Posts Tagged ‘boycott’

On the Charlie Sykes (620 WTMJ Milwaukee) show in Wisconsin they are commenting on the “protection” racket that the unions are using. Let’s remind you of what the unions are saying:

“Failure to do so will leave us no choice but (to) do a public boycott of your business. And sorry, neutral means ‘no’ to those who work for the largest employer in the area and are union members.”

So in other words as far as the unions are concerned you MUST take a position and it must be theirs or they will get you. One Republican legislator called in and suggested business so contacted check out chapter 943.30 of Wisconsin law and start making complaints

So let’s take a look at what Wisconsin law states, specifically Wisconsin Statutes > Criminal Code > Chapter 943 > Subchapter III > § 943.30 – Threats to injure or accuse of crime:

943.30
943.30 Threats to injure or accuse of crime.
943.30(1) 1) Whoever, either verbally or by any written or printed communication, maliciously threatens to accuse or accuses another of any crime or offense, or threatens or commits any injury to the person, property, business, profession, calling or trade, or the profits and income of any business, profession, calling or trade of another, with intent thereby to extort money or any pecuniary advantage whatever, or with intent to compel the person so threatened to do any act against the person’s will or omit to do any lawful act emphasis mine, is guilty of a Class H felony.

Note that since according to the letter sent out to businesses a “neutral” stance is not allowed, the union is COMPELLING the person to act against their will or suffer the consequences. That makes this section active and makes the union letter written proof of a class H felony.

A class H felony in Wisconsin carries a max of 6 years a fine of $10k or both.

And the second section is even more interesting:

943.30(2)
(2) Whoever violates sub. (1) by obstructing, delaying or affecting commerce or business or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or business is guilty of a Class H felony.

So that means that if you are a protester as part of the promised boycotts or picket of a business based on the above letter: Presto! You are subject to this same penalty!

And in our litigious society wouldn’t you like to be the lawyer starting a class action suit against the Unions who are boasting of full coffers and financial support to fight in Wisconsin? Can you imagine the size of the civil suit and award in a case like this? You want to sue people with a lot of money or insurance for a big payout. The local sub shop who gets the letter might not have it but the Union that sent it does. Every business who got that letter is a potential member of the class and the unions who supported this campaign and their national counterparts is a potential target. It’s a money tree!

I’m amazed a union lawyer didn’t spot this but it’s what comes of arrogant and unchecked power.

Update: Big Government was on this first but didn’t think of the class action angle, Ann Althouse is bother by the police involvement:

I can’t get my head around the concept of police involvement in boycotting businesses. That reads like pure corruption. I can’t believe it’s being done openly. Can someone explain to me how you can even argue that it is acceptable for police to extort political support from citizens?

If you ever wondered why the left always seemed to side with totalitarians, now you know.

My latest examiner piece is one of opinion Romance and Reality is up at Examiner.com, a peek:

Yet as the activists cheered the NBA’s Lakers prepare to go to Arizona to play for the NBA west title. The injustice of the law is apparently not sufficent to risk the wrath of LA fans or the NBA’s bottom line. (The Highland park Ill girls team is not so lucky.)

You can find this and my other writing for Examiner.com here. Every time you read and share one of my articles it is as if you are putting a couple of cents in DaTipJar.

I don’t know the demographics of their customer base, but for their sake I hope it is basically liberal activists because this will not play well with conservatives:

“For the last 16 years our headquarters have remained on Long Island where we continue to sell and distribute AriZona Iced Teas and beverages,” the company said in a statement to correct what it called “misinformation” about its origins.

The only problem? The polls show people favor the Arizona law and as you might recall last time national protests on immigration came up they backfired spectacularly. In addition conservatives are energized as never before. Might be a bad time to side against them.

They might have been better off just keeping quiet, if the country is 60-40 or 70-30 on an issue do you want your customer base from the 60-70 or the 30-40?

Your choice people.