Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Rolfe - many thanks for the update. I have been to Crossgates as my son goes to Union and I believe the owner of that mall also owns the big mall here in Syracuse. While I am split on my feelings about the Iraq issue this Mall situation is pathetic. God I wish I wasn't working and lived near enough to Albany I would be there with a T shirt on and bells. by the way do you know Curt Miller - Albany Area and Berkshire Leica user? ernie nitka At 02:53 PM 3/5/03 -0500, you wrote: >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 - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html