The Government Makes a Pizzeria Take Down a Mural of Pizza By Katherine Timpf
But a mural of something else (burgers, cars, unicorns … ) would be just fine.
The government of Arlington, Va., just forced a local pizza restaurant to paint over a mural of pizza that was outside of it — because the mural was of pizza and not something else.
So, you might ask: What could possibly be the problem with an artistic depiction of pizza? After all, I myself saw a lot of cartoon pizza in episodes of Ninja Turtles as a child, and I can confidently say I have suffered absolutely no damage — emotionally or physically — because of it.
Well, according to an article in Reason, the pizza place (called “Goody’s”) was forced to paint over the mural because of the county’s sign code, which prohibits any business from having a mural outside that depicts what’s sold inside. So, basically, the pizza place could have had a mural of pretty much anything else (aside from, like, violence and/or pornography, probably), and it would have been just fine. Here’s the thing, though: Why the hell would the pizza place have a mural of something other than pizza, if the goal of the mural was to get people to buy more pizza? Not to mention the obvious fact that there is literally no discernable reason that a business shouldn’t be able to advertise its legal, family-friendly products using a mural if it chooses to do so. After all, I did a little research, and I was able to find exactly zero examples of anyone being killed (or even injured!) by a painting of dough, sauce, and cheese.
Despite all this, however, Arlington apparently couldn’t just let the mural slide. This past week, the mural that had gone up in November — to “get a little attention from people walking by,” according to owner Glenda Alverez — was painted over with lime-green paint in order to comply with the government’s orders.
Now, it should go without saying that this is incredibly stupid — as are all laws that prohibit things without victims. In addition to being stupid, though, this particular law may also be unconstitutional, according to Robert Frommer, an attorney with the libertarian Institute for Justice. Frommer told Reason that if a government’s code states that “certain subjects or topics . . . are prohibited,” then that amounts to “preventing you from speaking on certain subjects just because they don’t like the message,” which violates the First Amendment.
Comments are closed.
