Marine Vet Told to Leave Six Flags in NJ Due to Patriotic T-Shirt

[Againsheila]

"I'm going to shoot you if you shoot me" is still threatening to shoot someone.

This is pretty basic english language stuff.

Saying one should or will defend themselves is not a threat in any manner, you're right is pretty basic english, evidently something you have yet to grasp.

Threat
noun
1. a declaration of an intention or determination to inflict punishment, injury, etc., in retaliation for, or conditionally upon, some action or course;

"I'm going to kill you if you shoot at me" is without question a threat.

the words were "return fire" not "kill"

 

[PaintMyHouse]

yes, you will. actually I've been simultaneously arguing with liberals who support banning t-shirts with guns and not gay t-shirts and conservatives who support banning gay t-shirts and not gun t-shirts.

You can read every post I've written on this site or any other site and you will see nothing but that government should not force anyone to do business with anyone.

A bit of apples and oranges in there, but good to know.

Government should not use force to compel it's citizens to do business with anyone. How is that "apples and oranges?" That doesn't even make sense.

There's a huge difference between a dress-code and the rules that govern, which I know you hate, Public Accommodations.

The park has the right to say no faggot T-shirts, it does not have the right to say no faggots. Oddly enough, both of those are designed to keep the peace and let everyone get on with their business...

 

[Vandalshandle]

The guy looks like a gang banger, with all of his tattoos, and a muscles shirt with a gun on it. I would not want him in my business either. I would feel the same way about anyone wearing gang colors, or with pants waist band 6 inches below his underwear. McDonalds learned back in the early 1960's that their drive in's were attracting teenagers hanging out together, which kept many adults from coming in. They countered that by introducing icons in their ads that teens hate. Specifically, clowns, and other icons that appealed to little children. Teens hate little children, and McDonald's problem was solved. As for me, I don't want to take my family to spend a day with people who look like they usually hang out in a biker bar.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Marine Vet Told to Leave Six Flags in NJ Due to Patriotic T-Shirt

A Marine combat veteran was denied admission to a New Jersey amusement park because he was wearing a patriotic Fourth of July shirt with a picture of a military rifle on it.

Mario Alejandro, 33, a veteran of the 2003 Iraq invasion, was stopped by a security guard when he and his family tried to enter Six Flags Great Adventure in Jackson Township, N.J., because his black shirt bore a drawing of an M-26 military rifle in red, white and blue, and the slogan, “Keep Calm and Return Fire,” NJ.com reports.

Marine Vet Told to Leave Six Flags in NJ Due to Patriotic T-Shirt - Tea Party Command Center

How is that a patriotic t-shirt?

A 'a patriotic Fourth of July shirt' according to the OP.

 

[kaz]

A bit of apples and oranges in there, but good to know.

Government should not use force to compel it's citizens to do business with anyone. How is that "apples and oranges?" That doesn't even make sense.

There's a huge difference between a dress-code and the rules that govern, which I know you hate, Public Accommodations.

The park has the right to say no faggot T-shirts, it does not have the right to say no faggots. Oddly enough, both of those are designed to keep the peace and let everyone get on with their business...

That's apples and oranges in your argument then, not mine. I made a simple and clear statement that it's not an appropriate use of government force to compel anyone to do business with anyone. If you want to carve that up into different categories, that's you doing that, not me.

 

[Ibentoken]

There are some very sick people in America who should have absolutely no authority over citizens.

 

[jasonnfree]

I didn't read all the posts here but just wondering. Does this mean the guy and his family have to leave, maybe their home is faraway. Maybe the park has shirts of various sizes to lend out or sell at a cheap price. They should if they have a dress policy like this. I think 6 flags could find some money in their budget for this. Again, I think it's over the top, the picture of a gun, big deal.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Government should not use force to compel it's citizens to do business with anyone. How is that "apples and oranges?" That doesn't even make sense.

There's a huge difference between a dress-code and the rules that govern, which I know you hate, Public Accommodations.

The park has the right to say no faggot T-shirts, it does not have the right to say no faggots. Oddly enough, both of those are designed to keep the peace and let everyone get on with their business...

That's apples and oranges in your argument then, not mine. I made a simple and clear statement that it's not an appropriate use of government force to compel anyone to do business with anyone. If you want to carve that up into different categories, that's you doing that, not me.

That's correct because they are separate issues that you are using a broad brush on. Your position has been rejected by society, decades ago. It's time to start dealing with that.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Not the first time Six Flags has gotten in legal trouble over profiling and refusing entrance for attire:

http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/v...du law refusing admission theme park cothing"

 

[Spoonman]

As any conservative can tell you six flags is a private company and sets it's own rules

If they don't want you walking around in a shirt threatening violence, that is their right

So I dont want you walking around in a shirt that promotes homosexuality I can boot you

 

[Spoonman]

I think he was "denied admission" because his shirt was vaguely threatening and included an assault rifle, not because it was "patriotic".

What is "patriotic" about threatening to kill people, anyway?

If that was the case most ethnic urban wear would be banned. Since when are words on a t shirt a threat?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I didn't read all the posts here but just wondering. Does this mean the guy and his family have to leave, maybe their home is faraway. Maybe the park has shirts of various sizes to lend out or sell at a cheap price. They should if they have a dress policy like this. I think 6 flags could find some money in their budget for this. Again, I think it's over the top, the picture of a gun, big deal.

If he was smart, he went and bought another shirt or waited outside until they went in and bought one which they tossed over the fence. That is what a rational person would do. I suspect this stink was made after his day in the park, unless he's a true asshole, which is certainly possible based on what he showed up to a family park wearing...

 

[kaz]

There's a huge difference between a dress-code and the rules that govern, which I know you hate, Public Accommodations.

The park has the right to say no faggot T-shirts, it does not have the right to say no faggots. Oddly enough, both of those are designed to keep the peace and let everyone get on with their business...

That's apples and oranges in your argument then, not mine. I made a simple and clear statement that it's not an appropriate use of government force to compel anyone to do business with anyone. If you want to carve that up into different categories, that's you doing that, not me.

That's correct because they are separate issues that you are using a broad brush on. Your position has been rejected by society, decades ago. It's time to start dealing with that.

You have a completely arbitrary standard, I have a clear one. So if government can force them to do business with the guy with the gay t-shirt, why should they not force them to do business with someone who is legally dressed and wearing a shirt that covers his Constitutional rights?

You cannot answer that without twisting and gyrating. I can answer it clearly, government can stop one citizen from harming another one, government has no legitimate right to force one citizen to do anything for another.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

As any conservative can tell you six flags is a private company and sets it's own rules

If they don't want you walking around in a shirt threatening violence, that is their right

So I dont want you walking around in a shirt that promotes homosexuality I can boot you

In this case not let you in, and such a decision can be defended. They are trying to make it so everyone has a nice day at fantasyland.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That's apples and oranges in your argument then, not mine. I made a simple and clear statement that it's not an appropriate use of government force to compel anyone to do business with anyone. If you want to carve that up into different categories, that's you doing that, not me.

That's correct because they are separate issues that you are using a broad brush on. Your position has been rejected by society, decades ago. It's time to start dealing with that.

You have a completely arbitrary standard, I have a clear one. So if government can force them to do business with the guy with the gay t-shirt, why should they not force them to do business with someone who is legally dressed and wearing a shirt that covers his Constitutional rights?

You cannot answer that without twisting and gyrating. I can answer it clearly, government can stop one citizen from harming another one, government has no legitimate right to force one citizen to do anything for another.

It's not arbitrary and no twisting is required. Can this guy gas up the car in that shirt? You bet. Can he eat dinner in a restaurant? If the restaurant is okay with the shirt he can, otherwise no, they have dress-codes which are reasonable.

Can you take that to extremes, well if the guy is totally naked the gas station can now say no but at the nudist restaurant, it's Good Evening Mr. Jacobs, your usual table sir? The restaurant could actually say we have a dress code here and cannot serve you tonight unfortunately, as you have clothes on...

 

[NYcarbineer]

A friend of mine once got a chance to play a free round of golf at a local course but when he got there they wouldn't let him play in a shirt without a collar.

He ended up buying a shirt for 30 bucks in the pro shop, which was just about the cost for a round of golf.

 

[Missourian]

Just keep in mind that this is Six Flags, Pussyville...I mean New England.

I seriously doubt Six Flags Missouri, or Six Flags Texas has this policy.

 

[Ibentoken]

I wonder if they would have let him in if he asked for a queer wedding cake......

 

[PaintMyHouse]

A friend of mine once got a chance to play a free round of golf at a local course but when he got there they wouldn't let him play in a shirt without a collar.

He ended up buying a shirt for 30 bucks in the pro shop, which was just about the cost for a round of golf.

That's how it works. Somehow the, You aren't leaving this house dressed like that young lady rules have been forgotten...

 

[kaz]

That's correct because they are separate issues that you are using a broad brush on. Your position has been rejected by society, decades ago. It's time to start dealing with that.

You have a completely arbitrary standard, I have a clear one. So if government can force them to do business with the guy with the gay t-shirt, why should they not force them to do business with someone who is legally dressed and wearing a shirt that covers his Constitutional rights?

You cannot answer that without twisting and gyrating. I can answer it clearly, government can stop one citizen from harming another one, government has no legitimate right to force one citizen to do anything for another.

It's not arbitrary and no twisting is required. Can this guy gas up the car in that shirt? You bet. Can he eat dinner in a restaurant? If the restaurant is okay with the shirt he can, otherwise no, they have dress-codes which are reasonable.

Can you take that to extremes, well if the guy is totally naked the gas station can now say no but at the nudist restaurant, it's Good Evening Mr. Jacobs, your usual table sir? The restaurant could actually say we have a dress code here and cannot serve you tonight unfortunately, as you have clothes on...

I like how you started with it's not arbitrary, then you were totally arbitrary. But when you advocate it's reasonable for government to use force to compel it's citizens to implement it's social policy, there really is no way it's not going to be arbitrary.