Person arrested in WM 'prank'......

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
16,067
Location
Canada
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/worl...article1506926/

Personally, I think arresting someone in this incident is going too far.

What this person did was mean, juvenille, and in extremely poor taste - but it was not a crime. There are NO laws against being an idiot and making a fool of yourself.

This person didn't threaten another person or even make a personal insult against someone - they made a stupid satement that IS covered by freedom of speech, no matter how distasteful that is.

Anyone agree? I don't reallty expect anyone to....
 
Originally Posted By: addyguy
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/worl...article1506926/

Personally, I think arresting someone in this incident is going too far.

What this person did was mean, juvenille, and in extremely poor taste - but it was not a crime. There are NO laws against being an idiot and making a fool of yourself.

This person didn't threaten another person or even make a personal insult against someone - they made a stupid satement that IS covered by freedom of speech, no matter how distasteful that is.

Anyone agree? I don't reallty expect anyone to....

01.gif
 
I wonder what the charges are. We have a very lax approach for hate speech as it is protected by the 1st amendment so the person could not be charged for what he said.

It's probably a trespass charge.
 
The guy is obviously a total idiot, and as said, it was in done very poor taste.

While it may (or may not) be covered by freedom of speech, using Wally's PA to make it, is not.

Does seem as though, Wally has some CYA going on.

That said, sounds as though spending some time in crowbar motel and/or paying a fine and court costs might be a good thing.
 
Originally Posted By: addyguy
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/worl...article1506926/

Personally, I think arresting someone in this incident is going too far.

What this person did was mean, juvenille, and in extremely poor taste - but it was not a crime. There are NO laws against being an idiot and making a fool of yourself.

This person didn't threaten another person or even make a personal insult against someone - they made a stupid satement that IS covered by freedom of speech, no matter how distasteful that is.

Anyone agree? I don't reallty expect anyone to....


I agree. All that 'hate speech' stuff is a bunch of handholding garbage. I think they ought to get him with a trespassing charge and leave it at that. I still think he should have said "All the fat chicks need to leave the store now" instead. It would have been funnier and fat chicks don't have a Jessie Jackson type figure.
 
Was it damaging to Wal*Mart? Certainly if they damaged some of the merchandise or store fixtures, nobody would question punishing them. If they went around the store bad mouthing Wal*Mart or its merchandise, there could be charges of libel or slander.

How about the famous free speech doesn't cover the right to shout ''fire!'' in a crowded theater?

As stores add security to their intercom systems, we will all pay higher prices.
 
WM has a disclaimer behind the service desk about how the public is only invited in for shopping or considering shopping. This excludes competitor price-checking, union organizers, Hare Krishnas, and a yahoo who intends to access the intercom for his own purposes.
 
I was reading on comsumerist how a walmart customer was banned for life from all walmarts, and could be arrested for going to them.

The guy refused to show his receipt to a checker at the exit of a store.

The walmart employees put him on the list, took his picture, and called the police.
 
Possibly disorderly conduct or trying to incite a riot. I'd arrest him for that (if I was a cop) as he is generating a potentially dangerous situation.
 
Originally Posted By: JustinH
I was reading on comsumerist how a walmart customer was banned for life from all walmarts, and could be arrested for going to them.

The guy refused to show his receipt to a checker at the exit of a store.

The walmart employees put him on the list, took his picture, and called the police.


As in any private property situation, the responsible parties have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason (except those protected by law) and to restrict future entry for any length of time allowed by law.

I would suspect that the person who "just refused to show his receipt" didn't do "just" that.
 
Originally Posted By: greenaccord02
I think they ought to get him with a trespassing charge and leave it at that.


Nope. He wasn't asked to leave first. This kid did nothing illegal.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Possibly disorderly conduct or trying to incite a riot. I'd arrest him for that (if I was a cop) as he is generating a potentially dangerous situation.


smirk2.gif
 
Make the kid sit through diversity counseling and ban him from Wal-Mart for 6 months. What he did was morally indefensible. I fail to see a crime, however.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Possibly disorderly conduct or trying to incite a riot. I'd arrest him for that (if I was a cop) as he is generating a potentially dangerous situation.


That's a bit over-the-top. It isn't like he hopped into the middle of the isle dressed in a white robe with a white "special hat" on with the intercom in his hand, yelling for *insert racially offensive word here* to leave the store.

What he did was in very poor taste and incredibly juvenile. But it is no different than yelling for all fat people to leave the store. We as a society, are FAR too racially sensitive.
 
Far more depressing is members of a certain group calling one congressman the N word and spitting on another earlier today...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top