Barefoot discrimination by Wal-Mart

Many of the people that support the NSNSNS policy feel that someone who is shirtless or barefoot is unsightly. For many people it's a social, personal belief more than it is a safety issue. That's why one will find some Walmarts or other stores that have a NSNSNS policy while others have no problem with someone going barefoot or shirtless. It depends on the perceptions of the people in a particular region.

People who support the NSNSNS usually don't want to admit that this is their reason and will instead try to hide behind a veil of 'protecting the rights of the store owner' or 'protecting the safety of the customer'.

 

Yes. In other words, they're cowards who are too afraid to state their real prejudices, and they have no compunctions about lying.

-Jeffrey

 

Legally this problem is much more complex than one may think at first blush.

When anyone requires certain behavior of another, they take responsibility for problems arising from liabilities tied to that behavior.

As long as a merchant does not say anything about your behavior, you are responsible for your own behavior in the store.

If you fall in the store due to negligence on the part of the store, they can be sued but you must prove that they did not provide reasonable care. They are not responsible for your fall if you dropped the bottle of water that caused your problem.

If the merchant requires footwear, then by law he must state the kind of footwear allowable. If he does not state the kind of footwear, then he is absolutely responsible for anything that happens to the customer no matter what footgear is worn.

The problem here is that the responsibility for reasonable care is shifted from the customer to the merchant.

This is a legal nightmare.

Our local town government passed an ordinance especially for me.

This ordinance was drafted by an attorney and says that shoes must be worn on town property. I asked if I could go barefoot on the road outside of my property. (I own 60 acres boardering a blacktopped road).

I was told that they did not know.

My daughter is a student at the UW Madison in her senior year. After she graduates in June of 2005 she will attend their law school.

I am trying to get information from her and her contacts in the legal aid relative to this topic.

I would appreciate any additional info I can get on this.

Maybe we can overturn the stupid clothing thing also.

 

Here's some views posted in another thread by someone who posted in this room about store owner rights. Sounds more like a problem with the sight of skin than an issue of store owner rights.

http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=652&page=1&pp=10

 

Still got nothing from them on their official policy toward barefeet in the store.

Been two weeks now and I don't suppose I will ever see anything in writing.

 

Well, in my opinion, Walmart is a horrible store anyway. If someone has enough care to stop you from walking barefoot, then they should care enough to stop working for companies who enslave children in South Vietnam and Indonesia. They should care enough about their fellow workers who died because factory owners locked the doors while workers were inside and set a fire to collect insurance money... people need to get their priorities straight damnit.

If they have issues with bare feet, tell them to check out the information on the site in my signature. The purpose of the Society for Barefoot Living is to spread the true and healthy information to people, stores and restaurants about the benefits of living barefoot. If you have any questions or would like to join, send me an email or private message. Let's set this world straight!

 

Look, I don't like to go around insulting people, but this "Megara" poster seems like an abject idiot. His views are offensive, and apart from that, they're ignorant.

How on earth is the public put at risk of people's "germs" because they're not wearing a shirt in a 7-11?!

So let's say we have everyone in shirts, shoes, pants, and hats. They don't still spread germs by BREATHING? SNEEZING? TOUCHING things with their hands? Should we have the police check everyone after they go to the bathroom, to make sure they wash their hands -- and thoroughly?

The force of law cannot possibly be used to protect every single person from every single thing that could possibly affect, offend, or harm them. And if you're not going to make the attempt to protect people from sneezed germs, etc., you cannot justify some bullshit attempt to protect them from "bare chest germs."

When you realize how nonsensical, illogical and stupid the inconsistencies in such a position are, you realize it has to be abandoned.

Blue skies,
-Jeffrey

 

If this is true, it is PATENTLY OFFENSIVE.
The idea that a town would be so stupid as to enact such an overbroad, ill-advised, overreaching and intrusive law is an outrage.

And the fact that the enactors of the law themselves don't even know how it can or can't be applied?! That is MALFEASANCE, and those people should be removed forcibly from office. They have proven their own incompetence.

Are you saying that because YOU like to go barefoot, they deliberately passed a law to prohibit you from doing so?

Have you sued them for anything in the past? Have you given them any reason except for being an eccentric who goes out in public barefoot (like many of us), to fear some sort of liability issue from you? Or are they just a bunch of morons who are caving in to the contemporary lawsuit-paranoia; who believe the many myths about the "dangers" of bare feet; who think it is up to them to protect people from their own freedom of choice?

I would like to know more about this, and where it took place. Thanks.

Blue skies,
-Jeffrey

 

The town of Palm Beach, Florida passed a law years ago that forbid men from being on public roadways or something like that without shirts on. (I guess it excused the beach.) It was struck down. You should try to look that one up.

This idiotic law even prohibited people who were jogging on public sidewalks from doing so without shirts on.

There are deplorable power-mongers in all levels of government, who cannot abide the notion of free people doing what they wish to do as long as they're not harming others. It makes me really angry. People who try to stifle the rights of harmless people living free really need to be... gotten rid of. They need to be set straight forcibly. They need to be told in a way that SCARES them: "We will NOT allow our rights to be curtailed by you simply because you are full of fear and lack of understanding."

Blue skies,
-Jeffrey

 

Makes me wonder if Wal Marts that ban bare feet also ban shirtless people and if so makes me wonder if they have any signs or postings legitimizing this in clear sight where people can see them and it also makes me wonder if they enforce the rules at all or are choosy and picky with which people they make follow the rules.

I beleive if these places have a rule for shoes but not shirts and have no signs posted anywhere and dont enforce the rules or are not consistant with them then they shouldnt have the rules and or nobody should have to follow them because it shows these people are incompetent and should not be respected and sure as hell shouldnt be trusted to run a big chain store like Wal Mart. I wonder if the big-wigs upstairs know about this nonsense, im sure they wouldnt put up with it if they did, they dont want these little twerps ruining their business.

 

We have two Wal*Marts nearby. The one in Opelika has never cared about barefeet. The other in Auburn will pester you about them. I was told twice in one night I couldn't shop barefoot (even though I was obviously doing just fine at it.) I asked them to show the "no shoes, no service" sign and just ignored them.


For a company wide policy someone can't agree. Lowe's Hardware is another who will harass you sometimes (and if you ain't a six foot something wooky.) A rather big and hairy friend of mine has never been approached in Lowes but shorter and less fuzzy me can't seem to get away with it. Fortunately we have another hardware that doesn't care if you wear shirt or shoes.

As for barefoot and injuries I find shoes more hazardous than barefeet. You are simply more aware of where you are walking. For example, you immediately know the floor is wet and know to be wary of slipping where with shoes you can overlook a wet floor until you're flat of your butt.

I stepped on a nail while wearing sandals this Spring but if I had been barefoot I would have been aware of what I was standing on before it came to that (I though I was in the grass, but was really trammpling on an old boards.)

 

I would think that if these stores are part of a chain then the whole chain should have one well understood policy of what goes on in their stores and not have some that care about bare feet and some that dont. I think somebody should go to the company's website and explain to them that if theyre going to have a policy then all stores need to be in agreement of it and enforce it. Either all stores ban bare feet or they all allow it, I dont want to have to try and guess what the rules and reactions are going to be every time I go into a certain store. I dont want them to have clothing rules but if they do I would expect them to have the same rules for all stores and to enforce them, otherwise there is no need for such rules.

 

These wal marts need to have documentation or signs that clearly state what their rules are in places that can easily be seen by people and or show people this when they ask for it or when the store sees them breaking the rules, otherwise I dont feel the store has any right to enforce any rules because there is no way for the customer to know theyre breaking any and they just assume there is no such rule and have no reason to do otherwise. If these people really care about their rules then they would at least come up with some proof that theyre legit.

 

How much do you want to know.

This took place in Gibson township, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin, USA.

The ordinance was passed in July of 2002. I was arrested in July of 2002 for the offense of attending a town meeting without shoes when I refused to leave the meeting because I was not properly attired.

I told them that this was discrimination and that I would not leave. The town constable was ordered to escort me out. I refused to leave as I am a town resident and tax payer and told them this was in violation of the Constitution of the United States.

They told me that they would call the cops and have me arrested.

I refused to leave, they called the cops and had me arrested.

 

i also tried to go into a wal-mart to grab sum fruit when we where comming in frum surfing da ole lady wouldnt even let me in the store,needless to say now she looks at my feet everytime i go in dere.

 

I still think these stores need to worry about more important issues like shoplifters and panhandlers and people who are basically doing damage to the business or bringing harm to the customers or employees. I really dont think they have the time to worry about such things as barefoot and shirtless people. Honestly I dont think its their business what anyone wears, these people's bodies belong to the individual and only they should be able to decide what they wear and when/where they wear it.

 

big corporations like that think they own the little guy. They are all conservitives. You will probably never hear anything. God...I know about corporations owning...my husband is trying to pay off a deep debt to Capital One credit card and I feel like they own our lives. I am ready to do away with checking accounts, bank cards, and all that shit! i just want to be free of these freakin plastic corporate crap...if i have to i will use cash but i prefer bartering.

 

well........walmart can kiss my ass.

 

i've never heard of a law banning bare feet...

 

I don't think there are enough laws prohibitting such lewd behavior.