Subject:
|
Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 12 Oct 2003 06:43:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
341 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
> > This seems to be your opinion more than the management of Home Depot, which seem
> > to view it as a mild annoyance at the worst.
>
> Meaning that they're not doing their job... we have an endemic problem in the US
> with management tending to ignore the actual owners of the company, and this is
> just one more example, albeit minor.
No, as in meaning that your opinion that there is a problem that needs to be
dealt with is not shared (currently) by the various managers involved.
> > >
> > > (remember, conversion of stolen property doesn't have to be *permanent*. If you
> > > steal my car, take a joy ride, and then give it back, you've still stolen my
> > > car... even if you topped off the gastank before you returned it)
> >
> > You are comparing a prosecutable crime with a non-crime. They are free to toss
> > her from the store if they find her activity inappropriate,
>
> Or prosecute. Which I think you're conceding. (or if not, please show why it's
> not a crime to convert property to use the owner doesn't intend or interfere
> with the flow of commerce on private property)
Prosecute: no, I'm not conceding that, except as a consequence of the artist not
bowing to requests that they may make. Prosecuting someone for rearranging but
not actually harming stock would be laughed out of court. If Home Depot
actually felt that there was a problem (my bet is that it will percolate around
for a while and then some company lawyer will whine about liablity) all they
need to do is ask her to cease and desist, and then ask her to leave if she
doesn't desist. THEN they could do some prosecuting if she refused the request
to leave. They are perfectly within their rights to ask her to desist, and ask
her to leave whether or not they ask her to desist.
>
> That they choose not to prosecute doesn't make it a non crime.
That's quite true, but at the same time, just because it violates Libertarian
philosophy (or just the Larry philosophy, if I mistake the source), doesn't mean
it's in the civil codes. I mean, is it? (Really! As in I'm curious, not
mocking)
>
> > so it seems a non-issue.
>
> To you. To me, it's symptomatic of something bigger.
Again, no. It's not a non-issue to me so much as it is a non-issue (again the
qualifier: currently) to Home Depot, and it seems to be in part because you are
being an Art Critic and they don't particularly care (heck, maybe they are
looking the other way because they like it or feel that it helps business!).
Like I said - tell me where she is making an appearance, I'll buy something from
that store!
-->Bruce<--
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
26 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
