Re: [Leica] Interesting in relation to photo ops in Malls etc.

[Rolfe Tessem <rolfe@ldp.com>]

Ernest Nitka wrote:
> Amilcar - with all due respect what happened at a private Mall is just 
> that - if the facts are as stated it was stupidity on the part of some 
> idiots looking to impose their view on this father /son - this is quite 
> another thing to start calling the USA a police state.  Also there is 
> always the possibility that the facts of the case are wrong - i.e if the 
> pair in question were attempting to have a pro-peace rally in a private 
> Mall they should've been escorted out of the building.
> 
> ernie

The facts of the case as reported are correct -- this is a local story 
for me here in the Berkshires in western Massachusetts and it has been 
extensively reported on local radio and television today. Obviously, it 
was an overreaction by the mall management, but what has created the 
climate that encourages such overreaction?

Ironically, so many local residents were so outraged by the mall's 
action that a couple hundred showed up at the mall today wearing tee 
shirts with similar messages. This happened earlier today and as far as 
I know, nobody was arrested. I think the mall learned its lesson on bad 
publicity with the first incident.

Also, malls may not be as completely private for the purposes of free 
speech as the owners contend. There have been some interesting court 
decisions relating to this. The one that comes to mind involves the land 
that the Mormon Church owns on downtown Salt Lake City. It is a common 
area that people use every day, but the church attempted to control 
speech on the property. They lost their case but I think it may still be 
working its way through the appeals courts.

The court basically took the attitude that if it walks like public 
space, and talks like public space, then it must be treated like public 
space for the purposes of free speech.

Rolfe


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html