Isn’t this a form of "freedom of expression"?
Posted by admin on Nov 30, 2009
A grocery store chain offered free coupons to customers that expired 12/31/07. Due to poor financial performance, the grocery store laid off employees and stopped honoring the coupons before the expiration date.
An angry customer expressed his anger by stealing $500 of merchandise from the store. When they arrested him for theft, he argued he was just exercising his freedom of expression covered by the 1st amendment.
He was expressing an emotion right?
since when is it against the law to express yourself in America???
Crimes are not covered under the First Amendment. The man is still taking property he does not own. He can and should still be arrested for theft.
Taking the man’s logic to extremes, I should be allowed to murder people if I use it as a form of expression.
Crimes are not covered under the First Amendment. The man is still taking property he does not own. He can and should still be arrested for theft.
Taking the man’s logic to extremes, I should be allowed to murder people if I use it as a form of expression.
References :
It is theft, plain & simple.
Never mind the Constitutions
References :
The law covering theft is quite clear . Regardless of what he claimed , he was stealing . If it was your property that he was stealing , I’m sure you wouldn’t see it as just an expression .
References :
common sense
Under Canadian law
his freedom of expression is considered expression but not justifeid under section 1 of the constituion.
(Sorry for any spelling mistakes)
References :
Canadian Constituttion