Wife Tries To Abort And Poison Husband's Lovechild
Man Injured By Tree Limb Files Suit Against City
Charles Barron Will Run For Council Speaker
Alleged Tiger Mistress Is Unrecognizable To Dead Fiancee's Dad
New Jersey State Senate To Vote On Gay Marriage
The Hotel Chelsea bloggers are reporting that the Bring Back the Bards sign that has been hanging on the facade of the hotel for two years has been forcibly removed. Tenant Arthur Nash had it hanging outside of his room, but at approximately 8:45 a.m. the "kinda-sorta manager Arnold Tamasar" took it down as a police officer and a security guard stood by. They report that "the cop’s explanation for allowing the sign’s removal was that only the owners of a building are allowed to hang signs on the façade. This is open to debate, and in fact it was being discussed with various city agencies. The cop further stated that, since Arthur didn’t have a door to the balcony (like many residents, he climbs through his window), he was not allowed go onto the balcony at all." Did the NYPD have a right to assist the hotel management in what the residents are calling "a suppression of Nash’s first amendment rights"?
NYPD Assists in Taking Sign Down at Hotel Chelsea
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookComments (3) [rss]
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Tips
Newsmap
Contribute
Latest Tip:
It's the same media that NEVER mentioned Muslims' hatred of Israel as a possible motive for 9/11.
[more]
The First Amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
So where does the right to hang a sign relating to a commercial dispute in violation of NYC laws fall in that sentence? Stop crying wolf.
Hey Sleepy, go back to sleep. I would be kind, but your above comment reminds all of us the need for quality education, not just rote memorization. Crying wolf? Are you sure you're not referring to Thomas Wolfe, who probably spent some time hanging at the Chelsea Hotel? Or perhaps you meant Tom Wolfe? Idiot.
Anyway, the owner probably has the authority to bring the sign off the building, though the use of the police is problematic. I would like to know what he told the police to get them to assist in this endeavor. Was there a fear of violence? As I understand police power, you must first invoke a valid reason to request it. Remember, when the government assists a private citizen in an enforcement, the private act becomes public, and is beholden to the 1st Amendment's prohibition on government abridgment of freedom of speech. I would still assume the owner has the right to take the sign down, but like for most things, you cannot call the police as your own private army. (Although you see politicans do this from time to time, it actually is illegal). The question is whether the owner had good cause to call the police, or had a valid court order. Why did the owner feel the need to call the police?
#2, I'm not sure where you received your education but you should ask for your money back.
Under your logic a person who calls the police to arrest someone who sprays grafitti on the side of their building can't have the person arrested because the act of involving the police protects the person's act. That's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
Having a lease to an apartment doesn't mean you can do whatever you want to the building.