On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Dan Minette wrote: > Reading through the complaint, I think what they couldn't stand is a heated > argument in the mall. And, that's exactly what the person arrested was > interested in. I agree that he probably didn't start the arguement, but > was happy when it started. > > Arguements in malls are bad for business. I think you need look no further > than Macy's wanting no distractions from the most important business of > shopping at Macy's.
Lol. :) Those are good points, but...so what if he was happy? If he didn't start it, why blame the shirt (if you're a mall cop) as opposed to the individual(s) who couldn't abide the shirt? Obviously *they* were happy to have the argument, too. And if they *started* the argument, then they were the cause of the problem. Unless it's a magic argument-starting Peace Shirt +3 or something. > example > > > of people not being willing to put the effort into civility. > > > > ...? I must have missed this. > > Subject: From Sgt. Stryker's Weblog Ah, that. I hadn't made the connection. Surely in this case the harassers are equivalent to whoever started the argument, and not necessarily the person wearing an object that identifies him in some way? > IMHO, it is incumbent for each side of the political debate to strongly > object to nasty tactics from those who they tend to agree with. Granted. Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter & Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) http://www.breakyourchains.org/john_poindexter.htm _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
