Westboro Baptist Church

[epitome]

Why aren't they hit by tear gas and rubber bullets when they protest but OWS is?

[Profits of Doom]

Come on dude, as much as I hate those Westboro shitbags you already know the answer to this. As reprehensible as they are they still apply for permits and follow the letter of the law when they protest. Maybe most of the OWS people do, too, but their crowds are so large there are always a few idiots that fuck it for the legitimate protesters...

[SmokeyTheBear]

simple answer , because they follow the law and most of them are lawyers

[Jack Sparrow]

Because they know not to cross the thin line thats called: the law.

[epitome]

Bullshit. Permit doesn't mean jack shit. A permit limits free speech and you're a pussy if you're going to let your speech be limited, especially if you're in this industry. They were occupying a public park and not impeding the movement of citizens. This wasn't a Brooklyn Bridge thing.

Having said that, Oakland police didn't do what they did because of a lack of permit.

The Mayor of Oakland has apologized and the interim chief of police has opened an investigation. At this point we don't even know what happened as the police received reports of unsanitary conditions and violence but protesters said there was no such thing.

We don't know if any laws were broken as the investigation is not complete. So I ask again, why do those protesting economic inequality get sprayed with tear gas and rubber bullets when Westboro Baptist Church doesn't?

GFY is the judge and jury? Good to know.

[Profits of Doom]

Originally Posted by epitome

Bullshit. Permit doesn't mean jack shit. A permit limits free speech and you're a pussy if you're going to let your speech be limited, especially if you're in this industry. They were occupying a public park and not impeding the movement of citizens. This wasn't a Brooklyn Bridge thing.

Having said that, Oakland police didn't do what they did because of a lack of permit.

The Mayor of Oakland has apologized and the interim chief of police has opened an investigation. At this point we don't even know what happened as the police received reports of unsanitary conditions and violence but protesters said there was no such thing.

We don't know if any laws were broken as the investigation is not complete. So I ask again, why do those protesting economic inequality get sprayed with tear gas and rubber bullets when Westboro Baptist Church doesn't?

GFY is the judge and jury? Good to know.

You seriously need to lighten up man. The Westboro Baptist Church protests in small groups and they follow the letter of the law. Yes they are reprehensible pieces of shit but they keep their groups small and don't do anything to incite police.

You ever listen to the Opie and Anthony Show on Sirius/XM? They have an intern that goes to the OWS in NYC every day and is completely for the cause, and even he admits that there are tons of shit bags with different agendas that are also protesting and inciting police. Trust me, no one distrusts police more than me, but the OWS protests are so big that there are plenty of idiots fucking it up for the legitimate protesters. In addition, the NYPD officers that are assigned to OWS fucking hate being there. They have retirement and pensions that they can lose if they are caught on camera doing something stupid, and everyone there has a camera.

OWS has no clear agenda, and because of that every homeless person, drifter, and crazy person with an agenda is hanging out there and it's a recipe for disaster...

[CaptainHowdy]

Lol @ protest permits ...

[epitome]

Originally Posted by Profits of Doom

You seriously need to lighten up man. The Westboro Baptist Church protests in small groups and they follow the letter of the law. Yes they are reprehensible pieces of shit but they keep their groups small and don't do anything to incite police.

You ever listen to the Opie and Anthony Show on Sirius/XM? They have an intern that goes to the OWS in NYC every day and is completely for the cause, and even he admits that there are tons of shit bags with different agendas that are also protesting and inciting police. Trust me, no one distrusts police more than me, but the OWS protests are so big that there are plenty of idiots fucking it up for the legitimate protesters. In addition, the NYPD officers that are assigned to OWS fucking hate being there. They have retirement and pensions that they can lose if they are caught on camera doing something stupid, and everyone there has a camera.

OWS has no clear agenda, and because of that every homeless person, drifter, and crazy person with an agenda is hanging out there and it's a recipe for disaster...

I need to lighten up because in America a tiny hate group can do what they want but a large movement gets shot up with tear gas and rubber bullets? FUCK THAT SHIT!

Here is a nice Q&A about "permits" from the ACLU:

Q. Do I need a permit before I engage in free speech activity?

A. Not usually. However, certain types of events require permits. Generally, these events are: 1) a march or parade that does not stay on the sidewalk and other events that require blocking traffic or street closures; 2) a large rally requiring the use of sound amplifying devices; or 3) a rally at certain designated parks or plazas, such as federal property managed by the General Services Administration. Many permit procedures require that the application be filed several weeks in advance of the event. However, the First Amendment prohibits such an advance notice requirement from being used to prevent rallies or demonstrations that are rapid responses to unforeseeable and recent events. Also, many permit ordinances give a lot of discretion to the police or city officials to impose conditions on the event, such as the route of a march or the sound levels of amplification equipment. Such restrictions may violate the First Amendment if they are unnecessary for traffic control or public safety, or if they interfere significantly with effective communication with the intended audience. A permit cannot be denied because the event is controversial or will express unpopular views

Q. If organizers have not obtained a permit, where can a march take place?

A. If marchers stay on the sidewalks and obey traffic and pedestrian signals, their activity is constitutionally protected even without a permit. Marchers may be required to allow enough space on the sidewalk for normal pedestrian traffic and may not maliciously obstruct or detain passers-by.

Q. Can the government impose a financial charge on exercising free speech rights?

A. Increasingly, local governments are imposing financial costs as a condition of exercising free speech rights, such as application fees, security deposits for clean-up, or charges to cover overtime police costs. Unfortunately, such charges that cover actual administrative costs or the actual costs of re-routing traffic have been permitted by some courts. However, if the costs are greater because an event is controversial (or a hostile crowd is expected) ? such as requiring a large insurance policy ? then the courts will not permit it. Also, regulations with financial requirements should include a waiver for groups that cannot afford the charge, so that even grassroots organizations can exercise their free speech rights. Therefore, a group without significant financial resources should not be prevented from engaging in a march simply because it cannot afford the charges the City would like to impose.

The Tea Party is suing to get their close to $10,000 back in permit fees as they were charged them and Occupy Richmond was not. I hope the Tea Party wins their case and Constitutional rights are restored those who wish to exercise their rights to free speech together with other citizens!

[epitome]

Oh about O&A and all of that other stuff. It doesn't matter if there are drug dealers and homeless people in the mix. There is nothing stopping the police from dealing with them on a one-on-one basis. Last time I checked, protestors are not forming a human chain and preventing police from entering the protests.

Hell, even OWS in NYC has complained about the homeless people and drugs ... but it seems like nobody can win ... if they try to clean it up you'll just hear a lot of bellyaching like you did here about OWS not wanting to feed homeless people but it wants socialism and the rich to pay for the poor, etc.

What people are protesting is very clear. Ironically, the movement started by a Canadian activist group. Protestors are against social and economic inequality, corporate greed, lobbyists and government corruption. People act like they don't know what they're protesting because they don't have a list of A, B, C on how to fix what they perceive to be problems, but they don't need to have the solution to express their outrage ... their goal is that the government leaders they elected will step up and answer to the demands of the citizens they represent.

I don't know how people can consider themselves intelligent and then say that OWS doesn't know what they're protesting about when it's been well-documented, down to the root, since the very beginning.

[ottopottomouse]

Originally Posted by epitome

What people are protesting is very clear.

Glad it's clear to you as most of them don't really seem to know what they are protesting.

[ilnjscb]

How does a permit allow you to blatantly disrupt a private funeral? Permits are discretionary, not mandated. Who gives that permit? Flag burning; sacred, saying god hates fags at funerals; sacred, disagreeing in public with unsound fiscal policy; light 'em up boys! That is clearly the sort of bullshit Jefferson The Architect had in mind when he advocated frequent revolution. Washington didn't follow the letter of the law, he broke the shit out of it. They would have hanged him as a traitor, and the letter of the law knuckleheads would have said "too right mate". The letters were written, and written for a reason, and if the reason is wrong, the law should be broken.

[spazlabz]

Originally Posted by ilnjscb

How does a permit allow you to blatantly disrupt a private funeral? Permits are discretionary, not mandated. Who gives that permit? Flag burning; sacred, saying god hates fags at funerals; sacred, disagreeing in public with unsound fiscal policy; light 'em up boys! That is clearly the sort of bullshit Jefferson The Architect had in mind when he advocated frequent revolution. Washington didn't follow the letter of the law, he broke the shit out of it. They would have hanged him as a traitor, and the letter of the law knuckleheads would have said "too right mate". The letters were written, and written for a reason, and if the reason is wrong, the law should be broken.

a permit does not allow that, it just allows them to asemble in a specific spot and also allows the cops to know whats going on. It is the first amendment that gives them the right to blatantly disrupt a private funeral. It sucks but it is what we allow.

Probably one of the most famous cases involving a group of miscreants and the first amendment was in Skokie Il where the American nazi party was planning to march. The ACLU defended their right to march there based on the first amendment and their lawyer was of Jewish descent. The argument being that the first amendment is there to protect the people we find vile and disgusting even more so then the people we agree with. Skokie is a predominantly Jewish community (Fantastic bagels I am not kidding!) and at the time had a small but substantial holocaust survivor community.

The nazi's won but were allowed to march in Chicago instead

[ilnjscb]

Originally Posted by spazlabz

a permit does not allow that, it just allows them to asemble in a specific spot and also allows the cops to know whats going on. It is the first amendment that gives them the right to blatantly disrupt a private funeral. It sucks but it is what we allow.

Probably one of the most famous cases involving a group of miscreants and the first amendment was in Skokie Il where the American nazi party was planning to march. The ACLU defended their right to march there based on the first amendment and their lawyer was of Jewish descent. The argument being that the first amendment is there to protect the people we find vile and disgusting even more so then the people we agree with. Skokie is a predominantly Jewish community (Fantastic bagels I am not kidding!) and at the time had a small but substantial holocaust survivor community.

The nazi's won but were allowed to march in Chicago instead

That is sort of the same thing, antagonistic assholes couching their bullshit as a "belief" in a place and manner designed to inflict maximum damage. However, a funeral is a small one time event. A neighborhood continues to exist and can be left for the day.

In the larger scheme, however, genuine peaceable protest assembly is an important part of our democracy. Protection of side shows denigrates that, equating general desire for reform with insane outliers. It is detrimental to the image of protest, which is a legitimate form of governing dialog.