Tattoo Parlors are guaranteed by the Constitution?

[chanel]

To some, they're body art. To others, they're hazards to health, morals and good taste.

But to a federal appeals court, tattoos are constitutionally protected free expression, and a city has no more right to ban tattoo parlors than to outlaw bookstores or newsstands.

"Tattooing is a process like writing words down or drawing a picture, except that it is performed on a person's skin," the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said Thursday in striking down an anti-tattoo parlor law from the Los Angeles suburb of Hermosa Beach.

"A form of speech does not lose First Amendment protection based on the kind of surface it is applied to," said Judge Jay Bybee, writing for a unanimous panel of three Republican appointees.

Read more: Court: Tattoo parlors covered by 1st Amendment

NIMBY!!!!

 

[CountofTuscany]

It's a legitimate business. Why should they be banned? Next will we ban printed T shirts and caps?

 

[uscitizen]

Tatoos are crap.
but I guess people have a right to show people they are stupid too.

 

[CountofTuscany]

Tatoos are crap.
but I guess people have a right to show people they are stupid too.

Tattoos are a form of expression.

 

[uscitizen]

Tatoos are crap.
but I guess people have a right to show people they are stupid too.

Tattoos are a form of expression.

Agreed, just why people have to express low life tendancies is beyond me though.

 

[Truthmatters]

Body modification has been going on throughout mankinds exsistance.

I dont understand the need to modify ones body but others do and it doesnt bother me.

 

[jillian]

Tatoos are crap.
but I guess people have a right to show people they are stupid too.

Tattoos are a form of expression.

Agreed, just why people have to express low life tendancies is beyond me though.

i don't get the tat thing either, and i don't think anyone would disagree that they can be zoned to particular areas... but they're right. they can't be totally prohibited.

i'm not sure what the issue is? is the o/p complaining that they can't be prohibited?

 

[CountofTuscany]

Body modification has been going on throughout mankinds exsistance.

I dont understand the need to modify ones body but others do and it doesnt bother me.

Why style your hair, or spend money on fashion? It's all about achieving a desired look or presenting a certain image.

 

[zzzz]

No problem with this ruling. As long as they are regulated and inspected for sanitary conditions and practices it is just like any other business, like hair salons, or barber shops. People have the right to screw up their bodies if they want from tattos, piercings and even chopping fingers off. They have to live with it the rest of their lives. The pursuit of happines, right?

Vaya con Dios !

 

[Father Time]

Why wouldn't tattoos be free speech? You want to put an image on yourself saying 'I like X or I'm a bad ass biker' how is that not speech?

 

[chanel]

Tattoos may be free speech; but tattoo parlors are not. In NJ they can be zoned just like liquor stores, massage parlors and titty bars. Claiming its a first amendment issue trumps local laws. NIMBY for me.

 

[Father Time]

Tattoos may be free speech; but tattoo parlors are not. In NJ they can be zoned just like liquor stores, massage parlors and titty bars. Claiming its a first amendment issue trumps local laws. NIMBY for me.

God forbid you'd ever have to put up with a harmless activity you don't like.

 

[chanel]

I put up with a lot of activities I don't like. Don't need anymore thank you. A tattoo parlor in town would lower property values. I don't support any stupid choices by other people that affect my pocketbook.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Tattoos may be free speech; but tattoo parlors are not. In NJ they can be zoned just like liquor stores, massage parlors and titty bars. Claiming its a first amendment issue trumps local laws. NIMBY for me.

The city of Hermosa Beach had totally banned them in an attempt to drive them entirely off the beach. I think that is a but different than regulating zoning them to keep them away from schools and churches.

 

[Luissa]

You can zoning laws, where they can't be near a school or something, but no way can you ban them.
I do love how the right loves the government telling other people what they should do, though.

 

[chanel]

Laws are all about telling people what they can or cannot do Luissa. That's why we have them.

In some towns, setting them away from schools, churches, and playgrounds leave no place at all. Sounds like a ban to me.

 

[Luissa]

Laws are all about telling people what they can or cannot do Luissa. That's why we have them.

In some towns, setting them away from schools, churches, and playgrounds leave no place at all. Sounds like a ban to me.

Sounds to me like you want to tell other people what they should do with their body.

How do Tattoo parlors hurt children or people for that matter, if they follow code and regulations?

My brother owns a building, when he bought it, it was crap. They put in a tattoo shop, a hair salon, and a bike shop. The building is worth more now. Condos for sale a block away, are the most expensive in the city.
Just admit it, if you don't agree with it, you want to ban it.

 

[Luissa]

This reminds me of a story here. This guy ran a business where he provided therapy to sex offenders. He had been there for years. A christian school decided to buy a building two blocks away for a school. The guy told the school what he did at his business, before they even bought the building. The christian school bought the building anyways, then went to the news to bitch about how there was sex offender close to school property which is against zoning laws here.

The guy ended up having to close his business, because the christian school, even though he had been there for years. Do you think that is right?

 

[chanel]

NIMBY. Yes, if I don't like it, build it elsewhere. I don't want to live near a titty bar, a methadone clinic, a nuclear power plant or a halfway house for convicts either. Only crazy people would.

 

[chanel]

This reminds me of a story here. This guy ran a business where he provided therapy to sex offenders. He had been there for years. A christian school decided to buy a building two blocks away for a school. The guy told the school what he did at his business, before they even bought the building. The christian school bought the building anyways, then went to the news to bitch about how there was sex offender close to school property which is against zoning laws here.

The guy ended up having to close his business, because the christian school, even though he had been there for years. Do you think that is right?

Nope that's not right. But don't expect any sympathy from me for sex offenders. Therapy is bullshit.

Here's an either funnier one. Bars in Tribeca that have been operating for years had to close because Imam Rauf had a mosque there.

Recently, the SLA notified three businesses on West Broadway that it is moving to revoke their liquor licenses. All four establishments are in the vicinity of Masjid al-Farah, a Sufi mosque in a nondescript two-story building at 245 West Broadway. According to the state's Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC) law, liquor licenses are prohibited for establishments that are on the same street and within 200 feet of a building "occupied exclusively as a school, church, synagogue or other place of worship…"

This is the mosque. No one even knew what it was.