It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Hoodies, hats banned from shops

page: 12
6
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua
Please refrain from judging each other. There is already one warning in this thread to refrain from personal attacks.

This is the pre-emptive second.


I am merely directing a specific part of this argument to a specific person. If you consider that a personal attack, so be it. I'm not sure anyone needed you to come to their defense just yet.




posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Please read my post FULLY again.

I stated 'CLOSE TO'...

please stay on topic.

 


Added my actual quote which was NOT quoted above;


Originally posted by masqua
"You are this" and "You are that" is getting close to becoming personal again.



Hope that clarifies things

[edit on 9/9/08 by masqua]



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by scientist
I am merely directing a specific part of this argument to a specific person. If you consider that a personal attack, so be it. I'm not sure anyone needed you to come to their defense just yet.


I think the mod was warning me because I said "I think you are being insensitive..."

Apologies.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 



This happened in the UK three years ago. Its nothing new over here.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
lmao, thats pretty funny that they think that will stop crime. I guarantee that the most merchandise stolen is by people who dont look like criminals or hoodlums. This kind of action always leads to more crime thats harder to detect. Its exactly what happened at sears when I worked there, they wouldnt let people have backpacks, and almost immediately twice as much merchandise was being stolen, almost as if the criminals were spite stealing.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 03:35 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 04:41 PM
link   
I think it's about time someone took a stand and said "no more" to this trend. Ever since 9-11, there has been an increasing number of kids going around wearing hoodies and the like, keeping their faces covered everywhere. Some are doing it in protest, but others are doing it to make sure nobody can pick up who they are, and go in to commit crimes.

When it is warm outside and you enter a business wearing a hoodie and have your face completely covered up and have your hands in your jacket, my gut reaction is to shoot first and ask questions later - you look like a robber to me.

Luckily I don't walk around with any weapons normally... that alone has probably saved many lives...

Anyways, hopefully more places will institute this, especially fast food restaurants, and people will get the hint - if you cover yourself up, you will not be serviced and will be asked to leave.

As much as I am for freedom, when what you do mimics what criminals do, more for your own safety than anything else, it would be better if you did not mimic what the criminals do.



posted on Sep, 10 2008 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


This same rule is being enforced at Metro Pointe, a shopping center near South Coast Plaza in Orange County, CA. I was shopping with my girlfriend when out of nowhere i was tapped on the shoulder by a security guard asking i remove my hat. I was defient and he asked me to leave the shopping center if i wouldnt abide by this rule. Needless to say, I left.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by kokuryu
it would be better if you did not mimic what the criminals do.


criminals also wear shoes, drive cars and eat soup.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by kokuryu
 


Hi,
the real criminals are the elites that attend Bilderburg meetings.
The law makers are the law breakers.

also just because it's a private business doesn't mean they can make their own laws.

How would anyone like it if I had a big shopping center and made a rule with signs saying no suites and dress clothes allowed. No one would like that.

No suites and dress clothes allowed because the elites that want global enslavement wear this. There responsible for more crimes than anything on the planet.

There are bigger problems people should be worrying about than if Mr.Sears president gets a Nintendo game stolen from his store by a hooded kid.
I'm sure he'll be missing that $50 out of his billions.

video.google.com...

[edit on 11-9-2008 by buds84]



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   
When I was in high school, there was a deli nearby that you could walk to at lunch time.

They had a huge problem with theft.

So they only allowed 3 students at a time in the store. At lunch time there would be a line of students waiting to go into the store. When one left another entered.

No one was outraged. People understood. It was better to have the deli near campus with a policy that was a little annoying then to have it go bankrupt and close its doors.

Pretty much the same thing with this mall. Before people get outraged they should ask themselves it it's better to have the mall with the anti hoodie anti hat policy or to have it close down do to excessive inventory shrinkage.

You can't stay in business very long when too much of your merchandise is finding its way out the door without being paid for.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 


Theres a bit of a difference between a small deli and Gucci store.
I don't Gucci and whatever stores in the mall are going bankrupt.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Ban [SNIP] hoods.
Are you lot [SNIP] mental.
It's not what you wear it's your [SNIP] actions.
Whats next?
You ya [SNIT&SNIP].
Conform, conform, conform.

 


removed censor circumvention(s)

Please read ABOUT ATS: Vulgarity and The Automatic ATS Censors

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 11/9/08 by masqua]



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 

Okay I think I've read enough of this to see where it is going. Nowhere. If you go into a public park and wear your hood up that is fine. On the other hand, if you go into a shopping center, mall, bank, restaurant, etc., you are in a private place of business.

In a private place of business, the proprietor has the right to deny access or service to anyone they want, provided the denial is not based on a person's race, religion, or nationality. Let me also add disability or for those that still think that is not PC, persons with limited mobility. Stores have banned bare feet, bare chests, and denied services to person's in their judgment were presenting themselves with behavior that the owner felt was improper for their particular establishment. No one is discriminating against "hoodies" or any other style of dress. The fact is, and several others have mentioned it, if you are hiding your face, you must be doing it to hide your identity, and therefore you are a risk for perpetrating a crime. Regarding burkhas and turbans, I do believe that is ethnic dress, however a business does have the right to refuse entry to someone, not because of ethnicity, but because their particular dress would violate their company's policy.

It is a violation of the owners rights to legislate who and who many not be welcomed into a business. If you feel that you are being denied entrance unfairly, shop elsewhere. Do not patronize a business that you feel violates your civil liberties, but by the same token, so not violate theirs.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by PhilltFred
In a private place of business, the proprietor has the right to deny access or service to anyone they want, provided the denial is not based on a person's race, religion, or nationality.

Can you see the logical contradiction in this sentence? Anyone doesn't mean anyone, as long as there are exceptions to the rule.


Originally posted by PhilltFred
It is a violation of the owners rights to legislate who and who many not be welcomed into a business.

This sentence also contradicts your previous sentence, as according to you, the owners don't have the right to legislate against race, religion, etc...

The politically correct people of this world have screwed it for everyone. It's why this hoodie issue is such a mess... It's another form of discrimination and control.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


Sorry but you are wrong. It's very obvious that things escalate and the waters are always being tested to see what they can get away with.

And most people who wear hoodies don't wear the hood up inside, only outside. There is no difference between wearing a hoodie and wearing a coat. It's a diversion away from the big issue. How about they get some security to get the thugs out of there instead of skirting the issue with this hoodie nonsense. If the security guards would do their job there wouldn't be a problem.

It's not hard to understand, it's very obvious. I'm done with this issue and obviously people who can't understand this aren't worth my time.


...Obviously you do live in an imaginary reality.

[edit on 11-9-2008 by blahblah123]



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by blahblah123
How about they get some security to get the thugs out of there instead of skirting the issue with this hoodie nonsense. If the security guards would do their job there wouldn't be a problem.


Do their job? They can't throw people out unless they have a REASON! If they start grabbing "thugs" they would have a ton of discrimination lawsuits inside of 5 minutes.

They can say "no minors without a parent or guardian". They can say "no hoods up". But they can't choose random thugs unless the thugs have committed a crime, and thugs tend to be pretty fast at running away when that point has been reached.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by C.C.Benjamin
 


"Evidently these kids are obviously always wearing them up and are then committing crimes."

Right here is where you prove that you fail to "get it."

Have you ever thought of the good kids that wear hoodies that now won't be able to wear them? All because of a stupid rule that doesn't have any effect.

Have you not realized that I've been talking about the innocent losing the freedom to wear these and not the guilty? It's not only the "bad guys" that wear these..which you don't seem to get.

How about security guards do their jobs instead of making false security.



posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Sonya610
 


Obviously they know who this group of individuals is and all they have to do is watch them...which is their job.

They can kick loiterers out of the mall too...

"can't choose random thugs unless the thugs have committed a crime"
...so you can't punish them unless you catch them in the act...but you can punish everybody else by banning hoodies. Um...?!?!

As for:
"no minors without a parent or guardian".

Um...thats discrimination too, but they do it anyway.

There are so many things wrong with your post.

[edit on 11-9-2008 by blahblah123]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I'm sorry but i will again bring up the central premise of all of this, which basically invalidates the thread.

If a government said we couldn't enter a shopping area because of our cloths, then i'd be asking for a revolt. However we are talking about a private enterprise!!! That is the major difference.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join