Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Everyone wants to slam the OP for the title of the thread, it is the same as the observer titled it. If the person would've obeyed the rules there never would have been an issue, so yeah the bassakwards hat is the root of the problem.
So if you walk into the Epicenter with your hat on backwards, and the CMPD tells you to reverse and you don't, not one but two cops will arrest you which includes cuffing and and being hauled off to jail. This seems like a horrendous waste of police & court resources especially in a city where people are getting shot dead on the street.
One guy is so upset that he started a movement.
Private property, private rules. If you don't abide by the rules then you are not welcome. If you are not welcome on private property then you are trespassing. Bye-bye. It sounds perfectly reasonable to me. What's the problem?
Private property, private rules? Really? I think I recall a smoking ban that turns that theory right on its head.
If the guy was asked to leave and didn't, he should have been arrested. End of story. Trespassing is an arrestable offense. He thought horns wouldn't hook. He thought wrong.
Everyone wants to slam the OP for the title of the thread, it is the same as the observer titled it. If the person would've obeyed the rules there never would have been an issue, so yeah the bassakwards hat is the root of the problem.
I'm not slamming anyone but I do think the title is misleading. Can you link us to the original article at the Observer? I can't find anything that says CMPD is arresting people for how they are wearing hats.
And I think the person's root problem goes way back further than this incident.
You can't arrest someone for the way they are dressed unless it falls under some sort of "decency" statute.
A place of business can have a dress code, but privately hired security guards (or bouncers, lol) would be who handled removal from the premises - not CMPD.
THey would have to be making a big scene -like - causing a public disturbance - for CMPD to get involved.
ETA: sorry for being redundant - i just read a few posts and responded to one - didn'trealize a link and more discussion had followed. My post seems a little late to the table, hee hee.
Private property, private rules? Really? I think I recall a smoking ban that turns that theory right on its head.
If the guy was asked to leave and didn't, he should have been arrested. End of story. Trespassing is an arrestable offense. He thought horns wouldn't hook. He thought wrong.
Apples and Oranges. If there were a law that stated hats must be worn with the brim forward, the private business would be risking fines or other government intrusion if they allowed their patrons to wear their hat any other way.
If there is no law to dictate the protection or restriction of a behavior then the private business can create any rule they want regarding it. And "86" from their property any violators.
I wonder about that... If someone was dressed like a Nazi & enjoying themselves at the Epicenter I wonder if they would be asked to leave?
Where I work, we throw people out daily. Because of how they are dressed, their behavior, their level of intoxication, just about anything. We ask them to leave. If we don't want them to ever come back, we tell them just that. If they do come back after we've told them not to, we have them arrested for trespassing. A fairly regular routine at my place of employment.
Private property, private rules? Really? I think I recall a smoking ban that turns that theory right on its head.
In theory I agree with you, but that's an issue of public health, and supersedes any private rules. Protecting non-smokers from the toxins produced by smokers is an excellent idea.
In theory I agree with you, but that's an issue of public health, and supersedes any private rules. Protecting non-smokers from the toxins produced by smokers is an excellent idea.
I think it's crap. In public places, sure. A private business should be allowed to control any legal behavior on their own property. Eventually, I believe the Courts will overrule these laws when the government spreads this theory beyond smoking.
Oh, and by the way, I've never been a smoker and think it's a disgusting habit.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
