.asp?0dm=C249N Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) http://www.breakyourchains.org/john_poindexter.htm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
John D. Giorgis wrote: At 02:53 AM 3/6/2003 -0600 The Fool wrote: http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNewsstoryID=2326548 Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt Tue March 4, 2003 07:55 PM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - A lawyer was arrested late Monday and charged with trespassing at a public mall in the state of New York after refusing to take off a T-shirt advocating peace that he had just purchased at the mall. According to the criminal complaint filed on Monday, Stephen Downs was wearing a T-shirt bearing the words Give Peace A Chance that he had just purchased from a vendor inside the Crossgates Mall in Guilderland, New York, near Albany. It seems to me that a Mall is private property, and thus they have a right to avoid the creation of confrontation on their property. I suppose that he can argue that a Mall is essentially a created public forum. but that argument seems like a stretch.I wouldn't be surprised, nor would I be upset, if a court bought that argument from him - but my guess is that the Mall is private property, and thus, their rights will be upheld. Also, he knew that other people had been arrested for the same thing earlier. He was deliberately trying to get arrested to bring attention to the issue. (At least, this is what I've heard; I don't have a URL for anything backing it up.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
Marvin Long, Jr. wrote: Interesting - there's a dispute of fact, it seems. The complaint suggests the two men were actively stopping other shoppers. In none of the news stories I've read, however, do the mall cops actually repeat that allegation. They just allege that other shoppers were disturbed by the shirts in some vague way. If the real offense was that the men were harrassing people physically, why were they not asked to leave for that behavior instead of being asked, at first, just to remove the shirts? It looks like the charges have been dropped: http://www.msnbc.com/local/WNYT/M276307.asp?0dm=C249N According to your link, they were, and one of them complied. The other didn't, was asked to leave, and then was arrested for trespassing. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Marvin Long, Jr. ... Interesting - there's a dispute of fact, it seems. The complaint suggests the two men were actively stopping other shoppers. In none of the news stories I've read, however, do the mall cops actually repeat that allegation. They just allege that other shoppers were disturbed by the shirts in some vague way. If the real offense was that the men were harrassing people physically, why were they not asked to leave for that behavior instead of being asked, at first, just to remove the shirts? Exactly. How would taking off their shirts have solved the alleged problem of them bothering other customers? This reeks of unreasonable, if not unlawful, intimidation. Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Julia Thompson wrote: Marvin Long, Jr. wrote: Interesting - there's a dispute of fact, it seems. The complaint suggests the two men were actively stopping other shoppers. In none of the news stories I've read, however, do the mall cops actually repeat that allegation. They just allege that other shoppers were disturbed by the shirts in some vague way. If the real offense was that the men were harrassing people physically, why were they not asked to leave for that behavior instead of being asked, at first, just to remove the shirts? It looks like the charges have been dropped: http://www.msnbc.com/local/WNYT/M276307.asp?0dm=C249N According to your link, they were, and one of them complied. The other didn't, was asked to leave, and then was arrested for trespassing. Yes - they were asked to remove the shirts. But if the men were physically accosting people, which is what the complaint appears to allege, why ask them just to remove their shirts? How will that stop them walking around and disrupting the activities of other shoppers? Is it reasonable to suppose that the mere act of wearing the shirts themselves, which bore no obscene or vulgar language, was so disturbing as to stop other shoppers from doing that they needed to do? Or is the crux of the issue that the mall is private property, so the management and mall cops can do whatever they damn well please? Excuse me sir, that shirt you're wearing is disturbing people. To prove that you're behaving like a good guest of the mall, I'm afraid we'll require you to remove the shirt, put your underpants on your head, and sing the Star-Spangled Banner with us in four-part harmony. You won't do that? Then you're trespassing. (I can actually imagine that argument succeeding in some places, actually.) Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) http://www.breakyourchains.org/john_poindexter.htm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
--- Marvin Long, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or is the crux of the issue that the mall is private property, so the management and mall cops can do whatever they damn well please? Excuse me sir, that shirt you're wearing is disturbing people. To prove that you're behaving like a good guest of the mall, I'm afraid we'll require you to remove the shirt, put your underpants on your head, and sing the Star-Spangled Banner with us in four-part harmony. You won't do that? Then you're trespassing. Marvin Long The Supreme Court should be one of them. There's no serious question that _even if_ all they were doing was wearing the shirt, the mall had a right to ask them to leave, and arrest them for trespassing if they did. See Instapundit's commentary, for example (Instapundit (aka Glenn Reynolds) is a law professor at UTenn, but I could have told you that without the law degree). If they were harassing shoppers - and I would guess that they probably were - then I don't even mind the mall telling them to leave. If they weren't, then that was a wrong decision on the part of the mall, but they were within their legal rights. Gautam __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
- Original Message - From: Marvin Long, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 10:22 AM Subject: Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Julia Thompson wrote: Marvin Long, Jr. wrote: Interesting - there's a dispute of fact, it seems. The complaint suggests the two men were actively stopping other shoppers. In none of the news stories I've read, however, do the mall cops actually repeat that allegation. They just allege that other shoppers were disturbed by the shirts in some vague way. If the real offense was that the men were harrassing people physically, why were they not asked to leave for that behavior instead of being asked, at first, just to remove the shirts? It looks like the charges have been dropped: http://www.msnbc.com/local/WNYT/M276307.asp?0dm=C249N According to your link, they were, and one of them complied. The other didn't, was asked to leave, and then was arrested for trespassing. Yes - they were asked to remove the shirts. But if the men were physically accosting people, which is what the complaint appears to allege, why ask them just to remove their shirts? Out of curiosity, what if a group of anti-abortionists were wearing shirts with anti-abortion slogans on it and coming to the mall every day to talk to shoppers. No accosting, just asking people if they think that people have a right to kill their own children, etc. I'm not trying to make this into an abortion debate, just trying to see the boundaries. Dan M. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gautam Mukunda ... If they were harassing shoppers - and I would guess that they probably were - then I don't even mind the mall telling them to leave. The mall security people didn't ask them to leave. They asked them to take off their shirts. Do you mind that? Since you guess they really were harassing shoppers, why was mall security's response to tell them to take off their shirts? What kind of security policy is that? Is it okay to bother people in the mall if you're NOT wearing certain kinds of shirts? How many clues does it take to become obvious what the real issue was? Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 10:28 AM Subject: Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt --- Marvin Long, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or is the crux of the issue that the mall is private property, so the management and mall cops can do whatever they damn well please? Excuse me sir, that shirt you're wearing is disturbing people. To prove that you're behaving like a good guest of the mall, I'm afraid we'll require you to remove the shirt, put your underpants on your head, and sing the Star-Spangled Banner with us in four-part harmony. You won't do that? Then you're trespassing. Marvin Long If they were harassing shoppers - and I would guess that they probably were - then I don't even mind the mall telling them to leave. If they weren't, then that was a wrong decision on the part of the mall, but they were within their legal rights. I agree with that anyone harassing shoppers should be asked to leave. I agree that asking anyone to leave because of a political statement they make (such as Stand by our president) can legally be asked to leave, but that it would be a wrong decision. What I don't understand is the juxtaposition of the actions by the mall security guard and the complaint. If they were harassing shoppers, then why did the mall guard state take off your shirts or leave. I could see we can't have people harassing shoppers, leave. I could see either stop harassing people, leave. But take off your shirts? My guess is that they were not harassing people, but that their shirts did stimulate conversation that disturbed a store employee. I saw a report that indicated that it was a Macy's employee that made the complaint, not a shopper. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The mall security people didn't ask them to leave. They asked them to take off their shirts. Do you mind that? Since you guess they really were harassing shoppers, why was mall security's response to tell them to take off their shirts? What kind of security policy is that? Is it okay to bother people in the mall if you're NOT wearing certain kinds of shirts? How many clues does it take to become obvious what the real issue was? Nick Since any criticism of the antiwar movement is inevitably and immediately called censorship, and we have a sworn statement that they were doing more than the protesters claim, more than we've got, actually. All I've seen is the claim by the protesters that they were asked to take off their shirts - since I give them little or no credibility, that isn't going very far. I'm not predisposed to think that we're plunging into a police state. It is not, in fact, okay to bother people on private property. Jackasses will be jackasses, which is one of the reasons why malls do, in fact, have security guards. The guards were within their legal rights to eject them for pretty much any reason - that's why it's called private property. If all they were doing was wearing (non-obscene) T-shirts, then they _should not_ have done so, but they were within their legal rights to do so. Gautam __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
- Original Message - From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:02 AM Subject: Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt What I don't understand is the juxtaposition of the actions by the mall security guard and the complaint. If they were harassing shoppers, then why did the mall guard state take off your shirts or leave. I could see we can't have people harassing shoppers, leave. I could see either stop harassing people, leave. But take off your shirts? ^^ or Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
- Original Message - From: Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 11:00 AM Subject: RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt --- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The mall security people didn't ask them to leave. They asked them to take off their shirts. Do you mind that? Since you guess they really were harassing shoppers, why was mall security's response to tell them to take off their shirts? What kind of security policy is that? Is it okay to bother people in the mall if you're NOT wearing certain kinds of shirts? How many clues does it take to become obvious what the real issue was? Nick Since any criticism of the antiwar movement is inevitably and immediately called censorship, and we have a sworn statement that they were doing more than the protesters claim, more than we've got, actually. Actually we don't. All I've seen is the claim by the protesters that they were asked to take off their shirts - since I give them little or no credibility, that isn't going very far. Well, lets look at who was arrested: Downs is the director of the Albany Office of the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, which investigates complaints of misconduct against judges and can admonish, censure or remove judges found to have engaged in misconduct. IMHO, it is reasonable to assume that he is fairly well acquainted with the lawwell enough to antagonize war supporters without doing any harassing at all. I'd bet he wasn't actually harassing shoppers, just offending folks who didn't like his view...probably on purpose. The charges were dropped, which may indeed have been a business decision by the mall, so we'll never know for sure. I would have guessed though that someone who was for going into Iraq and who had actually been harassed would have been willing to state that for their 15 minutes of fame. If I had actually been harassed, I would have been happy to tell folks. As far as any countering of anti-war protesters being the act of a tyrannical government, I agree that is silly. They should have exactly the same rights as anti-abortion protesters. Dan M. Dan M. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gautam Mukunda ... Since any criticism of the antiwar movement is inevitably and immediately called censorship, and we have a sworn statement that they were doing more than the protesters claim, more than we've got, actually. All I've seen is the claim by the protesters that they were asked to take off their shirts - since I give them little or no credibility, that isn't going very far. I guess you didn't read the police report, in which the police officer wrote that he or she asked them to please cover or remove their shirts and that if they complied with my request they will be allowed to stay in the mall and continue to shop as long as they do not cause any more gatherings. They said no they were going to continue shopping. I advised the Dows that [the mall] is private property and they will be asked to leave. And there's nothing in the sworn statement that says that the police or security people observed them bothering shoppers. That is entirely second-hand. And I'm quite sure, unless the police are incompetent, that they would have included such observations in their report. I'm not predisposed to think that we're plunging into a police state. Reductio ad absurdum. Nobody is claiming that here. It seems like we don't even agree on what the basic issue is. To me, it's not about the law of trespass. It is about our freedom to express ourselves without authorities, in law enforcement or otherwise, on private or public property, using pretenses to silence us. And that's what I see here, a pretense of these people causing a disturbance. Without a doubt, there are some messages that incite disturbances and it is proper for authorities to prevent opponents from interacting with each other in a way that is likely to lead to violence or significant disturbances. For some reason, the example that comes to mind was the presence of some very vocal Edmonton Oilers fans at a Pittsburgh Penguins hockey game I went to many years ago. The Civic Arena's security people insisted that those fans keep it down, fearing violence. At that time, the two teams were not on good terms, not at all. In fact, that very game set an NHL record for game delays due to fighting. By the end of the game, the ice had a lot of big red splotches on it -- players' blood from the fights. Where this kind of thing goes astray, IMO, is when the authorities choose sides by blaming one or the other group for causing the trouble that arises when people passionately disagree. When did we forget how to disagree respectfully? I find it disrespectful, indeed, for the mall and police authorities to insist that these guys remove their shirts. But I'd have no problem with them insisting that they not bother shoppers; a mall isn't an appropriate venue for such debates, unless the mall itself is somehow directly involved in the issue. And even then, demonstrations belong on the surrounding streets and sidewalks, the public spaces. It is not, in fact, okay to bother people on private property. Jackasses will be jackasses, Ad hominems have no place here. Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Gautam Mukunda wrote: The Supreme Court should be one of them. There's no serious question that _even if_ all they were doing was wearing the shirt, the mall had a right to ask them to leave, and arrest them for trespassing if they did. See Instapundit's commentary, for example (Instapundit (aka Glenn Reynolds) is a law professor at UTenn, but I could have told you that without the law degree). If they were harassing shoppers - and I would guess that they probably were - then I don't even mind the mall telling them to leave. If they weren't, then that was a wrong decision on the part of the mall, but they were within their legal rights. So far I haven't seen a news story that quotes anyone recounting being confronted or spoken to by the men, so I'm not inclined to leap to the conclusion that they actually harassed anybody. I'm sure you're correct on the legal implications of the mall being private property, which suggests that to me that the mall is run by gits, pure and simple. Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) http://www.breakyourchains.org/john_poindexter.htm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
It is not, in fact, okay to bother people on private property. Jackasses will be jackasses, Ad hominems have no place here. Nick If you think that the description of someone who is harassing people in a mall as a jackass is ad hominem, as opposed to fair...I don't want to ever go to a mall with you. Gautam __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
At 09:43 AM 3/6/2003 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote: It seems like we don't even agree on what the basic issue is. To me, it's not about the law of trespass. It is about our freedom to express ourselves without authorities, in law enforcement or otherwise, on private or public property, using pretenses to silence us. I don't think that you really mean that. For example, if I wore a T-Shirt bearing the slogan Abortion is Muder in bright red letters, and the mall authorities asked me to remove my shirt, I don't think that either you nor The Fool would be posting an article here about my freedom of expression. Please consider all the implications of this. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Dan Minette wrote: Out of curiosity, what if a group of anti-abortionists were wearing shirts with anti-abortion slogans on it and coming to the mall every day to talk to shoppers. No accosting, just asking people if they think that people have a right to kill their own children, etc. I think it would depend on degrees of behavior. If they're just wearing their T-shirts while shopping or having lunch, I see no problem. If they are making a daily habit of striking up unsolicited conversations with anybody who comes into earshot, I call that accosting for all practical purposes (whether it's harassment would depend on their attitude and persistence). But if it happened just once, and if the individual permitted himself to be blown off, I wouldn't care. If the individual clings or becomes abusive, then I start looking for security [*]. But if we have multiple individuals showing up every day and stopping people to talk about their issue, then it seems to me that we're talking about an organized group activity of some kind. Presumably the mall would have regulations permitting or disallowing such things and would be within its rights to put a stop to the activity or even to support the activity if the owners happened to agree with it (in which case I avoid that particular mall, which isn't a biggie because I avoid malls as a rule anyway). [*] In the t-shirt case I've heard nobody allege that the men were forcing people to have conversations, or that they were getting on soapboxes to speechify, or that they were part of an organized group devoted to doing such things. Nick quoted a police report that mentioned gatherings but I can't tell if that's legalese or if people actually were so offended at the shirts that they started gathering around Do the dirty looks of a Macy's clerk count as a gathering? Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) http://www.breakyourchains.org/john_poindexter.htm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dan Minette ... I guess you didn't read the police report, in which the police officer wrote that he or she asked them to please cover or remove their shirts and that if they complied with my request they will be allowed to stay in the mall and continue to shop as long as they do not cause any more gatherings. They said no they were going to continue shopping. I advised the Dows that [the mall] is private property and they will be asked to leave. Do you have a link on that? http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/crossgates2.html Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Gautam Mukunda ... If you think that the description of someone who is harassing people in a mall as a jackass is ad hominem, as opposed to fair...I don't want to ever go to a mall with you. We didn't agree that there was harassment... but more to the point, *this* is not a place for ad hominems. At least I think that's how the list feels, so to speak. It's certainly out of bounds with regard to other list members; I'd think it hypocritical not to extend it to the people we talk about. I'd hope that helps us keep our disagreements respectful. By the way, the head of the local McKinsey office has joined our board of directors at Plugged In. I'd gotten to know some of them already, by way of a good deal of pro bono work they did with us a year or so ago. Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 09:43 AM 3/6/2003 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote: It seems like we don't even agree on what the basic issue is. To me, it's not about the law of trespass. It is about our freedom to express ourselves without authorities, in law enforcement or otherwise, on private or public property, using pretenses to silence us. I don't think that you really mean that. For example, if I wore a T-Shirt bearing the slogan Abortion is Muder in bright red letters, and the mall authorities asked me to remove my shirt, I don't think that either you nor The Fool would be posting an article here about my freedom of expression. Bullshit. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you think that the description of someone who is harassing people in a mall as a jackass is ad hominem, as opposed to fair...I don't want to ever go to a mall with you. We didn't agree that there was harassment... but more to the point, *this* is not a place for ad hominems. At least I think that's how the list feels, so to speak. It's certainly out of bounds with regard to other list members; I'd think it hypocritical not to extend it to the people we talk about. I'd hope that helps us keep our disagreements respectful. Which was sort of my point, actually. If they weren't harassing people, then the description doesn't apply to them, no? I mean, it might well for other reasons, but I have no evidence either way. I have this vision now of Nick going through the mall grabbing random people and telling them about the importance of chaos theory to making breakfast :-) By the way, the head of the local McKinsey office has joined our board of directors at Plugged In. I'd gotten to know some of them already, by way of a good deal of pro bono work they did with us a year or so ago. Nick I'm glad to hear it. Gautam __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John D. Giorgis ... For example, if I wore a T-Shirt bearing the slogan Abortion is Muder in bright red letters, and the mall authorities asked me to remove my shirt, I don't think that either you nor The Fool would be posting an article here about my freedom of expression. I'm afraid you underestimate my idealism. And my thoughts on abortion. I believe that abortion very well may be murder; I certainly wouldn't argue that your t-shirt is wrong, although I'd have to concede that it may be. I have zero doubt that abortion is a sad and terrible thing that I wish we could end immediately. We are much more likely to disagree about how to respond to abortion. Please consider all the implications of this. All? I doubt if I could imagine all the implications, but it's a subject I'm happy to discuss here. Nick ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Dan Minette wrote: Reductio ad absurdum. Nobody is claiming that here. The reference to brownshirt alludes to that, I think. Self-appointed brownshirt - please get the whole quote. Which precludes an accusation of government wrongdoing, but which, yes, certainly alludes to the willingness of some ordinary people to behave like fascist gits under certain circumstances and when given a convenient excuse. If private property makes it legal for them to do so, it doesn't make the mall cops - or perhaps I should say mall management, or the Macy's clerk, or whoever it was that couldn't tolerate the sight of dissenting speech - nongits. Depending on the facts of the case, of course But so far as I can tell, the offenders did nothing but wear t-shirts and be seen on a solitary occasion. I also agree that we need to work on having more civil disagreements. I think there was no comment on Gautam's examples because there was no one who was interested in defending the behavior of the folks Gautam had issue with. It was wrong to do that, pure and simple. That is another example of people not being willing to put the effort into civility. ...? I must have missed this. Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) http://www.breakyourchains.org/john_poindexter.htm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
At 12:12 PM 3/6/2003 -0600 The Fool wrote: For example, if I wore a T-Shirt bearing the slogan Abortion is Muder in bright red letters, and the mall authorities asked me to remove my shirt, I don't think that either you nor The Fool would be posting an article here about my freedom of expression. Beep. Given that such an article would neither bash President Bush, nor copyrights. I think that its a reasonable prediction.Indeed, given that such incidents happen in schools every couple months Anyhow, didn't somebody just say something about ad hominems having no place here? JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
- Original Message - From: Marvin Long, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:27 PM Subject: Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Dan Minette wrote: Reductio ad absurdum. Nobody is claiming that here. The reference to brownshirt alludes to that, I think. Self-appointed brownshirt - please get the whole quote. Fair enough. yes, certainly alludes to the willingness of some ordinary people to behave like fascist gits under certain circumstances and when given a convenient excuse. If private property makes it legal for them to do so, it doesn't make the mall cops - or perhaps I should say mall management, or the Macy's clerk, or whoever it was that couldn't tolerate the sight of dissenting speech - nongits. Reading through the complaint, I think what they couldn't stand is a heated arguement in the mall. And, that's exactly what the person arrested was interested in. I agree that he probably didn't start the arguement, but was happy when it started. Arguements in malls are bad for business. I think you need look no further than Macy's wanting no distractions from the most important business of shopping at Macy's. I also agree that we need to work on having more civil disagreements. I think there was no comment on Gautam's examples because there was no one who was interested in defending the behavior of the folks Gautam had issue with. It was wrong to do that, pure and simple. That is another example of people not being willing to put the effort into civility. ...? I must have missed this. Subject: From Sgt. Stryker's Weblog One of my neighbors, who's in the Army and works in Oakland, was caught off post in her uniform by a bunch of people expressing their displeasure with the non-war in Iraq. They surrounded and harassed her for a good while until a few sailors happened upon the scene and extracted her from the situation just as it was starting to get a little rough. This isn't an uncommon occurrence around here but it's the first I've heard of it happening to someone I know. http://windsofchange.net/archives/003147.html IMHO, it is incumbent for each side of the political debate to strongly object to nasty tactics from those who they tend to agree with. Dan M. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
The Fool wrote: I don't think that you really mean that. For example, if I wore a T-Shirt bearing the slogan Abortion is Muder in bright red letters, and the mall authorities asked me to remove my shirt, I don't think that either you nor The Fool would be posting an article here about my freedom of expression. Bullshit. What if it was a whole group of people? What if it they were carrying signs instead of just wearing shirts? What if the signs said Vote for Bush in '04? What if the signs (or shirts) had some racist propaganda or slogans? How about if they had bullhorns too? Where is the line drawn? I for one would rather not see *any* of that at the mall, whether I agrred with the message they had or not. I don't think a shopping mall is the place for that stuff, and I suspect the mall owners would agree. It just isn't an appropriate forum. I think that the mall fully has the right to reject that stuff by asking people to stop displaying their message or leave. That said, the mall security might well have over-reacted, depending on what the facts really are. I don't think one or two people quietly wearing the T-shirts should merit any reaction from security. (I strongly doubt that was the case, though). On the other hand, it says here http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/crossgates1.html : Received complaints that they were stopping other shoppers. If so, I have no problem with them getting removed. And if they weren't stopping other shoppers, but their shirts were instigating loud arguments between themselves and other shoppers? Well, from the mall's perspective, I see that as a problem they'd justifiably want to put an end to, regardless of the t-shirt's message. I guess that's where I see the line being drawn: it's OK, unless it starts causing problems. And my guess is *that's* why those guys were asked to remove their shirts or leave; it was causing shoppers to complain (whether of being stopped or just or verbal disputes). I just don't see this as a freedom of speech/expression issue, unless you wish to argue that the shopping mall is an acceptable public forum for any and all forms of speech/expression. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Dan Minette wrote: Reading through the complaint, I think what they couldn't stand is a heated argument in the mall. And, that's exactly what the person arrested was interested in. I agree that he probably didn't start the arguement, but was happy when it started. Arguements in malls are bad for business. I think you need look no further than Macy's wanting no distractions from the most important business of shopping at Macy's. Lol. :) Those are good points, but...so what if he was happy? If he didn't start it, why blame the shirt (if you're a mall cop) as opposed to the individual(s) who couldn't abide the shirt? Obviously *they* were happy to have the argument, too. And if they *started* the argument, then they were the cause of the problem. Unless it's a magic argument-starting Peace Shirt +3 or something. example of people not being willing to put the effort into civility. ...? I must have missed this. Subject: From Sgt. Stryker's Weblog Ah, that. I hadn't made the connection. Surely in this case the harassers are equivalent to whoever started the argument, and not necessarily the person wearing an object that identifies him in some way? IMHO, it is incumbent for each side of the political debate to strongly object to nasty tactics from those who they tend to agree with. Granted. Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) http://www.breakyourchains.org/john_poindexter.htm ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
John D. Giorgis wrote: At 12:12 PM 3/6/2003 -0600 The Fool wrote: For example, if I wore a T-Shirt bearing the slogan Abortion is Muder in bright red letters, and the mall authorities asked me to remove my shirt, I don't think that either you nor The Fool would be posting an article here about my freedom of expression. Beep. Given that such an article would neither bash President Bush, nor copyrights. I think that its a reasonable prediction.Indeed, given that such incidents happen in schools every couple months Anyhow, didn't somebody just say something about ad hominems having no place here? Does cussing count as an ad hominem attack? (I think it depends on context, personally.) Maybe The Fool took your statement as an ad hominem attack on *him*. And maybe he would find it interesting enough to want to share anyway. He might not put the slant on it that you'd want, but maybe he *would* bring it to our attention. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
Marvin Long, Jr. wrote: I'm sure you're correct on the legal implications of the mall being private property, which suggests that to me that the mall is run by gits, pure and simple. If the mall is being run by gits, and you have a problem with gits, don't bring your business to the mall. I started avoiding Highland Mall at one point when it was reported that the security people were hassling minority kids at a much greater rate than white kids. So I took my business away from that mall. (Barton is a cooler mall anyway, and who *needed* to shop at Eddie Bauer?) Given that I have been informed by a (possibly not entirely reliable) source that he knew that someone else had been arrested or thrown out of the mall for wearing a similar t-shirt, I'd say that everyone behaved to one degree or another in an asinine manner. The guy for pushing it on a particular piece of private property when he had a decent idea of the outcome, and the security guard for not quite making sense. If the mall owners were to make any sort of official statement on the matter, I'd be interested in seeing it. I'd also be interested in hearing from any neutral party who happened to just be shopping at the mall that day and witnessed the guy's behavior before the security guard showed up. (Until we see *that*, it's just two opposing parties, and while the mall has the law on their side, the guy may have public perception on his side, and at some point the debate by other people may become entrenched and boring.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
At 14:22 6-3-2003 -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: For example, if I wore a T-Shirt bearing the slogan Abortion is Muder in bright red letters, and the mall authorities asked me to remove my shirt, I don't think that either you nor The Fool would be posting an article here about my freedom of expression. Beep. Given that such an article would neither bash President Bush, nor copyrights. I think that its a reasonable prediction.Indeed, given that such incidents happen in schools every couple months Anyhow, didn't somebody just say something about ad hominems having no place here? Does cussing count as an ad hominem attack? (I think it depends on context, personally.) It certainly doesn't count as ad hominem attack here. An ad hominem attack is an attack against a *person*, while the Bullshit comment referred to JDG's *argument*. Jeroen Big Difference van Baardwijk _ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On Thu, 06 Mar 2003 08:31:40 -0500 John D. Giorgis wrote: At 02:53 AM 3/6/2003 -0600 The Fool wrote: http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNewsstoryID=2326548 Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt Tue March 4, 2003 07:55 PM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - A lawyer was arrested late Monday and charged with trespassing at a public mall in the state of New York after refusing to take off a T-shirt advocating peace that he had just purchased at the mall. According to the criminal complaint filed on Monday, Stephen Downs was wearing a T-shirt bearing the words Give Peace A Chance that he had just purchased from a vendor inside the Crossgates Mall in Guilderland, New York, near Albany. It seems to me that a Mall is private property, and thus they have a right to avoid the creation of confrontation on their property. Wouldn't this be like getting arrested for smoking a joint to test the quality of the stuff somebody sold me in somebody's house? I suppose that he can argue that a Mall is essentially a created public forum. but that argument seems like a stretch.I wouldn't be surprised, nor would I be upset, if a court bought that argument from him - but my guess is that the Mall is private property, and thus, their rights will be upheld. I'm sure that in my example everyone in the house would be arrested for selling or allowing the sale of forbidden goods :-) Cheers! -- Han Tacoma - knows he's streching the metaphor! ~ Artificial Intelligence is better than none! ~ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On 6 Mar 2003 at 2:53, The Fool wrote: http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNewsstoryID=2326548 Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt Some facts. There were a group there harrasing and preaching to people there wering those T-shirts. They were thrown out. Then this guy comes along and does the same thing. He's a lawyer. He FORCED this as a PR stunt. Andy Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
On 6 Mar 2003 at 11:28, Dan Minette wrote: Since you guess they really were harassing shoppers, why was mall security's response to tell them to take off their shirts? What kind of security policy is that? Is it okay to bother people in the mall if you're NOT wearing certain kinds of shirts? How many clues does it take to become obvious what the real issue was? Nick Since any criticism of the antiwar movement is inevitably and immediately called censorship, and we have a sworn statement that they were doing more than the protesters claim, more than we've got, actually. Actually we don't. All I've seen is the claim by the protesters that they were asked to take off their shirts - since I give them little or no credibility, that isn't going very far. Well, lets look at who was arrested: Downs is the director of the Albany Office of the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, which investigates complaints of misconduct against judges and can admonish, censure or remove judges found to have engaged in misconduct. He should be fired then...sigh. As far as any countering of anti-war protesters being the act of a tyrannical government, I agree that is silly. They should have exactly the same rights as anti-abortion protesters. It's HIGHLY political, anti-war right now. And I for one have helped throw anti-abortionists out a private building where they were harrasing people. Also neo-Nazis, Anti-Nazi League, Evangelical Catholics, Jehovahs Witnesses and some Jews for Jesus (THAT one almost turned nasty), so don't feel they wee being singled out. Dawn Falcon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
- Original Message - From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 7:31 AM Subject: Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt At 02:53 AM 3/6/2003 -0600 The Fool wrote: http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNewsstoryID=2326548 Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt Tue March 4, 2003 07:55 PM ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - A lawyer was arrested late Monday and charged with trespassing at a public mall in the state of New York after refusing to take off a T-shirt advocating peace that he had just purchased at the mall. According to the criminal complaint filed on Monday, Stephen Downs was wearing a T-shirt bearing the words Give Peace A Chance that he had just purchased from a vendor inside the Crossgates Mall in Guilderland, New York, near Albany. It seems to me that a Mall is private property, and thus they have a right to avoid the creation of confrontation on their property. I suppose that he can argue that a Mall is essentially a created public forum. but that argument seems like a stretch.I wouldn't be surprised, nor would I be upset, if a court bought that argument from him - but my guess is that the Mall is private property, and thus, their rights will be upheld. Nahhe is going to win. He bought the t-shirt in the mall...that day. If the mall had taken no action against the seller, they have no claim against the wearer. Seems fairly cut and dried to me. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt
- Original Message - From: The Fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 12:12 PM Subject: Re: Lawyer Arrested for Wearing a 'Peace' T-Shirt From: John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 09:43 AM 3/6/2003 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote: It seems like we don't even agree on what the basic issue is. To me, it's not about the law of trespass. It is about our freedom to express ourselves without authorities, in law enforcement or otherwise, on private or public property, using pretenses to silence us. I don't think that you really mean that. For example, if I wore a T-Shirt bearing the slogan Abortion is Muder in bright red letters, and the mall authorities asked me to remove my shirt, I don't think that either you nor The Fool would be posting an article here about my freedom of expression. Bullshit. It that on your T-shirt? xponent Expletive Defeated Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
