Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Barefoot Pub' started by Nyal, May 29, 2011.
Think again: http://cavemandiaries.com/index.php?post=7
gotta love America. the land
gotta love America. the land of the free do to what you're told. unfortunetly it appears we are losing more and more freedom everyday in the name of security.
Puts a whole new spin on the
Puts a whole new spin on the quote "If I can't dance, I don't wanna be part of you revolution". (Can't remember who said that).
Freedom is not being told you
Freedom is not being told you can't go barefoot in a business? Since when is being told what to do a freedom? To me that is a freedom being taken away! I really hate that everytime I hear someone tell me I can't go barefoot in their place of business! Why call it a free country if you make rules that the government don't even have? The government has enough rules without people adding to them. Let people be people, quit judging people for what they like to do!
Well private businesses have
Well private businesses have the right to regulate (for the most part) who their patrons are just like you have the right to choose whether or not to be a patron at their business. The Bill of Rights applies to government actions against its citizens, not citizens actions towards each other. In that respect, we're not free to do whatever we want to each other, and we never have been.
I travel a lot but always
I travel a lot but always find it most difficult to be barefoot in USA because people with power tell you that you can not.
My most recent experience at The Alamo in San Antonio Tx. I had been exploring the city barefoot all day and had had nothing on my feet since leaving the UK. A large man in uniform, shades and a belt with several guns tells me that I cannot be barefoot 'for my own safety' and 'because it's in the rules, Sir'. I ask to see the rules and he takes me to the big sign listing numerous 'do nots'. (A common sight in USA). We are unable to find any mention of footware which he said was because the sign was out of date. I pointed out the clear instruction that firearms must not be taken in to the site and glared at his belt. This was a fine and oh so common example of 'do what I say in the USA'. The least free country I have ever been to. I could fill a book with other examples and another book with stories of other countries where no one ever questions the safety, possibility or legality of going barefoot!
That is sad, ive found that
That is sad, ive found that only big city folk really care about being barefoot enough to actually do anything
My thoughts are that most
My thoughts are that most barefoot laws were an attempt to keep homeless people, and counter-culture people out of businesses. Give it a more believable justification like "for health reasons" or "it's unsafe" or "unsanitary" and most neutral people will usually side with it than against it. Why? Because it sounds reasonable; just so long as you don't think the whole thing through anyway. Not like there wasn't a long history of using such types of regulation to keep people away based on color; just repurpose it to fit the new situation! Ta Da!
I'm not 100%, but I am pretty sure there were enforceable regulations regarding bare feet when I was a kid in the 70's, and obviously between then and now some people fought those regulations and left us free to go sans shoes. Yay freedom!
I look at the United States of America, not as a land of complete freedom, or perfection, but a land that is fighting and refighting the battle for real freedom every day. People don't always get it right, but with any luck we'll see the error and make it right.
Only India and China have more people than the United States. I am not sure about India, but if China had a law against dancing someplace, hell would freeze over before it had a glimmer of a thought of a dream of a chance of changing. Sure, some people have recently had a problem, but there is a very good chance, not in some long far off time after were all dead, but in all likelihood within months or years there will be dancing allowed there if indeed it was illegal to begin with. Note they were charged with disturbing the peace, not dancing where no dancing is allowed. I'm guessing some lawyer is having a field day right now over the disturbing the peace thing. Which means, aside from an inconvenience, no one is going to be sentenced to jail.
For what it's worth, I looked through my state's laws and regulations regarding barefooting or shoe wearing and there is only one instance where one is required by law to wear protective foot covering: Motorcycle operation. That's it.
Yes dunetraveller, you have
Yes dunetraveller, you have put your finger (or toe) on it.
The society for barefoot living was started in USA in order to 'debunk' the myths particularly common in that country regarding barefooting. As you have discovered, there are laws in perhaps 2 states about barefoot motorcycle riding but that is about it. It is not ilegal to be barefoot while car driving, in restaurants, bars or public buildings but many people believe that it is. It is quite easy to prove a positive but much more difficult to prove a negative when you are faced with a person in a position of power who is adament that they are correct.
And again, just because there
And again, just because there is no law on the books requiring you to be shod in a private business doesn't give you free reign to go barefoot in them, and assert that you have a "right" to do so.
Businesses can refuse service to you for being barefoot despite the lack of laws to the contrary. It's a liability issue, not a rights issue. Businesses don't want you getting hurt on their property, because that means a potential lawsuit.
saypay45 wrote:And again,
I can understand their right to keep you out of their place of business. But "liability"? I'm much more likely to get hurt wearing shoes than being barefoot.
That does raise the question
That does raise the question though. How much more likely is the potential for a slip and fall in bare feet (assuming good balance because we likely do have better than average balance) versus any shod person? And is there really an increased risk for damage (apart from glass and punctures from carelessness or inattentiveness) while barefoot? I am sure there is an actuarial with the goods as insurance companies have to have this to best advise their clients.
If I walk into a place barefoot, could it be argued I am assuming the liability if I get injured? or do I have to have been warned in advance? I know even if I am guaranteed to lose my case, there are costs associated with defending against my lawsuit, and always a cost if there is a settlement, even if only because the insurance costs from my carrier are likely to go up. Lots of factors to think about.
The best people to know this off hand are those with businesses beachside as they experience the greatest potential for barefoot traffic.
"But "liability"? I'm much
"But "liability"? I'm much more likely to get hurt wearing shoes than being barefoot."
And you are. See here and here:
We believe that businesses legally have nothing to fear from letting their patrons go barefoot. The risks of any potential injury are incredibly low and a barefooter would have a nearly-impossible time successfully suing if injured. This is due to the near impossibility of serious injury, structure of tort (civil) law and the societal norm that wearing shoes is a standard practice.
Dr. Daniel Howell, PhD, outlined in his book The Barefoot Book the four legal conditions that must be met in order for an injured barefooter to successfully sue a business.1 They are (with our italicized notations for each item):
1. A duty of care to the customer must be established -The business was responsible to keep the floor reasonably clear of things that can hurt you.
2. A breach of that duty must be demonstrated. - The business didn't keep the floor reasonably clear of something that can hurt you.
3. A causal link between breach and harm must be made. - Because the business didn't keep the floorreasonably clear of something that could harm you (their "negligence"), you hurt your bare foot.
4. Actual harm or damage must be assessed. - What harm did the business' negligence cause that must be remedied?
In most cases, the harm would be a cut to the foot which could be remedied by a simple bandage. A business' legal obligation would end with the bandage and no other damages could be awarded.
Any threat that would result in an injury greater than that which could be treated with a simple bandage -- like a broken foot from a falling box -- likely would not be preventable even while wearing some kinds of footwear like flip flops (and such an injury falls out of the realm of this FAQ) or it would be considered easily avoidable -- like a broken toe stubbed on the leg of a clothing rack. That takes us to our next point:
Adult customers are legally responsible for their own actions or those of their minor children. That means that if we can perceive and avoid a threat, it's our responsibility to do so. Footwear is generally believed to be a way to avoid the threat of cutting your feet on a sharp thing on the ground or stubbing your toe on something like a clothing rack. That said, a court would likely dismiss a suit altogether or rule in favor of the business if a barefooter could have avoided harm by using footwear. The judge would likely say, "You took on the liability when you chose not to wear shoes or sandals" and/or "It's not the business' fault you weren't paying attention to what you were doing."
It should be noted that anyone who subscribes to a barefoot lifestyle understands the risks and believes the benefits of going barefoot outweigh the risks. Not only is it doubtful we'd actually get hurt, but it is highly unlikely that one of us would ever sue a business because we got hurt due to a lack of footwear.
Liability and legal matters aside, let's take a quick look at the actual risk of a cut to a bare foot in a typical business:
A barefooter could cut their foot only IF a glass object breaks on the ground and IF employees don't clean it up well enough and IF the barefooter doesn't see the remaining broken piece and IF the barefooter steps in that exact area of the floor and IF the piece is big enough to cut the skin and IF they step on it in such a way to cut the skin.
That's a lot of IFs. Too many to be concerned about, we think.
Disclaimer: Nothing in this post should be construed or used as legal advice and we make no claims to its accuracy. Because laws are different in each jurisdiction, consult with a licensed, practicing attorney if you have further questions regarding this subject.
1. Howell, L. D. (2010). The barefoot book, 126. Alameda, CA: Hunter House.
Business management and security officials who are concerned about customer safety might want to focus more on patrons who wear dangerous shoes rather than those who go barefoot. High heels, because of their unstable nature, send about 20,000 women to hospital emergency rooms every year.1 Furthermore, the slick outer sole of many high-heeled shoes also puts women at risk of slipping and falling on the slick floors of many businesses.
Incidentally, bare feet have special skin prints that acutally help improve grip and can make feet more slip resistant than many shoes.2
1. D.P. Manning and C. Jones, "High Heels and Polished Floors: The Ultimate Challenge in Research on Slip-Resistance," Safety Science 19, no. 1 (1995): 19.
2. "Foot Anatomy 101 - The Special Skin of Your Feet" - The Barefoot Professor blog. http://barefootprof.blogspot.com/2010/11/special-skin-on-your-feet.html
Lawsuits for own injury from wearing high heels? I haven't heard of any to date.
Skyalmian wrote: Lawsuits for
Thanks Skyalmian! Nice bit of
Thanks Skyalmian! Nice bit of explaining there.
It's tricky business being a
It's tricky business being a barefooter in the U.S., and I've discovered that playing the game works best.
As Ahcuah knows well, asking permission to be barefoot in advance is frequently met with undesirable responses.
But just showing up can be equaly dissapointing especially when one does'nt want to embarrass the others that are with you.
Last weekend I e-mailed the venue in question in advance with this carefully worded question, and carried the printout with me. I had full confidence that I could not be challenged armed with this document, and was'nt. I of course carried letters from all of the named departments as well.
We are considering meeting at Somerset Inn Troy for our large and rather diverse crowd.
Do the restaurants and lounges at the hotel have any dress codes other than those required by the Oakland County Health Department, Michigan Department of Agriculture, State of Michigan Department of Health, Michigan State Police, Oakland County Sheriff, or City of Troy police department?
Reply |Reservations to me
show details Jul 1 (7 days ago)
Hello, No, there is not a particular dress code. Which date will the group be arriving? Somerset Inn ReservationsJessica