Supermarket Bans Jedi Knight

The employees at Tesco seem to be immune to mind tricks, and have kicked out the founder of the International Church of Jediism. Daniel Jones, 23, who founded the religion based on the Star Wars movies, was asked to leave because his robes were against store rules which forbid the wearing of 'hoodies' in their premises. "I told them it was a requirement of my religion but they just sniggered and ordered me to leave," he told The Daily Telegraph newspaper. "I walked past a Muslim lady in a veil. Surely the same rules should apply to everyone." It's exactly this kind of stuff that turns young Jedis to the dark side.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason is young people use them to obscure there identity while causing trouble. Try going into a bank, post office or petrol station wearing a full face crash helmet. You get the same reaction for the same reason.

Re:Rules for all

[PitaBred]

Screw you! The Flying Spaghetti Monster [venganza.org] is real, and I'll sue you for implying that he might not be!

Re:Why?

[The Evil Couch]

Why in the world would anyone ban hoodies, and how would they stay in business if they actively enforced such a ban? Seriously, that's like banning jeans in your store.

Not quite the same. Most store security cameras are located at head height or higher, making the faces of people wearing hoodies nearly invisible. I don't know about the UK, but in the US, the courts are over-worked enough that the police are likely to drop any shoplifting case unless there is solid evidence that the person they have in custody actually tried to steal something. Anyone caught shoplifting in a store wearing a hoodie is unlikely to be prosecuted, unless they did it right in front of a security guard, so banning them is an understandable move.

Re:Why?

[welshbyte]

Here in the UK, the media (in their infinite wisdom) have taken to calling aggressive-looking youths who wear hoods 'hoodies'. This tends to add ambiguity to sentences like 'hoodies are banned' because 'hoodies' is also the name of the item of clothing worn by people from many different walks of life (e.g. they're fairly popular with students and, um, boxers?).

Re:Why?

[theJML]

Actually most stores in this area (Virginia) ban the wearing of any hood/head concealing garment while in the premises. It goes along with them banning scarves/baklavas/3 hole head covering masks/cotton hats/ski-masks/etc that hide the face and or other discernible personal features. Especially places like 711 and gas stations.

I can see both sides of the argument, but why not just allow them in if they drop the hood? that's usually the way it works. stores don't have a problem with a hooded jacket, as long as the hood is not in use while in the store (you can carry a ski-mask with you too if you want, as long as you don't put it on, no one can say anything, just put it back up/on when you leave.

Really I think stories like this do a lot more harm than good for their cause. Sure they think they've been caused an injustice, but most of the time it's better for both parties if you just go along with it. Not that I don't think oppression is wrong, but trying to make a ruckus by going against a policy like this is just stupid. It's not like anything is going to happen by taking the hood down for a few minutes while you shop. And if you don't like it, just go somewhere else, no harm no foul. I tell people to take their shoes off when they come in my house, if they don't want to, they can sit on the deck, thems the rules.

Re:Why?

[phoenixwade]

Just so you know, to a bank, $5000 is nothing.

Or if it isn't "nothing" then you have bigger problems to worry about than the dress code.

Re:Discrimination

[Homr Zodyssey]

Lovely tax break? I'm no accountant, but I wasn't aware that individual clergy-members received a tax-break. My father is an ordained preacher. He currently is employed as a college professor, but when he was the minister of a church he had to file as "Self-Employed". This was ridiculous, because he was hired by the church, remained employed by the church and could be fired by the church. However, he was legally required to file as "Self Employed" and pay taxes at a higher rate than an "employee" would.