Forums: Community: The Soap Box:
Land of the free
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Soap Box

Premier Sponsor:

 


veganclimber


May 29, 2011, 11:28 PM
Post #1 of 24 (1822 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2775

Land of the free
Report this Post
Can't Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixwf2B4ATX8

This country is rapidly becoming a joke.


spikeddem


May 30, 2011, 12:48 AM
Post #2 of 24 (1807 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Can we please get any context whatsoever in this video?


veganclimber


May 30, 2011, 12:56 AM
Post #3 of 24 (1806 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2775

Re: [spikeddem] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I thought the video was clear enough, but here:

http://www.nbcwashington.com/...orial-122778309.html

In reply to:
A handful of dancers got cuffed on Saturday for doing what they say the Founding Fathers would have wanted them to do - expressive dancing in National Parks.

A court recently ruled that expressive dancing was in a category with picketing, speech making, and marching - a banned activity at national memorials.

A small group came out on Saturday to protest the ruling, by dancing together inside the rotunda of the Jefferson Memorial.


notapplicable


May 30, 2011, 7:43 AM
Post #4 of 24 (1786 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17752

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

That whole bodyslaming bit seemed excessive. Should have just tased him. Should have tased all of em, really.


spikeddem


May 30, 2011, 11:04 AM
Post #5 of 24 (1776 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

veganclimber wrote:
I thought the video was clear enough

Are you serious?


spikeddem


May 30, 2011, 11:13 AM
Post #6 of 24 (1773 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
“Although silent, Oberwetter’s dancing was a conspicuous expressive act with a propensity to draw onlookers,” Judge Thomas Griffith wrote for the appeals court. Judges Judith Rogers and David Tatel joined the opinion.
That the dance happened near midnight on a weekend--making it less likely a crowd would form--does not make it lawful, the court said.

Oberwetter’s conduct, the court said, is prohibited “because it stands out as a type of performance, creating its own center of attention and distracting from the atmosphere of solemn commemoration” the regulations are intended to preserve.

I agree. We really don't need "performers" in such a place. It's also illegal to picket, march, or protest there. The people from your video could be arrested simply for the protesting aspect and not even the dancing aspect.


veganclimber


May 30, 2011, 11:44 AM
Post #7 of 24 (1771 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2775

Re: [spikeddem] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

spikeddem wrote:
In reply to:
“Although silent, Oberwetter’s dancing was a conspicuous expressive act with a propensity to draw onlookers,” Judge Thomas Griffith wrote for the appeals court. Judges Judith Rogers and David Tatel joined the opinion.
That the dance happened near midnight on a weekend--making it less likely a crowd would form--does not make it lawful, the court said.

Oberwetter’s conduct, the court said, is prohibited “because it stands out as a type of performance, creating its own center of attention and distracting from the atmosphere of solemn commemoration” the regulations are intended to preserve.

I agree. We really don't need "performers" in such a place. It's also illegal to picket, march, or protest there. The people from your video could be arrested simply for the protesting aspect and not even the dancing aspect.

Do you not see the irony of arresting people for dancing in Thomas Jefferson's memorial? Keeping protesters out of there is one thing. At worst, they should kick people out if they are actually distracting others. Look at the first couple arrested. I can't imagine any circumstances where what they did could rightly be called a crime. They weren't bothering anybody. The only real disturbance came when the police started arresting people.

We are seriously becoming a police state here in America. The Fourth Amendment is virtually gone. We have the largest prison population in the world (25% of the worlds prisoners). Many of these prisons are run by for-profit corporations. When I was in school you would get sent to the principals office if you misbehave. Now they call the cops and arrest you. Here's another, all too common, story:

http://abcnews.go.com/...nse/story?id=9053934

In reply to:
Eighth-graders Cassandra and Aliyah Russell of Chicago never imagined they'd be arrested in their school cafeteria, much less for throwing food.

But that's just what happened following lunchtime mayhem last Thursday at the Perspectives Charter Middle School, south of Chicago. More than two dozen students, ages 11 to 15, were rounded up by police, arrested and charged with misdemeanor reckless conduct.

"They took us to jail, fingerprinted us, mugshotted us, or whatever, all because of a food fight...I was arrested. Handcuffs on," 13-year-old Cassandra told ABC News.

"We were suspended, went to jail and now have to go to court," said 14-year-old Aliyah.

Here is another one:

http://www2.wagt.com/...g-on-desk-ar-689753/

In reply to:
A New York principal is apologizing for placing one of her students in handcuffs because she was caught drawing on her desk.

12-year-old Alexa Gonzalez was sent to her principal's officer after she was caught doodling on a desk at her Queens middle school.

The principal called both the girl's mother and police, having officers place the girl in handcuffs when they arrived.

Cops and prisons are not the answer to everything.


squierbypetzl
Moderator

May 30, 2011, 2:56 PM
Post #8 of 24 (1751 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 3431

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

This is the way things always have been. You can thank the internet and cameraphones for bringing every little incident to your attention, but spare yourself the heartache of thinking things will radically change.

Excessive government oversight is becoming a bit of bitch though.


veganclimber


May 30, 2011, 3:13 PM
Post #9 of 24 (1747 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2775

Re: [squierbypetzl] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

squierbypetzl wrote:
This is the way things always have been.

Not really.



America took a "tough on crime" approach in the 80's. Our prison population has quadrupled since then. Schools now have zero-tolerance policies that are completely ridiculous. Talk back to a cop and you get tazed pretty quickly. Doesn't matter if you are 10 or 70 years old and senile, they will still taze you. It's not just the internet, things have changed.

In reply to:
You can thank the internet and cameraphones for bringing every little incident to your attention, but spare yourself the heartache of thinking things will radically change.

Actually, I expect things to continue to change for the worse.
Attachments: 693px-US_incarceration_timeline-clean.svg.png (54.0 KB)


squierbypetzl
Moderator

May 30, 2011, 3:33 PM
Post #10 of 24 (1746 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 3431

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post



Have to take this into account as well.




And this (notice the difference between 1980 and 1985).


When was the civil rights movement again? 1960's ya say? It must have been tough to be black before, you know, when they were legally 2nd class "citizens". I'd be willing to bet they had it comparitively tougher back in 1920 than we do today: this day in age, you might get tazed, back then you might have simply been beaten.

While your video certainly doesn't showcase behavior one would expect (or even demand) of a professional police officer in a civilized society, if you compare that to the beatdown they would have gotten half a century ago you'll realize some progress has indeed been made.

That said, cops will be cops will be cops.


(This post was edited by squierbypetzl on May 30, 2011, 3:34 PM)


veganclimber


May 30, 2011, 4:45 PM
Post #11 of 24 (1732 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2775

Re: [squierbypetzl] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

squierbypetzl wrote:
[


Have to take this into account as well.
The prison population has increased far faster than the general population. If you looked at the per-capita prison rate it shows the same trend.
In reply to:



And this (notice the difference between 1980 and 1985).

That chart shows poverty rates decreasing, if anything.

In reply to:
When was the civil rights movement again? 1960's ya say? It must have been tough to be black before, you know, when they were legally 2nd class "citizens". I'd be willing to bet they had it comparitively tougher back in 1920 than we do today: this day in age, you might get tazed, back then you might have simply been beaten.

No doubt they had it much tougher back then.

In reply to:
While your video certainly doesn't showcase behavior one would expect (or even demand) of a professional police officer in a civilized society, if you compare that to the beatdown they would have gotten half a century ago you'll realize some progress has indeed been made.

The difference is that it was "bad" cops beating civilians back then. Now it's standard procedure. Police are trained to taze anybody that shown any sign of resistance. Our attitude has changed significantly. Instead of "protect and serve", it's "obey or get beaten down quickly". People get tazed just for arguing with cops, and a lot of people side with the cops in these situations.


spikeddem


May 30, 2011, 7:02 PM
Post #12 of 24 (1713 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Much more interesting than anything in this thread, is the crazy disparity between men and women in the prison system. Never realized it was this uneven.



You also have to realize how much harder it is to get away with a crime today. Smokey and the Bandit today? Ha! Yeah, right.


guangzhou


May 30, 2011, 8:14 PM
Post #13 of 24 (1693 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 26, 2004
Posts: 3388

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

On the charts: A few things overlooked. For one population growth in the U.S.. I'd like to see the charts show these stats by percentage of the population instead of numbers . Would help me see things a little clearer.

Cops being trained to tazze people, not sure that's true, haven't been to any cop training lately. I did do quite ab it of crowd control training with the military, soldier can be rougher than cops, and we were not trained to harm first, ask question later. Escalation of force determines what you can and can't do.

As for cops using force, I think people should respect cops a bit more for sure. I think cops are a target every-time they talk to someone, pull someone over, or respond to a call. I rather see them taze someone then get killed because they were to cautious. American's love to blame uniform wearer and public servants.

Freedom of speech, Americans love to talk about the importance of freedom of speech, until someone they don't agree with chooses to speak in a way they don't agree with. (Flag burning comes to mind, something I am in favor of actually, but don't plan on doing).

By the way, some people stage demonstration where they know the cops will react and invite cameras to come to the scene.
In the case of the video, a law was passed, and protesters, using a combination or twitter and facebook invited people to Civil “Danceobedience." Another words, they invited people to willingly come and break the law in order to get arrested in front of cameras.

It's called getting your cause noticed. This video being a good example of this, people show up to make a scene at the memorial knowing they would get arrested and make a scene about the arrest.

This was a staged situation, if enough people care, the court will revisit the original law, until then, the silent protesters choose to break the law and were arrested. I agree with the law, the memorial should be a place where people "maintain an atmosphere of calm, tranquility, and reverence."

In this case, they used social media, press releases, and local companies to advertise what they were doing ahead of time. That is not just dancing, that is organized protest.

Those of you yelling free speech, how would you react if people were there to spray paint the memorial memorial with gratify. Yes, free speech unless you don't like it.

They were breaking the law, the cops asked them not to, they kept doing it, the cops responded. They were not dancing in public, they were demonstrating after they were specifically told not too.

Personally, I think that laws should be enforced. I've lived in places where laws are not and I prefer a tighter enforcement than a looser enforcement of existing laws. In America, laws are made and changed constantly, enough people don't agree, laws are revisited.

By the way, those of you so interested in free speech and who think this law is stupid, you should drive there June fourth, they are repeating the process and inviting everyone who wants to attend, especially those willing to be arrested for their belief. .


(This post was edited by guangzhou on May 30, 2011, 8:22 PM)


veganclimber


May 30, 2011, 8:46 PM
Post #14 of 24 (1684 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2775

Re: [guangzhou] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

guangzhou wrote:
On the charts: A few things overlooked. For one population growth in the U.S.. I'd like to see the charts show these stats by percentage of the population instead of numbers . Would help me see things a little clearer.



In reply to:
Cops being trained to tazze people, not sure that's true, haven't been to any cop training lately. I did do quite ab it of crowd control training with the military, soldier can be rougher than cops, and we were not trained to harm first, ask question later. Escalation of force determines what you can and can't do.

As for cops using force, I think people should respect cops a bit more for sure. I think cops are a target every-time they talk to someone, pull someone over, or respond to a call. I rather see them taze someone then get killed because they were to cautious. American's love to blame uniform wearer and public servants.

I think the exact opposite is true. People go to insane lengths to defend cops. Look up Amadou Diallo for example. Shot 19 times, out of 41 shots fired by four cops, for reaching for his wallet. The "I though he had a gun" excuse basically gives the police a license to kill. They always get the benefit of the doubt.

In reply to:
Freedom of speech, Americans love to talk about the importance of freedom of speech, until someone they don't agree with chooses to speak in a way they don't agree with. (Flag burning comes to mind, something I am in favor of actually, but don't plan on doing).

Sadly, that's true. A lot of people don't seem to get the concept of free speech.

In reply to:
By the way, some people stage demonstration where they know the cops will react and invite cameras to come to the scene.
In the case of the video, a law was passed, and protesters, using a combination or twitter and facebook invited people to Civil “Danceobedience." Another words, they invited people to willingly come and break the law in order to get arrested in front of cameras.

It's called getting your cause noticed. This video being a good example of this, people show up to make a scene at the memorial knowing they would get arrested and make a scene about the arrest.

It's called civil disobedience. I'm aware that this was staged.

In reply to:
This was a staged situation, if enough people care, the court will revisit the original law, until then, the silent protesters choose to break the law and were arrested. I agree with the law, the memorial should be a place where people "maintain an atmosphere of calm, tranquility, and reverence."

I don't give a damn what some judge decides should be the appropriate way to respect Jefferson. You should be able to do that however you want as long as you are not bothering anybody. That's besides the point though. Acting inappropriately is not a crime. I don't like it when people talk in movie theaters. I would not suggest arresting people that I find annoying though. Worst case, kick them out.

I also don't buy this "sacred ground" bullshit. Jefferson was just a man. A great one, sure, but he had flaws as well. Just like those bullshit flag burning amendments, I do not support placing a symbol above what it is supposed to represent.

In reply to:
In this case, they used social media, press releases, and local companies to advertise what they were doing ahead of time. That is not just dancing, that is organized protest.

Those of you yelling free speech, how would you react if people were there to spray paint the memorial memorial with gratify. Yes, free speech unless you don't like it.

Graffiti has nothing to do with free speech.

In reply to:
They were breaking the law, the cops asked them not to, they kept doing it, the cops responded. They were not dancing in public, they were demonstrating after they were specifically told not too.

They were arrested for dancing.

In reply to:

Personally, I think that laws should be enforced. I've lived in places where laws are not and I prefer a tighter enforcement than a looser enforcement of existing laws. In America, laws are made and changed constantly, enough people don't agree, laws are revisited.

Laws that make sense should be enforced. This one was complete bullshit. Also, police can use discretion in deciding how to handle these things. Watch the law again and tell me that it made sense to arrest that first couple.

In reply to:
By the way, those of you so interested in free speech and who think this law is stupid, you should drive there June fourth, they are repeating the process and inviting everyone who wants to attend.

I don't think I'll be able to make it. Hope they get a good turn out though.
Attachments: Incarceration_rate.png (84.9 KB)


guangzhou


May 30, 2011, 11:08 PM
Post #15 of 24 (1668 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 26, 2004
Posts: 3388

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

In reply to:
Cops being trained to tazze people, not sure that's true, haven't been to any cop training lately. I did do quite ab it of crowd control training with the military, soldier can be rougher than cops, and we were not trained to harm first, ask question later. Escalation of force determines what you can and can't do.

As for cops using force, I think people should respect cops a bit more for sure. I think cops are a target every-time they talk to someone, pull someone over, or respond to a call. I rather see them taze someone then get killed because they were to cautious. American's love to blame uniform wearer and public servants.

In reply to:
I think the exact opposite is true. People go to insane lengths to defend cops. Look up Amadou Diallo for example. Shot 19 times, out of 41 shots fired by four cops, for reaching for his wallet. The "I though he had a gun" excuse basically gives the police a license to kill. They always get the benefit of the doubt.

I don't deny that cops make mistakes, but I if four cops felt threatened, you have to ask yourself what happened. I was not there in person, so I can not say. I know from personal first hand experience, if I honestly think someone is going to shoot me, I won't hesitate to shoot them first. The decision has to be made in a split second.

In your case, if I remember correctly, guess I can ggogle but why, the suspect was approached, the cops identified themselves and he bolted.

When he decided he couldn't outrun them, he turned and reached for his wallet under his jacket. I think I would have shot him too to be honest, it would have looked very threatening to run away, then turn and reached for something concealed instead of raising his hands.

Easy to say he was reaching for a wallet after the fact. If I feel threatened, I react.


In reply to:
Freedom of speech, Americans love to talk about the importance of freedom of speech, until someone they don't agree with chooses to speak in a way they don't agree with. (Flag burning comes to mind, something I am in favor of actually, but don't plan on doing).

In reply to:
Sadly, that's true. A lot of people don't seem to get the concept of free speech.

In reply to:
By the way, some people stage demonstration where they know the cops will react and invite cameras to come to the scene.
In the case of the video, a law was passed, and protesters, using a combination or twitter and facebook invited people to Civil “Danceobedience." Another words, they invited people to willingly come and break the law in order to get arrested in front of cameras.

It's called getting your cause noticed. This video being a good example of this, people show up to make a scene at the memorial knowing they would get arrested and make a scene about the arrest.

In reply to:
It's called civil disobedience. I'm aware that this was staged.

I know it's civil disobedience, which mean willingly breaking the law to prove your point. I do like the play on words they used for this Danceobedience.

In reply to:
This was a staged situation, if enough people care, the court will revisit the original law, until then, the silent protesters choose to break the law and were arrested. I agree with the law, the memorial should be a place where people "maintain an atmosphere of calm, tranquility, and reverence."

In reply to:
I don't give a damn what some judge decides should be the appropriate way to respect Jefferson. You should be able to do that however you want as long as you are not bothering anybody. That's besides the point though. Acting inappropriately is not a crime. I don't like it when people talk in movie theaters. I would not suggest arresting people that I find annoying though. Worst case, kick them out.

Acting inappropriately isn't a crime, most of the time, but doing it over and over does mean I can us the police. Asking someone to be quiet in a movie is a good example, ask a second time, then have the movie manager ask him to leave, if he refuses to leave, have the cops come and ask him to leave, if he refuses, arrest him for being a public nuisance. I see nothing wrong with this.

Same is true for a teenager drawing on on school property. Warning, detention, suspension, then it become vandalism and expelle them or call the cops.

In this case, they danced to defy the law, they made it very known that they were going to go there at specific time to break the law because they didn't like the law.

When they asked to hold the demonstration, they were denied, another-words kicked out. They choose to go anyways.

In reply to:
I also don't buy this "sacred ground" bullshit. Jefferson was just a man. A great one, sure, but he had flaws as well. Just like those bullshit flag burning amendments, I do not support placing a symbol above what it is supposed to represent.

Monuments are there to honor, whether or not you approve or not is irrelevant. I feel the same way about church, but I don't go to church on Sunday morning hopping to get arrested so people know that one religion or another is a farce. Instead, I avoid the church all together.

I don't agree with the "Under God" part of our pledge, so I don't say the "Under God" phrase. More to do with separation of church and state than my religious views.

In reply to:
In this case, they used social media, press releases, and local companies to advertise what they were doing ahead of time. That is not just dancing, that is organized protest.

Those of you yelling free speech, how would you react if people were there to spray paint the memorial memorial with gratify. Yes, free speech unless you don't like it.

In reply to:
Graffiti has nothing to do with free speech.

In your opinion. Most likely mine too.

Gratify is some people's version of civil disobedience.

In reply to:
They were breaking the law, the cops asked them not to, they kept doing it, the cops responded. They were not dancing in public, they were demonstrating after they were specifically told not too.

In reply to:
They were arrested for dancing.

The charge was not dancing, but protesting without a license.

Looking at how much they pre organized, how much they publicized what they were doing, and not having the permit issued means they were not dancing, they were breaking the law.
They didn't like the law and decide to protested by dancing where dancing isn't allowed. I think it's a sily law too, so I hope they change it, but in this case, they organize a breaking the law event to get news attention.

I don't think they dancing, I think they were wilfully breaking the law. They ere asked not to dance before the event, they were asked to stop repeatedly, and then they were arrested.

In reply to:
Personally, I think that laws should be enforced. I've lived in places where laws are not and I prefer a tighter enforcement than a looser enforcement of existing laws. In America, laws are made and changed constantly, enough people don't agree, laws are revisited.

In reply to:
Laws that make sense should be enforced. This one was complete bullshit. Also, police can use discretion in deciding how to handle these things. Watch the law again and tell me that it made sense to arrest that first couple.


And laws that don't make sense should be changed, I agree. Cops don't get to decide what laws make sense or not, they get to enforce them.

I find the minimum drinking age to be one of America's dumbest laws. Every chance I get, I speak out against it, but I don't buy booze for minors when in America.

America's second dumbest law is that you can drive at 16, I think this is ridiculously low.

In this case, the cops asked them to stop, I bet several times. The cops told them the law. Prior to ever coming there to dance, they were told it was against the law. They were warn before the event, during the event, and they continued to break the law to prove a point.

Maybe you should look up why the law was created too.

In reply to:
By the way, those of you so interested in free speech and who think this law is stupid, you should drive there June fourth, they are repeating the process and inviting everyone who wants to attend.

In reply to:
I don't think I'll be able to make it. Hope they get a good turn out though.

I agree this is a silly law, and maybe these actions will be enough to bring light to them and get the law changed. Hope so, but until the law is changed, if you dance there, you're breaking the law.


(This post was edited by guangzhou on May 30, 2011, 11:26 PM)


Toast_in_the_Machine


May 31, 2011, 4:57 AM
Post #16 of 24 (1649 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5184

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

veganclimber wrote:
America took a "tough on crime" approach in the 80's. Our prison population has quadrupled since then.

No. It was one, and only one "crime" that changed in the 80's. War. On. Drugs.


Partner rrrADAM


May 31, 2011, 6:30 AM
Post #17 of 24 (1645 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17543

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I've been fighting "forced annexation" of my neighborhood, and the City trying to annex us is rushing to beat the law, since it is going to change in just a couple weeks:
http://www.wect.com/...southport-annexation

I've been in another news interview, as well as several articles and letters to editors of some regional newspapers.

It really sux, as I, and my neighbors, could end up paying tens of thousands of dollars for the privilage of paying a city tax, to a board whose on members are delinquent in paying their own city taxes. Many of my neighbors are retired, some on fixed incomes, who cannot afford it, and will be forced to TRY to sell their houses, likley ending in no sale soon enough, and losing their homes.


(This post was edited by rrrADAM on May 31, 2011, 6:31 AM)


veganclimber


May 31, 2011, 8:11 AM
Post #18 of 24 (1626 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2775

Re: [Toast_in_the_Machine] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

Toast_in_the_Machine wrote:
veganclimber wrote:
America took a "tough on crime" approach in the 80's. Our prison population has quadrupled since then.

No. It was one, and only one "crime" that changed in the 80's. War. On. Drugs.

Drugs are a big part of it, but it's more than that. California's 3 strike law was in response to a murder, for instance.


traddad


May 31, 2011, 8:17 AM
Post #19 of 24 (1624 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2001
Posts: 7129

Re: [rrrADAM] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

rrrADAM wrote:
I've been fighting "forced annexation" of my neighborhood, and the City trying to annex us is rushing to beat the law, since it is going to change in just a couple weeks:
http://www.wect.com/...southport-annexation

I've been in another news interview, as well as several articles and letters to editors of some regional newspapers.

It really sux, as I, and my neighbors, could end up paying tens of thousands of dollars for the privilage of paying a city tax, to a board whose on members are delinquent in paying their own city taxes. Many of my neighbors are retired, some on fixed incomes, who cannot afford it, and will be forced to TRY to sell their houses, likley ending in no sale soon enough, and losing their homes.

Is that your family crest on your shirt or did a squirrel commit seppuku on your shoulder?

We live in an unincorporated development just to the east of Apache Junction, AZ (where meth labs outnumber teeth). We are SO lucky that they cannot annex us without our consent.


veganclimber


May 31, 2011, 9:22 AM
Post #20 of 24 (1611 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2775

Re: [guangzhou] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

guangzhou wrote:
I don't deny that cops make mistakes, but I if four cops felt threatened, you have to ask yourself what happened. I was not there in person, so I can not say. I know from personal first hand experience, if I honestly think someone is going to shoot me, I won't hesitate to shoot them first. The decision has to be made in a split second.

In your case, if I remember correctly, guess I can ggogle but why, the suspect was approached, the cops identified themselves and he bolted.

When he decided he couldn't outrun them, he turned and reached for his wallet under his jacket. I think I would have shot him too to be honest, it would have looked very threatening to run away, then turn and reached for something concealed instead of raising his hands.

Easy to say he was reaching for a wallet after the fact. If I feel threatened, I react.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. You have no idea what actually happened. All we know for sure is that the guy was unarmed and shot 19 times by 4 cops. All they have to say is that they thought the guy had a gun. That's it. People always side with the police, and they know it.


petsfed


May 31, 2011, 10:15 AM
Post #21 of 24 (1597 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 8585

Re: [guangzhou] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

guangzhou wrote:
In the case of the video, a law was passed, and protesters, using a combination or twitter and facebook invited people to Civil “Danceobedience." Another words, they invited people to willingly come and break the law in order to get arrested in front of cameras.
However much you may like (or dislike) that law, it is unconstitutional. The easiest way to get it to the supreme court for review is to get arrested over it. I'm quite uncomfortable with the idea of designating regions where only one kind of display of respect, reverence, mourning, etc is allowed. The idea, clearly, was to keep certain kinds of protesters out, but that sort of behavior can't be legislated into existence.

In reply to:
Those of you yelling free speech, how would you react if people were there to spray paint the memorial memorial with gratify. Yes, free speech unless you don't like it.

Graffiti damages property, therefore having a measurable monetary impact. So limiting that sort of expression is easy because doing so protects somebody else's rights. That is to say, laws against vandalism act entirely in ignorance of intent. Vandalism that encourages everyone to follow the laws is still itself against the law because it is vandalism.


Partner rrrADAM


May 31, 2011, 1:16 PM
Post #22 of 24 (1550 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17543

Re: [traddad] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

traddad wrote:
rrrADAM wrote:
I've been fighting "forced annexation" of my neighborhood, and the City trying to annex us is rushing to beat the law, since it is going to change in just a couple weeks:
http://www.wect.com/...southport-annexation

I've been in another news interview, as well as several articles and letters to editors of some regional newspapers.

It really sux, as I, and my neighbors, could end up paying tens of thousands of dollars for the privilage of paying a city tax, to a board whose on members are delinquent in paying their own city taxes. Many of my neighbors are retired, some on fixed incomes, who cannot afford it, and will be forced to TRY to sell their houses, likley ending in no sale soon enough, and losing their homes.

Is that your family crest on your shirt or did a squirrel commit seppuku on your shoulder?

We live in an unincorporated development just to the east of Apache Junction, AZ (where meth labs outnumber teeth). We are SO lucky that they cannot annex us without our consent.


That's what the law will be, in just a couple weeks... But they are doing this in a rush to beat the law.


Partner j_ung


Jun 1, 2011, 5:06 AM
Post #23 of 24 (1504 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [veganclimber] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

veganclimber wrote:
I thought the video was clear enough, but here:

http://www.nbcwashington.com/...orial-122778309.html

In reply to:
A handful of dancers got cuffed on Saturday for doing what they say the Founding Fathers would have wanted them to do - expressive dancing in National Parks.

A court recently ruled that expressive dancing was in a category with picketing, speech making, and marching - a banned activity at national memorials.

A small group came out on Saturday to protest the ruling, by dancing together inside the rotunda of the Jefferson Memorial.

That was not even slightly clear.


guangzhou


Jun 2, 2011, 5:59 PM
Post #24 of 24 (1464 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 26, 2004
Posts: 3388

Re: [j_ung] Land of the free [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

The key word being expressive dancing, not just dancing. In this case, it was just expressive dancing, but it was a form of picketing because they pre-organized the whole thing.


Forums : Community : The Soap Box

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$17.95 (10% off)
$89.96 (10% off)
$11.66 (10% off)
$53.96 (10% off)



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook