A sign causes lawsuit

[SGTUSArmy]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,...ions/lawcenter

A bar owner was forced to remove a sign that said "For Service, Speak English." It was claimed that the sign was discriminatory.

[ChamberedRound]

This one really aggravates me. Last time I checked, a business owner was allowed to refuse service to anyone for any reason, as the business is private property.

[billamj]

What a freaking crock! Any business does have the right to deny service on any grounds that they see fit, if the gov't doesn't like that tough shit. I've got to say though that I liked the remarks about the new sign, "I don't see that as denying anyone service." ROFL

[phillyd2]

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

This one really aggravates me. Last time I checked, a business owner was allowed to refuse service to anyone for any reason, as the business is private property.

Huh? Which country you living in? A restaurant can no longer even decide if they will allow smokers or not. Check out the Public Accommodation Laws to learn that we are way past private property especially with regards to a business that serves the public.

[ChamberedRound]

Originally Posted by phillyd2

Huh? Which country you living in? A restaurant can no longer even decide if they will allow smokers or not. Check out the Public Accommodation Laws to learn that we are way past private property especially with regards to a business that serves the public.

Hmmm... touche.

A rhetorical question:
If the above is the case, then why is it a business can't refuse a smoker/non-smoker, but can ask a person legally carrying a firearm to leave (assuming they know of the firearm)?

[phillyd2]

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

Hmmm... touche.

A rhetorical question:
If the above is the case, then why is it a business can't refuse a smoker/non-smoker, but can ask a person legally carrying a firearm to leave (assuming they know of the firearm)?

Oh, I'm sorry. I did not know you were looking for laws to make sense. Good luck with that.

http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/harass/pubaccom.htm

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/h...1----000-.html

[NineseveN]

That's just not right.

[SGTUSArmy]

OK. So now you can't refuse service if they don't speak english. What's next, you can't refuse service to someone who smells of a dead animal drug through manure?

Wait....if they can't post that they don't allow foreign languages to be spoken for service, then why can people be barred from establishments? Let's take NASCAR for one example.....They barred 14 people who were arrested for throwing objects at a car (I don't blame them, I don't like Jeff Gordon either, but the race was already over), then how is that different from posting a sign that says "if you want service, speak English"?

[Nate]

Originally Posted by SGTUSArmy

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,...ions/lawcenter

A bar owner was forced to remove a sign that said "For Service, Speak English." It was claimed that the sign was discriminatory.

Whatever... I find the sign to be funny and now I want one.

[budney]

Originally Posted by phillyd2

Huh? Which country you living in? A restaurant can no longer even decide if they will allow smokers or not. Check out the Public Accommodation Laws to learn that we are way past private property especially with regards to a business that serves the public.

Yup--and those "public accommodation" laws were introduced to... wait for it... ban segregation. I guess it seemed like a good idea at the time, but now it results in smoking bans and every other kind of nonsense.

I always said (and I'm sure others have said it first), if the 1st Amendment is ever repealed, it will be as part of a crackdown on the KKK. After all, who in their right mind will defend the KKK? It'll be a decade or two later, when people have gotten used to the loss of their free speech, that they'll start targeting churches, small political parties, etc.

--Len.