Paper carrier arrested for not revealing names of subscribers....


PDA






jsalcedo
September 25, 2004, 10:30 AM
Vee haf vays uf makking you Tock!




http://www.freep.com/news/mich/flint24e_20040924.htm

If you enjoyed reading about "Paper carrier arrested for not revealing names of subscribers...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
George S.
September 25, 2004, 11:22 AM
Another example of somebody with too much power and not enough brain.

I can see employees not being allowed to read a newspaper or book or magazine at their desk or workplace unless it was during a authorized break time or their lunch break, but this is beyond stupid.

While the Mayor's actions are way off the deep end, I can't completely see this as only a First Amendment issue. What if he had a coffee vendor arrested for selling coffee that the Mayor didn't like? Or somebody was selling donuts at the police station that already had a contact with Krispy Kreme?

This is simply arrogance on the part of a politician who thinks he can be a dictator.

Aren't most paper carriers independent businessmen? If so, they aren't a newspaper or publisher in terms of the First Amendment and as such, I would thik that the names of their subscribers or clients are none of the Mayor's freakin business. And having the poor guy arrested on what charge? It will be intersting to see exactly what law or city ordinance will be the basis for the arrest.

I can just see the lawsuit for illegal arrest, harassement, and loss of income.

answerguy
September 25, 2004, 11:30 AM
Is that newspaper headline accurate? It seems like he was detained by the police not arrested.

M1911Owner
September 25, 2004, 11:47 AM
From scripture:

We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

Marriott hotels once owned a theme park in Santa Clara, California, Marriott's Great America. When the price of real estate went through the roof there, they decided that it was worth more to them to sell the land than to continue to operate it as a theme park. The city council decided that they would rather have the theme park, so they spent $101 million of The People's money to buy the theme park.

Shortly thereafter, having the usual problems with people running, and with people cutting in line for the rides, they made it a criminal offense to run or cut in line at Great America.

That's a classic example of government--they had the power, and they used it. They abused their power.

Government is force. And pretty much all that government is able to do is to do things by force. They write laws to force people to do what they want them to do under threat of fine or imprisonment; they take the people's money by force in order to spend that money to attempt to bring about the ends they think desirable.

Coronach
September 25, 2004, 11:48 AM
1. Seems like he was detained and not arrested, correct.

2. If he was arrested, what crime was committed? Criminal Trespass? Ok, maaaaaaaybe.

3. Lets be clear: your place of employment can and will determine what you may do while you are at work. This is perfectly reasonable, in theory (I add the 'in theory' because anything can be taken to silly extremes). So, I think that the ACLU isn't gonna get far with that. But trying to extract information from the paperboy under threat of arrest? Come on, now. ;)

If he was arrested, I bet there is more to the story (like: he was told not to deliver there before)(Actually, I'm sure there is more to it in any event).Otherwise, failure to answer the mayor's question sure doesn't sound like acrime to me.

Mike

AZRickD
September 25, 2004, 12:01 PM
The mayor made the classic mistake of coming down on a person whose employer purchases ink by the barrel.

May Gawd have mercy on Hizzonner.

Rick

71Commander
September 25, 2004, 12:36 PM
The paper backed his opponent in the last election, and he has eased up on his prohibition.

TarpleyG
September 25, 2004, 03:03 PM
We could flood the Flint City office with e-mails but I doubt it'd do any good.

http://www.cityofflint.com/emailus/e_mail.asp

Greg

txgho1911
September 25, 2004, 04:43 PM
Did the mayor detain or have security detain the delivery person while waiting on the police? I understand even security guards have to have a good case to detain shop lifters. Person conducting a citizens arrest can be subject to charges if they don't have a case.

jefnvk
September 26, 2004, 12:48 PM
Flint is one of Michigan's worst cities. They just got out of state control because of complete mismanagement of money. That being said, this completely doesn't suprise me.

Also, when you work for someone, you follow their rules. They are paying you, you agreed to their terms, tough for you. If you don't like the rules for the workplace, find another job. That being said, the paperboy shouldn't have been detained, as he did nothing wrong, unless he was told not to come there again. If that is the case, then the employer should have been notified, and they should be the ones dealing weith the situtation. The paperboy has no control over what is going on, he just wants to do his job annoying as few people as possible.

Starpower
September 27, 2004, 09:45 PM
All Right, Now. Let's get off the Krispy Kremes at the police Station. That's a derogatory stereotype, and we'll have none of that! Besides, we've graduated to Pastries and Cappuccino! Personally, I like the Apple Cider Cakes lightly dusted with cinnamon/sugar, and Mocha Latte, myself, but that's just me.

oneslowgun
September 28, 2004, 12:32 AM
Starpower, dont forget.. It's fall time now... the Pumpkin Spice Cappuccino is back!!!!


Sorry... Back to topic...

Glamdring
September 28, 2004, 02:10 AM
Seems like a fishy story to me. Normally papers delivered to a business are being bought BY that business. Unless they are going to a stand or machine.

You don't just deliver papers to people at work. Mainly because most places aren't open that early. I deliver papers on the weekends, easy money for 90 minutes of work, and they have to be there by 7pm on weekends, 6:30am on weekdays.

I find it really hard to believe a Mayor would be up that early.

Anyway it doesn't sound like a real newspaper carrier. Maybe a swandwich guy that also brings papers? Or local city/county flier?

c_yeager
September 28, 2004, 04:38 AM
You don't just deliver papers to people at work. Mainly because most places aren't open that early. I deliver papers on the weekends, easy money for 90 minutes of work, and they have to be there by 7pm on weekends, 6:30am on weekdays.

I think we may have some regional differences with how this is done. Up here in Seattle it's fairly common practice to have office workers get personally paid for newspapers delivered either directly to their offices or to the front desk to be picked up on their way into work. It may well be common over in Michigan as well.

It hink the real question is this though: While employeers CAN and DO dictate the behavior of employees while they are on their (the company's) property, can the Mayor of a city treat the PUBLICALLY OWNED City Hall building as though it were an office building under hi management?

I guess what it comes down to is who really employees all the people at city hall, the mayor or the people. The boss is the only one that gets to make silly rules like this.

Double Naught Spy
September 28, 2004, 07:11 AM
Do folks not actually read these things before posting them with inflammatory titles. Yes, the title says 'arrested,' but he wasn't arrested. There does not seem to be any great trampling of the carrier's rights. The mayor, pissed or whatever, called the police. That was a wrong event. The police came and then did what they were supposed to do. They spoke with both sides. Yes, the carrier was detained as would any person be after somebody calls the police and complains about them. Once the police were able to assess that there were no legal infractions, the carrier was allowed to continue on his way. From the way it reads, the police acted properly, figured out what was going on, and took no action against the carrier.

If there is going to be a claim of some injustice, at least actually use facts.

gigmike
September 28, 2004, 12:32 PM
Why were the cops called? The only reason I can think of was to intimidate the delivery guy. That in itself is improper. It seems to me that the mayor ought to have had something more important to do.

jsalcedo
September 28, 2004, 12:46 PM
Do folks not actually read these things before posting them with inflammatory titles.

The article used the word arrested at least 3 times. this leads me to believe
the paper carrier was held in handcuffs, detained and questioned under orders from the mayor.

It doesn't say whether the man was taken to the police station or not.

I don't think the title was inflammatory as the quote comes directly from the article.

The actions of the mayor are reprehensible and he should be removed from office for abusing his power as a government official and abusing the civil rights of the paper carrier.

carpettbaggerr
September 28, 2004, 01:04 PM
Yes, the title says 'arrested,' but he wasn't arrested. There does not seem to be any great trampling of the carrier's rights. If he was prevented from leaving until the police arrived and spoke with him whoever prevented him from leaving may be guilty of false arrest. You don't have to be booked and processed by the cops to be under arrest. The mayor, pissed or whatever, called the police. Yes, the carrier was detained as would any person be after somebody calls the police and complains about them. Most people aren't detained to speak with the cops when you call to complain about them.

Glamdring
September 28, 2004, 02:47 PM
Being detained is arrest and/or kidnapping. Sounds like the Mayor was the one who did the deed.

Jim K
September 28, 2004, 04:09 PM
How to eliminate the Federal government:

Fire every employee who reads the paper in the office.

Jim

If you enjoyed reading about "Paper carrier arrested for not revealing names of subscribers...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!