What’s ineresting to me is that this shirt is in red, the color of certain gangs making the wearer a target for other gangs and potentially a murder victim. Ah, modern society.

Mayor wants to ban T-shirt Message

Among the steps: Sending city Inspectional Services Division officials to seize T-shirts emblazoned with the “Stop Snitchin’ ” message.
“It’s wrong,” Menino said. “We are going into every retail store that sells the shirts and remove them.”
The Herald reported the shirts were worn by the mother of a reputed gang member earlier this year during his trial for a shooting that killed 10-year-old Trina Persad.
The mayor did not say what legal authority ISD would cite in seizing the shirts from retailers.

Free speech is one thing, but the Mom seems like kind of a creep and who would sell these in the first place? Boston is weird.

I’m thinking that Cheney will wear one.

found by Ima Fish



  1. Ima Fish says:

    I work for a judge and I see nothing wrong with having the mom not wear it during the hearing/trial. It would certainly be disruptive and could possibly be a message to witnesses. (By “possibly” I mean “most certainly.”)

    However, for the mayor to confiscate every single one is simply bizarre. As a friend of mine said, “Well, if there’s an outcry and he loses the position of mayor, he sounds like a perfect candidate for a public school superintendent! :-)”

  2. Moreno says:

    What’s sad is it wouldn’t make any difference if the Mayor removes these shirts from Boston stores. Those punks and their coward neighbors like to protect their own people. I was listening to a local talk radio show where a store owner in Dorchester, a burrough of Boston, has had items from his store stolen and other things done to his property. When he reported it to the Police no one in the community “snitched”. But, one time trash from his garbage container blew across to someone else’s property. He received fines for littering after the Police received multiple complaints from the locals in his area. The same locals that never saw anything that was done to his store.

    As stupid as these shirts are, the Mayor would just be wasting his time and city resources by removing them because it wouldn’t make a difference. Those hoodlooms and thugs somehow think that their lifestyle should be totally accepted by the law and that it’s “the man is that’s out to get them”…

  3. Imafish says:

    “Those hoodlooms and thugs somehow think that their lifestyle should be totally accepted by the law and that it’s “the man is that’s out to get them””

    Hasn’t this been said of every generation’s youth?!

  4. Shane Taylor says:

    Even though we may not like the message, this is exactly the type of thing the First Amendment was put in place to protect. After all, popular speech, by definition, does not require protection.

    We are raising a generation of little informants who will report anything to the government. Everything is not the government’s business. We are losing our right to privacy a bit at a time.

  5. K B says:

    “However, for the mayor to confiscate every single one is simply bizarre. As a friend of mine said, ‘Well, if there’s an outcry and he loses the position of mayor, he sounds like a perfect candidate for a public school superintendent!'”–ImaFish

    I agree. Aside from the obvious stupidity of seizing t-shirts from retailers, what’s next? Seizing DVDs of “Scent of a Woman” from Best Buy? Where does it end?

  6. dawn w says:

    Here in Rochester NY, these cropped up over the summer. The “solution” here has been for community and church leaders within the affected neighborhoods to rally against the shirts and more importantly, the sentiments. With the number of kids shot here lately people aren’t taking this garbage lightly.

    Haven’t heard about them as much lately – maybe the campaign is taking hold- but more likely, it’s because it’s too %@)!! cold to be out in a t-shirt without covering up with a coat.

  7. James Hill says:

    Even though we may not like the message, this is exactly the type of thing the First Amendment was put in place to protect.

    Actually, no.

    The first amendment does not protect criminal activity. Withholding knowledge of a crime is a criminal activity. Encouraging people to break the law is a criminal activity.

    The way to handle this in your life, not just in a community, is to choose not to support people who tollerate such behavior. Don’t spend your money in these areas. Don’t allow your tax money to be spent in these areas. Don’t treat these individuals as your equals.

  8. Shane A. Taylor says:

    Actually, yes.

    The shirt simply says “Stop Snitchin.” This could mean for children not to tell on their brothers and sisters. What it is advocating is not per se illegal and therefore is not prohibited. Even if it were advocating illegal activity, it may be protected speech because there is no imminent threat that it would cause someone to break the law. But what do I know, I am only an attorney.

    Bottom line: The seizure of these shirts is unconstitutional. The mayor’s legal advisors have probably told him this and he is using it for political gain.

  9. John Wofford says:

    Either we have free speech, or we don’t. At that, the Snitch shirt is a much better deal than the F… You shirt I saw in a mall once. Anything can be interpreted any way you want; just watch the preachers having fun with the scriptures. Leave the folks alone, let them wear what they choose, and yeah, anyone who attempted to remove a hot moving, trendy item from store shelves would look silly indeed, should they survive.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5414 access attempts in the last 7 days.