Raleigh police doing Gods work.
https://www.wral.com/raleigh-police-investigating-armed-protest-group/19094083/
https://www.wral.com/raleigh-police-investigating-armed-protest-group/19094083/
A few things:
The issue I had with what they did wasnt that they were out, or even that they were armed, or even that they wanted a sandwich from Subway. But from another report I read they basically forced Subway to allow them in, and when asked to eat outside some refused and sat at tables. Whether you agree with the shutdowns or not, a business has a right to dictate whether people can or cant enter their business. We discuss this often with property rights being tantamount. No one ever cries foul over "No shirt, no shoes, no service" signs.
This also irritates me "A member of the anti-government movement"...disagreeing with what the governor has done doesnt by default make one "anti-government". It is a label used by the media to paint anyone who disagrees with just "doing what you are told" as a far right extremist. And its working.
This is not correct. Try keeping out somebody for race, creed or nationality. I absolutely agree that a business owner Should be able to do this. You can't.Whether you agree with the shutdowns or not, a business has a right to dictate whether people can or cant enter their business.
This is not correct. Try keeping out somebody for race, creed or nationality. I absolutely agree that a business owner Should be able to do this. You can't.
Sorry, I understood these folks went in to get service. I had no idea they tried to get into the freezer or kitchen.There is a difference.
They were provided service...they were asked not to stay in the dining area.Sorry, I understood these folks went in to get service. I had no idea they tried to get into the freezer or kitchen.
Because of the Pandemic rules or something? If everything they were doing was legal why were they asked to leave?They were provided service...they were asked not to stay in the dining area.
Because of the Pandemic rules or something? If everything they were doing was legal why were they asked to leave?
This is not correct. Try keeping out somebody for race, creed or nationality. I absolutely agree that a business owner Should be able to do this. You can't.
This may be an unpalatable opinion, but @BatteryOaksBilly is right with regards to property Rights as well as the Right to associate as guaranteed by the First Amendment.
On your property, if property Rights were really a thing, you have the Right to refuse service or admittance for whatever reason you as the property owner deem.....whether they be moral and just or petty, vile, etc.
Likewise, the Right to assembly (also association) as guaranteed by Amendment the First must, logically and reasonably, also be a Right to NOT associate or assemble, again for whatever reasons the Individual wishes.....be they high minded or depraved reasons.
Be that as it may, I am also free to not patronize your establishment if I feel your behaviors are abhorrent, and I am free to assemble with like minded people to, as a group, refuse to patronize your business. If enough of us do it that it threatens the business, it either changes to stay afloat or succumbs to the forces of the Free Market and its replaced by an establishment more aligned to patronization.
To @B00ger 's point, the same robed people who insist the State has power to infringe upon all our Rights has done to property Rights what it has done to every other Right, be it in the BoR or not.
Liberty is not all rainbows and unicorns. But I would rather deal with the evils of having too much than the evils of not enough.
I'll broach another subject related to this activity and the ensuing articles. On numerous occasions in the past, where there were "marchers/protestors" involved, many were wearing bandans across their faces which, to my understanding, is still illegal. Curiously, nothing was done to those individuals and nothing was said in the local reporting. Now, forward to this past Saturday, many of the "protestors/marchers" were wearing face coverings, in compliance with the government suggestions. The news coverage pointed out more than once that some of the "protestors/marchers" had their faces covered but made no reference to it being in compliance with the virus guidelines. The spin is always in with nearly all the local news media.
I believe what he is saying is that you SHOULD be able to say "We are not allowing blacks/Muslims/women/etc to sit indoors at this time." as the right to NOT associate is equally implied. If you are a black muslim woman and find this abhorrent you have every right to refuse to patronize his service and associate with and encourage others to do the same, but that you should have no special rights or legal privileges based upon being black, muslim, or female.Not sure I follow. (snip) What they cannot do is say "We are not allowing blacks/Muslims/women/etc to sit indoors at this time."
What ever happened to "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." And "If asked to leave and you do not, you will be charged with trespass"? Maybe this does not apply in this state but I know it does in others.
One of the oldest and most widely known restaurants in Murder Beach was J Edwards Steak House. They chose to close during the Black Bike Week. Just chose to close for a week. The S.C. NAACP sued them and eventually they had to close because of legal expenses.What ever happened to "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone."
It was about when I moved to the area but Greensboro City councilman Billy Yow was notorious for opposing the NAACP calling it a racist organization.During the NAACP boycott of Murder Beach over the Confederate Flag , there was a local hangout that is still quite popular that had a huge sign inside that said...WE SUPPORT THE NAACP BOYCOTT!!! Everybody I knew supported it.
Not sure I follow. As long as a protected class isnt treated differently, then a property owner does have the right to refuse admittance to their property. Heck, its as simple as having business hours. I cant show up at a restaurant 30 minutes after they close and demand they open for me and serve me. They can say "We are not allowing seating indoors at this time." What they cannot do is say "We are not allowing blacks/Muslims/women/etc to sit indoors at this time."
I am saying that property Rights would allow for the latter situation, because there are no protected classes in a Free Society. There are Citizens, all equal under the law. Conversely, it allows anyone who is black/Muslim/etc ad nauseum to exclude whites/Christians/men from THEIR property, even if that was the only arbitrary reason.
Again- I despise racism in all its forms. I'm not saying it's a good reason. But it's not always my property.
This is the same argument that supports a baker not making a cake for someone whose lifestyle he finds morally repugnant.
Again- not everyone will exercise their Rights in ways I find palatable. But so long as they don't hurt someone or steal their stuff? They can do them with their property, and I am free to do the opposite.
It was about when I moved to the area but Greensboro City councilman Billy Yow was notorious for opposing the NAACP calling it a racist organization.
Ahh...yeah...perfect world we could discriminate or not to our hearts content. But that aināt where we are at the moment, for better or worse.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk