arrested for dancing in public.

[Dark Jedi]

You fail to see that what that wracked out church does is protest on public land. Which you are allowed to do by your first admendment rights. Where as dancing at the Jefferson memorial is government land and they can deny you access for whatever reason they see fit as its not public land. If they say no dancing? By god you better not.

Try this go on a military base and then protest the war. Then when they arrest you cry out its your rights are being violated. They will laugh at you. Why you think when people protest they do it outside the fence. Because its public land.

Don't ever put words in our mouths saying we condone the actions of that church. Compare apples to apples and not apples to oranges. Don't like the laws? Call your senator and voice your dislike about that. As Much as I hate what they do they are protected by the freedom of speech just like you and everyone else in this country has the same rights.

I personally think they should be sent to Afghanistan and let them protest there. Then I bet thy would see the light quick.

 

[jwp1223]

I didn't know that Cemeteries were public land though....that's new to me...now if they are outside the cemetery that's completely different.

 

[Steven58]

Since this is political, I'm moving this to the political section. If you disagree, please PM a mod....errr... I mean. PM me.

 

[Dark Jedi]

I didn't know that Cemeteries were public land though....that's new to me...now if they are outside the cemetery that's completely different.

THey protest by the road side.

Since this is political, I'm moving this to the political section. If you disagree, please PM a mod....errr... I mean. PM me.

I'll pm real mod. Like angel or earlymon.

 

[lunatic59]

I'll pm real mod. Like angel or earlymon.

Ouch!

I didn't know that Cemeteries were public land though....that's new to me...now if they are outside the cemetery that's completely different.

Cemeteries are private property, even if they are owned by the government (Arlington National, for example) just as the Jefferson Memorial is private property. As such the owner (U.S. Govt.) can set rules of conduct and enforce them by asking offenders to leave. If they do not, at that point they are trespassing which becomes a matter for the civil authorities.

As for the Nimrods from Kansas, the best thing to do is to ignore them completely and they will fade into obscurity.

 

[noah way]

How appropriate that this happened at the Jefferson Memorial.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.
Thomas Jefferson

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
Thomas Jefferson

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson

Force is the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism.
Thomas Jefferson

 

[nlsme]

The way I see it, dancing is no more a demonstration as talking is. Or visiting with a group. What is next? Cant talk, or visit with your family?

 

[shawn1224]

So if a little kid is skipping or dancing around the memorial (like they normally do) are they going to get arrested? Sure i can understand someone crudely disturbing the peace but this law is archaic beyond any measure.

 

[ocnbrze]

now i can understand that if is an actual demonstration with picket signs and yelling and such. however they were demonstrating (if you call dancing demonstrating) silently with headphones on. it did not become a distraction until they started to arrest them. i agree that the law is archiac.

 

[Wpz2000]

No opinion on the law. But I find it truly ironic that the original arresting incident was done to people that were there to CELEBRATE Jefferson. What was the memorial for again?

 

[tommy_ed]

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.

so you think it was okay for that officer to body slam that guy then choke him out when all he did was hold up his hands?

So its ok for that horrible church to protest at the soldiers funerals, but dancing at a public monument gets you arrested?

EXACTLY.

You fail to see that what that wracked out church does is protest on public land.

what YOU fail to see is that a memorial is public land just as much as a cemetery is

 

[jwp1223]

Ouch!



Cemeteries are private property, even if they are owned by the government (Arlington National, for example) just as the Jefferson Memorial is private property. As such the owner (U.S. Govt.) can set rules of conduct and enforce them by asking offenders to leave. If they do not, at that point they are trespassing which becomes a matter for the civil authorities.

As for the Nimrods from Kansas, the best thing to do is to ignore them completely and they will fade into obscurity.

That's what I figured....quite frankly, they don't have the guts to talk to do much....especially when the Patriot Guard gets involved.

 

[Dark Jedi]

so you think it was okay for that officer to body slam that guy then choke him out when all he did was hold up his hands?



EXACTLY.




what YOU fail to see is that a memorial is public land just as much as a cemetery is

Better look again. Jefferson Memorial is federal government property. Thank you for playing.

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"

 

[Bob Maxey]

what YOU fail to see is that a memorial is public land just as much as a cemetery is

And there are rules of conduct for public land and just because it is public land, it does not mean you are free to do whatever the hell you want to do.

Try walking across the White House property and see just how far you get before you are stopped by the SS. I mean the Secret Service.

My library is a public building on public land and you can't dance there. I remember when you had to be quiet as not to disturb the other folks. This was understood and respected by most people.

What about court room and police stations? Disrupt things there and a judge or a cop will have you removed. Perhaps they are public lands, if you define public land as any land built with tax payer dollars.

National Parks are public land but they sometimes close and you are trespassing if you camp out and suddenly become Baryshnikov.

A military base might be considered "public land" but try dancing your way into one of those tax dollar supported facilities, past the gate guards and see what arguing with the MPs about your right to be on "public land" gets you. I suggest you go to Area 51 and dance across that piece of tax payer supported land and see what happens.

As for cemeteries, not all are public. Some are, and although you might be allowed to protest and sing and dance, decent people won't disrupt a place that should be kept free from distraction.

As for it being the Jefferson Memorial, I think Tom would agree: keep the troublemakers out. As for some skewed idea about the Constitutional validity of removing these cretins, I think Democracy and the Bill of Rights will survive.

Here is the problem: we raise people without good judgment, they have a serious lack of knowledge of the law, no respect for authority, and a disregard for rules that govern an otherwise polite and proper society. They scream about the guarantees guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, having read neither and not giving a damn about these documents.

Bob

 

[Bob Maxey]

so you think it was okay for that officer to body slam that guy then choke him out when all he did was hold up his hands?

I think police need to do whatever they need to do to protect themselves and the public.

Here is the amazing thing: if you do not want to suffer at the hands of the police, do not be an ass. Do what the cops tell you to do and if you think they are in the wrong, go to court.

What happens to you in a case like this is entirely up to you. You have complete control and if you want to fight the cops, then perhaps you get what you get.

 

[nlsme]

How appropriate that this happened at the Jefferson Memorial.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.
Thomas Jefferson

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
Thomas Jefferson

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.
Thomas Jefferson

Force is the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism.
Thomas Jefferson

This mans post deserves some attention from some in this thread.

@Bob, "Tom" specifically says he wouldn't.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.
Thomas Jefferson

 

[lunatic59]

This mans post deserves some attention from some in this thread.

@Bob, "Tom" specifically says he wouldn't.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.
Thomas Jefferson

Mr. Jefferson was a brilliant man and one of our nation's founding fathers. He was a prolific writer and had a great many opinions on freedom and government. He was, however, a man, not a god. Every word ever spoken or written by the man should not be turned into some sort of political gospel.

You also have to put his opinions into historical context. This country and it's government was very different in Jefferson's time and the world in general was a different place.

I live in a country that reveres both freedom and democracy, but sometimes freedom and democracy can be divergent concepts. Democratic government is never a 100% consensus and therefore there will always be people who feel the government is impinging on their freedom in one form or another. But the beauty of democracy is you are free to try and change it.

If the laws of the land say a private property owner is free to establish guides of conduct for their property and has the right to deny access to said property, AND that if a trespasser is not abiding by the property owner's request, then the civil authorities not only have the right, but the responsibility to remove the offending individual(s). It really very simple.

Now, to the topic of this thread, the original group had scheduled a meeting of a group of people (the were local Washington D.C. Libertarians, but their affiliation is irrelevant.) at a Federal monument and capture the event on video. That was considered (by the court) to be a demonstration, which on federal land, requires a permit. They did not have one. Even if you argue that they were not demonstrating, but just dancing, they were not arrested for dancing, even thought he press latched on to that because it was much more sensational than saying trespassers were arrested. They were asked to stop and asked to leave at which point they became argumentative.

The second group (in the video) went there SPECIFICALLY to demonstrate, also without a permit, the arrest of Ms. Oberwetter. They danced in a deliberate disregard for the rules of conduct, which they knew beforehand. The guy who stood and held up his hands was resisting. Those officers did a remarkable job of keeping the peace and subduing him (for not only their own safety and the safety of the other innocent people trying to enjoy a national monument, but his as well.)

That's the thing about democracy and freedom. You are free to disagree and free to try and change it. And if you do change the law, then you have exercised your rights as a citizen. If, through due course the law is upheld, then you have STILL exercised your rights as a citizen and you are STILL free to disagree. But, at that point, if you continue to exercise what you consider to be your rights and freedoms in defiance of what the democratic government has determined to be the law, then there will be consequences.

These people knew that, that's why they had the video cameras at the ready. Heck, even Gandhi knew that when he marched to the sea to make salt, there was going to be trouble.

If the laws get changed eventually, then meet me at the memorial for a cha-cha or a tango. In the mean time, if you dance and are asked to leave and you don't, then expect to closely inspect the travertine marble floor with your face. The police did nothing wrong.

 

[nlsme]

Historical context? Pretty sure people demonstrated in those times. Hell, I would even go as far as saying they danced too.

Onto the next quote,

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
Thomas Jefferson

So, what rights of others were being violated?

 

[lunatic59]

Historical context? Pretty sure people demonstrated in those times. Hell, I would even go as far as saying they danced too.

I think you are missing the point here.

People in the revolutionary era did demonstrate and there WERE consequences and when they didn't like the consequences, they changed the laws. It this case, they did it by violent revolt to establish democracy so violent revolt wouldn't be necessary for their children and children's children. Patrick Henry's great cry of "Give me liberty or give me death" meant that some people got death. Personally, I'd prefer a faceplant into a stone floor over death.

Onto the next quote,

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
Thomas Jefferson

So, what rights of others were being violated?

I did not say that anyone's rights are being violated. I am saying the exact opposite. The federal government's rights were upheld by being able to establish guidelines of conduct and rightfully prohibit those they feel are non-compliant by means of civil authority. The other visitors' who were conducting themselves according to the rules rights were upheld by being protected from resisting trespassers. Even those who were subdued had their rights to due process upheld. Even your right to disagree with civil authority and consider the court's decision (in this case) tyrannical is being upheld here in the forums by not having posts censured.

Now, if two people have, to quote Mr. Jefferson "Rightful liberty ... unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others" and I wish to exercise said rights by solemn reflection at a national monument at the same time someone else want's to dance which i find distracting, my rightful liberty is definitely obstructed. Of course, as I said before, the issue isn't about the right to dance or express one's self, but the right of a property owner, tenant or conservator to control conduct and access.

 

[nlsme]

So what is next? Dancing is no more a demostration as is talking, or attending with a group. You gonna be allright with it when they arrest you for talking with your family? Or even attending at the same time?

 

[noah way]

We are intolerant of the wrong things. A guy with an anti-Bush t-shirt is dragged off to jail, a guy carrying an automatic weapon is allowed to stand in a crowd near where Obama speaks.

McCain sings, "Bomb bomb bomb ... bomb bomb Iran" in a televised speech, but say the word "bomb" in an airport or on a plane and you're going to interrogation and jail. Simply tipping your seat back and pissing off the guy behind you is enough to get the pilot to call in a terror emergency, get an air force escort, dump 15,000 gallons of fuel and make an emergency landing.

The Patriot Act allows search and seizure that violates the constitution. Protests on Federal property are illegal without a permit ("So, you want to protest? Fill out this form in triplicate, pay this application fee, ...").

At what point did we become a police state? And why aren't the conservatives who constantly trumpet the Constitution screaming about it?

 

[lunatic59]

So what is next? Dancing is no more a demostration as is talking, or attending with a group. You gonna be allright with it when they arrest you for talking with your family? Or even attending at the same time?

If I'm talking in the theater, I'll expect to be asked to be quiet or leave. If I refuse, I'll expect to be removed. If I see a sign that says "no shoes - no service" and I argue with the patron of the establishment over his policy violating my right to be barefoot and he has me arrested after I refuse to leave, I would be alright with it, even though i wouldn't like it too much. I also wouldn't go moaning about my rights being violated, even though i have the freedom to do it.

Third time is the charm, at least for me because I am not going to say it again. The arrest wasn't about the dancing, even though that was what they were asked not to do. Federal property is not public land and therefore they have the right to restrict access based on visitor's conduct.

 

[oldsoldier]

I didn't know that Cemeteries were public land though....that's new to me...now if they are outside the cemetery that's completely different.

They dont protest in cemetaries-they protest on the streets, in public, where it is allowed. We dont have to agree with it-but, it IS the law. They are allowed to peacably assemble. Look at any of their protests-they are done on public throughfares. They are a family of lawyers and push the limits of the law. They assemble peacably, and hold signs. They arent violent, or shouting, or making a scene for themselves. They DO bait others to do that-to prove their own point. However, most counter protests are onto that game. I belong to the Patriot Guard, and there are contingents that will assemble directly in front of hte Westboro folks-we assemble with large American flags, held high-high enough to cover their hate filled signs. But, what we do is legal too-there is no law stating that you cannot stand directly in front of a protest. You just cannot "interfere"-which is broadly interpreted as you cannot physically touch each other, or any signs, flags, etc.

 

[lunatic59]

They dont protest in cemetaries-they protest on the streets, in public, where it is allowed. We dont have to agree with it-but, it IS the law. They are allowed to peacably assemble. Look at any of their protests-they are done on public throughfares. They are a family of lawyers and push the limits of the law. They assemble peacably, and hold signs. They arent violent, or shouting, or making a scene for themselves. They DO bait others to do that-to prove their own point. However, most counter protests are onto that game. I belong to the Patriot Guard, and there are contingents that will assemble directly in front of hte Westboro folks-we assemble with large American flags, held high-high enough to cover their hate filled signs. But, what we do is legal too-there is no law stating that you cannot stand directly in front of a protest. You just cannot "interfere"-which is broadly interpreted as you cannot physically touch each other, or any signs, flags, etc.

Thank you not only for for being reasonable, but for actually taking action against the unreasonable.

 

[nlsme]

I would say that them dancing isnt unreasonable, and that they took action against an unreasonable law.