Who here thinks Congress and the government should sign a law permitting people to go barefoot wherever they choose? Since all groups for the most part have their rights, why can't the barefoot community have their rights too!?
No law needs to be made, since we already have that right. Stores will always be able to disallow bare feet because it is their property and they have that right. I would never want a law made that takes way someone else's right and puts mine ahead of theirs.
The problem we barefooters face, is not a legality issue but a social one. Bare feet are just not socially acceptable by many people. A law will not change that either.
Yeah TJ that's exactly what I'm trying to get at. I want it so we barefooters can go barefoot without being challenged by status quo and have people not freak about it. So if the government can hear us say something about that and make the status quo get off our backs, that'd be nice.We actually don't have that right to go barefoot anywhere we want...in public (public library, public school, etc.) or privately owned businesses (stores, amusement parks, etc.). It's not a right. Store owners, for example, can send you packing if they want, and if you don't comply (get out or get shod), they can have the police remove you. No law protects us from this. That would be like saying we have the right to parade around naked. If we did, you and I know we'd be arrested for indecent exposure in probably most public places.
What Tyler is getting to, I believe, is that he would like to see that we have the right to go barefoot anywhere without being challenged by the status quo.
That's why I said as long as there would be no liability on anyone's part, I think there should be a law stating specifically so. I stub my toe in your building, I don't sue you. (I know I will hear it on this one, but I stand by this.)
Also, if being allowed to venture everywhere publicly were allowed, then more people would do it, and more people would be "desensitized" to it, allow it, and eventually accept it. That's the case with nearly everything in history that's not evil if you think about it.
Agreed TJ. As the 2015 adult citizen of character I know better than to blame everyone for something that goes wrong (with a few exceptions but that's beyond my point). Who knows? Maybe someday it will happen with the changing times.A note about liability, thinking on the issue... Of course stores, etc., should keep their facilities clean of hazards. They are required to do it regardless if we wear gloves to protect our hands in their stores or helmets to protect our heads. When I talk about liability, I'm talking about the mistakes we make that cause us injury, stubbing a toe on a fixed object, pinching a finger pushing shopping carts together. We have to also take responsibility for our own actions and not always blame someone else.
Very much agreed there, if a property owner is negligent that is different (they left hazards exposed, etc) but if I am not paying attention and run a shopping cart into a glass door and then cut myself, then that is my liability and I don't know why it is allowed in the U.S. to sue over such things. People need to be responsible for themselves and not be allowed to sue other people over their own dumb selves faults. I here lots of stories where folks wander on to someone else property (often times to rob them) and then hurt themselves doing something they shouldn't be doing, and sue the landowner. That just drives me nuts that it is even legal.When I talk about liability, I'm talking about the mistakes we make
I like to think of it as a wild stab in the dark. Besides, eventually people in government will include a majority of millenials. Some of which may be barefooters so suffice to say, it may happen. Just don't know when.Sigh. So much ignorance in this thread (sorry!).
First, a national law would violate state sovereignty. Nothing, absent a constitutional amendment, gives the national government power to regulate in this area.
Second, while it is true that people owning private property can do as they wish (mostly), public accommodations are subject to different standards. The best (and most parallel) example I can think of is breastfeeding laws. For instance, the Ohio version reads:
A mother is entitled to breast-feed her baby in any location of a place of public accommodation wherein the mother otherwise is permitted.
But third, does anybody think we have a snowball's chance in hell of affecting such a change? We can't even get a decent letter-writing campaign against any one store. (And it's a million times worse thinking about a national constitutional amendment.)
Plus, TJ knows what she's talking about. She's the head honcho of this group!Sigh. So much ignorance in this thread (sorry!).
First, a national law would violate state sovereignty. Nothing, absent a constitutional amendment, gives the national government power to regulate in this area.
Second, while it is true that people owning private property can do as they wish (mostly), public accommodations are subject to different standards. The best (and most parallel) example I can think of is breastfeeding laws. For instance, the Ohio version reads:
A mother is entitled to breast-feed her baby in any location of a place of public accommodation wherein the mother otherwise is permitted.
But third, does anybody think we have a snowball's chance in hell of affecting such a change? We can't even get a decent letter-writing campaign against any one store. (And it's a million times worse thinking about a national constitutional amendment.)
Hee. You crack me up, always saying it like it is.Sigh. So much ignorance in this thread (sorry!).
That's like saying, "It'll stop hurting when the pain goes away."Second, while it is true that people owning private property can do as they wish (mostly), public accommodations are subject to different standards. The best (and most parallel) example I can think of is breastfeeding laws. For instance, the Ohio version reads:
A mother is entitled to breast-feed her baby in any location of a place of public accommodation wherein the mother otherwise is permitted.
No snowball, I'm afraid. But I know that you have had some success with writing letters, hint, hint.But third, does anybody think we have a snowball's chance in hell of affecting such a change? We can't even get a decent letter-writing campaign against any one store. (And it's a million times worse thinking about a national constitutional amendment.)
Thank you for your vote, Tyler. Actually, Ahcuah is well-rehearsed in the "rights" and laws about barefootedness in public, since he has challenged the status quo time and again for many years. At times, I have deferred to him for his valuable, real-world insight. Check out his very informative blog at http://ahcuah.com.Plus, TJ knows what she's talking about. She's the head honcho of this group!
You're welcome TJ. I don't know of any "laws" that prohibit barefootedness or allow it but maybe someday there will be. Especially when it comes to millennials such as myselfThank you for your vote, Tyler. Actually, Ahcuah is well-rehearsed in the "rights" and laws about barefootedness in public, since he has challenged the status quo time and again for many years. At times, I have deferred to him for his valuable, real-world insight. Check out his very informative blog at http://ahcuah.com.
Hee. You crack me up, always saying it like it is.
Do you know of any "laws" (not policies) anywhere that allow or disallow barefootedness in public?
There are cities (or towns) that have local ordinances (which are laws with possible arrest for violating them) banning bare feet in public establishments. A list is here.
And then there is Burien, WA.
Burien, WA Bans Bare Feet