[B5JMS] And So It Begins...

[b5jms-admin at cs.columbia.edu]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: velovich at aol.com (V-Man)
Date: 01 Apr 2003 06:46:01 GMT
Lines: 56

>>*Really*?   So you are about to get that knock on your door for speaking
>out?
>
>On the other hand, we are hearing about more and more cases of people being
>arrested for expressing an anti-war sentiment. 

  Sorry, that hasn't been on CNN that *I* saw.  I see people expressing
anti-war sentiment and getting *harassed* by their neighbors, but that isn't a
violation of their rights.

  I saw a woman working for a C&W record label that publicly criticised a C&W
artist get canned for opinions that might have, in her business life, hurt the
company.

  But feel free to post a link to ANYONE that was MERELY expressing their
views, in a public place and NOT part of an illegal demonstration(1).

  (1)  Illegal in this context is one that did not bother to gt a permit,
likely due to a desire by the organisers to be disruptive.

>Most recent case in point, a father and son who were accosted by security at
>a
>shopping mall in Albany, NY, for wearing t-shirts that said GIVE PEACE A
>CHANCE, shirts that, btw, they had *bought* at that same mall the day before.

  I said arrest, you say accost.  In *Indiana*, the local climate is such that
people don't make such protests on an individual basis - they are very much in
the minority.  If they have the right to speak their mind, so does everyone
else, *right*?

>When the father refused to remove the t-shirt, he was arrested.  There have
>been other cases of such arrests.  

  What was the charge?  I'm guessing, since I know a bit of the law, that they
were asked to leave by Security, refused, and then arrested.  
   You see, it *is* private property and many malls do not want customers
starting fights over politics.  The Mall owners, through thier officers and
security people, can expel anyone from the mall they wish.  When people are
told they must leave, I often see them arguing with security.  Stupid move -
the police will listen to the security guys first.

   So I have to question the judgement of the idiot that got arrested.

  This particualr arguement is weak, Joe.  i can come up with a number of
examples where other issues would force much the same thing.  it's an example
of somebody holding their right to speak above the property rights of others. 
That is not guaranteed.  You have the right to free speech, but not in the mall
if the mall's owner disagrees with you.

  Had their t-shirt said:  "FUCK YOU!" the result would have been the same.


Play more with Claymore!  V-Man
Living Vicariously through my Characters...



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Date: 01 Apr 2003 21:30:21 GMT
Lines: 27

>What was the charge?  I'm guessing, since I know a bit of the law, that they
>were asked to leave by Security, refused, and then arrested.  

No, that's not what happened.  They were told that they could stay IF they
removed the t-shirts.  They were only told to leave after they refused to take
off the shirts.

And again, I point out that the shirts they were wearing had been purchased AT
THE SAME MALL the day before.  

The police arrived, said you can't wear that shirt in here.  The father -- who
is not "an idiot" as you claim but a respected attorney in the area -- said no,
that he wsa NOT engaged in a demonstration or a protest, only wearing a shirt
and using his freedom of expression.  They then arrested him.


 jms

(jmsatb5 at aol.com)
(all message content (c) 2003 by synthetic worlds, ltd., 
permission to reprint specifically denied to SFX Magazine 
and don't send me story ideas)