Jealous older women get pretty young woman banned
Dress is a form of self-expression so she would have a First Amendment case:
"A Kentucky college student has hired a lawyer after she was escorted out of a mall by security on Sunday because her dress was deemed too short, MyFOXBoston reports.
Kymberly Clem, a 20-year-old student at Eastern Kentucky University, wore the dress Sunday after purchasing it from the mall in Richmond the previous day, the Richmond Register reported Tuesday.
After just a few minutes inside of the mall, a security guard approached her and expressed concerns over the length of the garment. According to MyFOXBoston, the guard informed her that several female patrons had complained that she was disrupting their shopping experience because their husbands were 'checking her out.'"
Source
8 comments:
More proof why anything women say should always be considered irrelevant. I hope this young girl walks away with a truck-load of the mall's money!
Most idiotic part of the whole story: she'd purchased that dress in that same store a few days earlier.
If that dress was so provocative she wasn't allowed to wear it in public, why was it part of their product line?
I went to a Christian university where they did the same thing, geez it was annoying. How am I suposed to get turned down for dates for being Jewish if I am not checking out beautiful women.
Most malls are private property, so the first amendment isn't probably applicable. Although the mall seems to be getting bad press and the client of the mall that sold the customer her attire will probably not be pleased that their wares are deemed inappropriate for public display.
Do we lose our constitutional rights simply because we're on private property? Suppose she was arrested in the mall for this "crime", would she not have the right to council, or to refuse to answer any questions under Miranda? What if this guard didn't arrest her but simply searched her. Is she not protected from unlawful search and seizure?
Most malls are private property, so the first amendment isn't probably applicable
There are differing views of this. Courts have held that the common areas of a mall are in fact "gathering places" or "town squares" and therefore not private property. Other courts have held that the common areas are private property and the mall has the right to remove those it choses for whatever reason. The middle ground seems to be that people can congregate in common areas of malls, but lose the right to be there when they cause disturbances.
Do we lose our constitutional rights simply because we're on private property
You do not lose them, but they can be curbed. For example, I do not have the right to walk into your house and do some "performance art" at 3 AM. Generally speaking, the right of the property owner to control the activities on their property outweighs rights of individuals.
Suppose she was arrested in the mall for this "crime", would she not have the right to council, or to refuse to answer any questions under Miranda?
You would still have the right to council, 5th amendment rights, etc. The reason for this is that you are being arrested by the government and the government has restrictions on it to protect your rights.
What if this guard didn't arrest her but simply searched her
The security guard cannot "arrest" her per se, but they can detain under the guise of a "citizen's arrest." A citizen's arrest is vastly different than being arrested by an agent of the government.
Is she not protected from unlawful search and seizure?
By the security guard? Yes, she is protected but if the guard searched her, it would be more under the law of sexual assault. The security guard has to be concerned with wrongful detention (ie kidnapping) and theft (your "seizure.")
Don't ascribe the same rights and responsibilities to security guards as to governmental police. They are two different animals.
Like every red-blooded American Male (hetero) I can't help but check out a woman that presents herself in a way that grabs my attention.
I used to think that I was subtle enough to hide it from my wife, but now she just blatantly comes out with "Well, enjoy that one?" or some similar phrase.
She knows I look, and she accepts it, because I still go home with her and my son.
While strolling through a local mall with my then 82 year old aunt and her then 85 year old husband, (both are now deceased), my uncle proceeded to check out a couple of very fine mall bunnies. I said to my aunt, "Aunt Amar, did you see Uncle Darrell ogling those two young women?"
She replied, "Honey, if he ever gets too old to look, I'll trade him in on a younger model."
Too bad these biddies don't have the same self assurance that she did.
I remember an admonishment my mother used to give me when I was a child, and went shopping with her. "Look but don't touch!" Seems it would apply here as well.
peedoffamerican
Post a Comment