• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

arrested for dancing in public.

Hmm... I wonder how the police is going to justify their actions. Perhaps the folks did something before the camera was turned on?

I'm really a bit confused and seems to be a lack of full details of what was going on there.
 
cds0699 said:
Um wow, thats crazy. How can that be arrestable?
Click to expand...
Those cops were there on an exchange program with that town from Footloose and they didn't know that dancing isn't illegal everywhere. Give em a break, anybody could make that mistake...right?
 
did a little research on this:

apparently a group of about 15 people went to the memorial around midnight in april 2008 to celebrate jeffersons birthday. they had ipods and were dancing silently. a police officer came up and told them to leave, and when one of them (brooke obberwetter) asked why, they arrested her.
the people you see in this video are protesting her arrest, this was a week or so after the original incident.

from what ive read, they passed a law saying you cant dance around a national monument because it basically distracts attention from the monument itself. sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me, those cops need ARRESTED
 
This reminds me of the old joke "Why don't Quakers make love standing up? Because they don't want people to think they are dancing." ;)

Anyway, as it turns out, it was a scheduled event by a group of local D.C. Libertarians to create a short video. They were asked to leave and Brooke Oberwetter subsequently arrested. It wasn't about the dancing, per se, but a demonstration without a permit (at least that's their story and they're stickin' to it.)
 
Legal opinions about dancing at the Memorial . . .

Judge Thomas B. Griffith wrote in the court's opinion. "But the conduct is nonetheless prohibited because it stands out as a type of performance, creating its own center of attention and distracting from the atmosphere of solemn commemoration that the Regulations are designed to preserve.

"In a decision released Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit says U.S. Park Police officers were right to bar Mary Brooke Oberwetter and a group of 17 friends from dancing at the memorial on the Tidal Basin."

What do you all think?
 
tommy_ed said:
did a little research on this:

apparently a group of about 15 people went to the memorial around midnight in april 2008 to celebrate jeffersons birthday. they had ipods and were dancing silently. a police officer came up and told them to leave, and when one of them (brooke obberwetter) asked why, they arrested her.
the people you see in this video are protesting her arrest, this was a week or so after the original incident.

from what ive read, they passed a law saying you cant dance around a national monument because it basically distracts attention from the monument itself. sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me, those cops need ARRESTED
Click to expand...

No, the police do not need to be arrested. There are rules and if they are broken, someone must enforce them. Do not blame the cops, they are blameless.

If people do not like the rules, they should try to change them through legal means.

The Memorial is a solemn place and dancing should not be allowed. I am all for free speech but these days, it seems too many people that have never bothered to read the founding documents scream about how they were violated or they are wholly unreasonable.

Some places need to be free of bothersome things that detract from the atmosphere. Have you ever been to the monument?
 
I disagree pretty strongly. We're supposed to be free in the United States, and as long as the people dancing are not harming another individual, then they should be allowed to dance if they wish to, my personal opinion of course.

It's stuff like this where I think the government takes their control just a little to far.
 
Vihzel said:
Hmm... I wonder how the police is going to justify their actions. Perhaps the folks did something before the camera was turned on?

I'm really a bit confused and seems to be a lack of full details of what was going on there.
Click to expand...

If there is a rule/law/statute forbidding dancing at the memorial or other places, for that matter, the police do not need to justify their actions. They are there to uphold the rules.

Happy Memorial Day, anyway.
 
I do agree with Bob regarding the police. They were only doing their job.... even if people do not agree with the law.
 
cds0699 said:
I disagree pretty strongly. We're supposed to be free in the United States, and as long as the people dancing are not harming another individual, then they should be allowed to dance if they wish to, my personal opinion of course.

It's stuff like this where I think the government takes their control just a little to far.
Click to expand...

I uphold your right to your opinion, but i have to disagree. I have been many times to the memorial and it is a solemn place. I would consider dancing in the memorial to be no less than "performance graffiti". The rules of conduct should reflect the place and be enforced. It's a matter of respect.

They could dance on the sidewalk, in the mall, or in the gardens if dancing were their objective. The government has to set the rules here because it's a national monument, but it is the same as being required to wear pants if you want to enter the Vatican or keep your voice down when you are in the Holocaust museum.

They were asked to stop and argued. At that point i commend the police for acting quickly and stopping it before it turned into something ugly.
 
cds0699 said:
I disagree pretty strongly. We're supposed to be free in the United States, and as long as the people dancing are not harming another individual, then they should be allowed to dance if they wish to, my personal opinion of course.

It's stuff like this where I think the government takes their control just a little to far.
Click to expand...

I have not checked, but when did this law or rule or mandate take effect? If there has been a prohibition on dancing at the Jefferson Memorial for several decades, then you have no right to blame the cops and scream how much your rights were violated.

We already know that judges have ruled on the matter and what they said makes perfect sense. Some places should be kept reverent and free from distraction.

The way to do things is not by creating a viral video of some perceived violation; all the while ignoring the law, to make police look like fools, and to proclaim to the world how your "rights" were violated.

The dancer's rights were not violated, the law was violated. Ignorance of the law is no excuse, as they say.

Bob
 
cds0699 said:
Um wow, thats crazy. How can that be arrestable?
Click to expand...

It becomes "arrestable" whenever the police warn you to stop and you do not stop. Pretty simple concept I have lived my life by. Bob hates prison and jail, so he bends to the will of the police when told to be quiet and knows he is in the wrong.
 
lunatic59 said:
I uphold your right to your opinion, but i have to disagree. I have been many times to the memorial and it is a solemn place. I would consider dancing in the memorial to be no less than "performance graffiti". The rules of conduct should reflect the place and be enforced. It's a matter of respect.

They could dance on the sidewalk, in the mall, or in the gardens if dancing were their objective. The government has to set the rules here because it's a national monument, but it is the same as being required to wear pants if you want to enter the Vatican or keep your voice down when you are in the Holocaust museum.

They were asked to stop and argued. At that point i commend the police for acting quickly and stopping it before it turned into something ugly.
Click to expand...


THANK YOU!

There are places to protest whatever bothers you and when you make a spectacle of yourself, you do nothing to serve the principals of free speech or yourself.

Hate the law, then change the law and dance, dance, dance. I would object to a change in this case, but a law is a law.

Bob
 
Bob Maxey said:
THANK YOU!

There are places to protest whatever bothers you and when you make a spectacle of yourself, you do nothing to serve the principals of free speech or yourself.

Hate the law, then change the law and dance, dance, dance. I would object to a change in this case, but a law is a law.

Bob
Click to expand...

Quite welcome, Bob. Sometimes this cry of "This is America and I can do whatever I want" gets tiresome.
 
cds0699 said:
I disagree pretty strongly. We're supposed to be free in the United States, and as long as the people dancing are not harming another individual, then they should be allowed to dance if they wish to, my personal opinion of course.

It's stuff like this where I think the government takes their control just a little to far.
Click to expand...
You forget all monuments are federal government property and not public property. So The people protesting was in the wrong. They was busted and told it was against the law. So you dont have any rights on Gov property. If they tell you to leave? Guess what you have to leave. Many people forgets all those monuments are not public property.
 
Dark Jedi said:
You forget all monuments are federal government property and not public property. So The people protesting was in the wrong. They was busted and told it was against the law. So you dont have any rights on Gov property. If they tell you to leave? Guess what you have to leave. Many people forgets all those monuments are not public property.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point.
 
Just doing a small search for the laws/rules...

In April 2008, Mary Brooke Oberwetter was arrested at the Jefferson Memorial while participating in an organized celebration of the 265th birthday of President Jefferson. Ms. Oberwetter and the group were dancing silently as they listened to music on headphones. She was charged with demonstrating without a permit (charge later dropped) and interfering with park police.
Oberwetter sued the arresting officer and park police for violating her first amendment right to free expression. In May 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the arrest and conviction, confirming a lower court's finding that "the Jefferson Memorial is a nonpublic forum reserved for the tranquil commemoration of [President] Jefferson's legacy" and that Ms. Oberwetter had violated reasonable rules in place intended to maintain the monument for that purpose.
On May 29, 2011, five visitors were arrested while dancing inside the monument in protest of the court's decision. The protest and arrests were captured by numerous press and amatuer photographers
As of yet, no law or documentation of law or statute indicating that this actually is illegal has been cited.


(Source Wikipedia)


But I agree with Bob, Dark Jedi and lunatic, honestly if I saw idiots dancing around Memorials and such in the Nations Capital, I'd probably sock them in the mouth.
 
So its ok for that horrible church to protest at the soldiers funerals, but dancing at a public monument gets you arrested? What's wrong with this picture? Just because I may find these dancing fools annoying, doesn't mean I think they should be arrested. Freedom of speech is meant to protect the unpopular, not the popular, speech. I'm surprised so many would be willing to give up their rights because they disagree with something. Especially those of you that obviously hate the government. It seems the wing nuts and tea baggers always hate the government if they want to make rich people pay taxes, but love heavy-handed police tactics. I've never understood that.
 
Gmash said:
So its ok for that horrible church to protest at the soldiers funerals, but dancing at a public monument gets you arrested? What's wrong with this picture? Just because I may find these dancing fools annoying, doesn't mean I think they should be arrested. Freedom of speech is meant to protect the unpopular, not the popular, speech. I'm surprised so many would be willing to give up their rights because they disagree with something. Especially those of you that obviously hate the government. It seems the wing nuts and tea baggers always hate the government if they want to make rich people pay taxes, but love heavy-handed police tactics. I've never understood that.
Click to expand...

Why are you thinking, that we think some asshats from Kansas should be allowed to protest funerals? Frankly if I see any of those asshats, I'd shoot them. Quite frankly I don't think they should be able to protest at funerals or dance at the memorials.
 
jwp1223 said:
Why are you thinking, that we think some asshats from Kansas should be allowed to protest funerals? Frankly if I see any of those asshats, I'd shoot them. Quite frankly I don't think they should be able to protest at funerals or dance at the memorials.
Click to expand...
It seems backwards to me that the courts say it is ok for those jerk-offs to protest at the funerals, (which hurts people), but not ok to dance at a national monument, (which is just annoying). Sorry if I got off topic a bit there.
 
Gmash said:
It seems backwards to me that the courts say it is ok for those jerk-offs to protest at the funerals, (which hurts people), but not ok to dance at a national monument, (which is just annoying). Sorry if I got off topic a bit there.
Click to expand...


I agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom