Author Topic: Freedom of speech suppressed at the Jefferson Memorial  (Read 7408 times)

Leave it to blockland to piss and moan about small stuff like this.

The douche didn't stop when he was asked to by a federal officer, I see no problem here.
So, why did the police officer approach them and ask them to stop in the first place?

So, why did the police officer approach them and ask them to stop in the first place?
The court had recently passed a law that made it illegal to dance there, among other places.

He specifically stated that he was inviting people to an act of civil disobedience.
Which is illegal.


I fail to see Civil Disobedience before the officers began cuffing people. Didn't see the quote. Anyway, then I wholly support them. There's no reason for a law to exist to prohibit dancing in any area, and there's no reason to enforce that law.
not telling them the statute or law/legal precedent that they were being arrested/detained for (which they CONTINUED to do), and then illegally assaulting and arresting people without cause
That's my biggest loving grievance. The richardhead Sgt couldn't even tell them why they were being arrested, he skated around the question twice and then just ignored it for the remainder of the time.
Leave it to blockland to piss and moan about small stuff like this.

This isn't small stuff, it's never small stuff when our Police start assaulting, detaining and arresting people for dancing at a memorial.

The court had recently passed a law that made it illegal to dance there, among other places.

Alright, so the police had cause to arrest them. So they were placed under arrest without being read their miranda rights (could have been read later but regardless) or being told the statute they were arrested under.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2011, 01:55:52 PM by yuki »

Alright, then what was the grounds for arrest?
If it's within your rights, police can't tell you to stop.
You don't know if he was arrested you silly stuff. He was probably just removed from the area, and if he was arrested it was for failing to comply with police then becoming belligerent with them.

Stop throwing a fit.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2011, 01:55:27 PM by Vagabond »

cops arent even allowed to read rights to people they arent arresting.

plus was he even a real cop? he looked like any park security. even fed park.
private security dont have to read rights, or identify themselves.

It's just as much the protesters fault as the policemens.  Justice was served, although the police brutality was unnecessary.

Justice was served, although the police brutality was unnecessary.
Arresting people for loving DANCING is not loving JUSTICE. Justice is the police arresting CRIMINALS, not bullying loving civilians.

Didn't see the quote. Anyway, then I wholly support them. There's no reason for a law to exist to prohibit dancing in any area, and there's no reason to enforce that law.
It could boil down to disturbing the peace or disrespect.
I personally don't care if people dance in a field or something, but I find it disrespectful to do it on a memorial to a past president.
That's my biggest loving grievance. The richardhead Sgt couldn't even tell them why they were being arrested, he skated around the question twice and then just ignored it for the remainder of the time.
I do agree with you here though.
He basically kept saying the same thing each time a question was asked, and it was nowhere near the answer.

And yes this is small stuff when there is a war going on and the economy is in ruins

It could boil down to disturbing the peace or disrespect.
I personally don't care if people dance in a field or something, but I find it disrespectful to do it on a memorial to a past president.
A president who stood for the very ideology that allows us to dance at a memorial no matter how "disrespectful" it is, regardless.

Arresting people for loving DANCING is not loving JUSTICE. Justice is the police arresting CRIMINALS, not bullying loving civilians.
If somone of authority asks you to stop doing something, YOU loving STOP DOING IT.

A president who stood for the very ideology that allows us to dance at a memorial no matter how "disrespectful" it is, regardless.
I don't particularly think they should have been arrested for it, but I still think that they shouldn't have done it.

A president who stood for the very ideology that allows us to dance at a memorial no matter how "disrespectful" it is, regardless.
So if I went and took a stuff on the grave of someone close to you, you wouldn't he able to do anything about it?

well if they are getting arrested, then there will be a trial.
they can argue it there. if they have a problem with the non justice they get from court, then thier issue is bigger then a few cops anyways.

the camera man is a tool. dont trust the propaganda from some hippy.
his goal was to incite anger based on no facts. forget him.

So if I went and took a stuff on the grave of someone close to you, you wouldn't he able to do anything about it?
That's decimation of private property, that's not the same thing. When creating an brown townogy next time, try to be less of a handicap.
I don't particularly think they should have been arrested for it, but I still think that they shouldn't have done it.
The law shouldn't exist in the first place.