It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Biker Ban Fuels Controversy

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 1 2007 @ 03:09 PM

Can a city ban a biker group from a bar? It's a debate that is heating up in Hudson, Wisconsin.

The story begins on April 14.

The Hudson Police Chief says, "The outlaw motorcycle gang showed up at Dibbo's wearing their colors."

The chief alleges the club took over the bar, kicking patrons out and refusing to let the police in. This incident is the central theme in the city's new liquor license agreement with Dibbo's.

The bar now has to post a "no gang colors" sign and refuse to allow private motorcycle parties. If Dibbo's doesn't comply, the city will pull its liquor license.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


I think this is interesting. I feel the tavern owner definitely has the right to set a dress code for his establishment, but does a municipality have the right to in essence make a dress code for this establishment a law, that if not followed could lead to the suspension of a liquor license? The owner says he supports the minicipality in their ruling, and will be happy to comply.

As can be expected, a number of motorcyle clubs/groups have spoken out on what they feel is a violation of their rights to wear their colors proudly. They say they're being painted with too broad a brush. The ACLU has gotten involved on their behalf.

I first heard about this today on a Milwaukee talk radio program. The opinions offered were about 50/50. I'm torn. For those who don't know, The Outlaws, the motorcycle club, or gang, depending on who's describing them, have quite an unsavory reputation, and not just here in Wisconsin. Drug dealing, robbery, murder, coercion of witnesses, there are Outlaw members serving time in Wisconsin prisons for these types of offenses.

I'd like to hear some opinions.

posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 01:57 PM
It's iffy territory.

On one hand, the bar-owner (assuming he OWNS the bar) has the right to allow or dis-allow anyone from his place of business.

However, 'the bar' is a public space. Public places are watched over by the cities/states.

For the city to _order_ and _threaten_ the bar-owner to ban certain colors is barely in their place... (and only because 'the bar' is considered a public sphere)

Then again, if the bar-owner called on city & state police for help, then he (I guess?) kinda left the door open for them to demand further actions be taken.

Society demands that justice be had... but wants someone else to fix the problem. So the state/city steps in and attempts to legislate behavior.
To pick on all bikers because of one group of bad seeds is ignorant -- and yet the mentality runs rampant, and is socially accepted (at least insofar as 'the people' giving the city their knee-jerk-reaction consent for this to happen).

posted on Aug, 5 2007 @ 12:53 AM
I think this is unncessary. The city government has passed the buck by simply asking the owner of the establishment to keep these people out.

Did it ever occur to the police that if a large group of people have the power to 'refuse to let the police in' and are assaulting and/or terrorizing people in a public place, that maybe instead of asking a lone, unarmed bartender to somehow get rid of them, that the proper course of action may be to return with a dozen armed officers and arrest every member of the gang on every possible charge?

Preventing the police from entering the bar is a 3rd degree felony in Texas: unlawful restraint of a public servant.

Then there's class A misdemeanor unlawful restraint for kicking out patrons.

Assault on the patrons who were removed.

Terroristic Threats

Distrubing the Peace

For those who can't actually be pinned with the actions there is conspiracy still.

I'd think that taking the whole bar-full of them downtown and arraigning them on felony charges the next morning would end the problem in one hell of a hurry without causing any stir from the ACLU and without putting the bar owner in a difficult position.


log in