# Ferguson, MO **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 12, 2014, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354 "2014-08-12T04:51:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 26
**Author:** ![SmellMyWort](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea5d25/32.png) [@SmellMyWort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmellMyWort)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/501 "2014-08-14T21:50:54Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > I know that firing occurred in their vicinity. Have you interviewed the police to determine what they were aiming at? Have you watched the video? Have you read the article? I didn’t see any protesters/rioters around that news van. The other news crew who witnessed the attack probably would have mentioned it. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/502 "2014-08-14T21:51:50Z")
> [@LibrarySpy](#): > > I consider most laws with no qualifications to be vague and un-Constitutional, not just against the press but against the population at large. That’s nice. Cite for the courts sharing your opinion? > [@](#): > > The one you cited requires an [unlawful assembly](http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/chapters/chap574.htm) or a [riot](http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/chapters/chap574.htm), neither of which was the case here. Really? Well, I guess this entire thread has been based on a false premise, since apparently there was never a riot going on in the first place. > [@](#): > > I agree with **andros** that this is all nitpicking semantics anyway, and that at least for the press corps, justice and common sense have prevailed. Fingers crossed that tonight, it will prevail for everyone. That depends on whether the press corps has learned its lesson. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/503 "2014-08-14T21:53:26Z")
> [@SmellMyWort](#): > > Have you watched the video? Have you read the article? Unless the video features an officer on camera declaring out loud “Shoot at that news van and the reporters around it!”, then any speculation about what the cops were aiming at is just that. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/504 "2014-08-14T21:54:37Z")
> [@SmellMyWort](#): > > It would have been even faster for the police to demand that they abandon their gear. Would that have been a reasonable request? The cop was just looking for an excuse to harass these reporters and not moving fast enough was a convenient excuse. So now you’re psychic and are able to divine the thoughts of someone by watching a video of them? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/505 "2014-08-14T21:55:15Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > “Delaying” doesn’t appear to be included as a term in the statutes you just posted. Perhaps there is some next part to the cited text that includes it, but I don’t see any onus towards expeditious dispersal in there. However, I hope you understand that an accused cannot automatically defend himself against a charge that he failed to disperse by claiming he was going to disperse in a few minutes. The element of the crime at issue is that he knowingly fails or refuses to obey the order to disperse. So when is that crime complete? More to the point here: when does probable cause exist that the subject is refusing or failing to obey? That last question is easy to answer: the moment the accused does anything that evinces an intent to slow or stop his dispersal. ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/506 "2014-08-14T21:58:04Z")
Last night, the brave cops of Ferguson protected the community from a terrorist sympathizer cleverly disguised as a middle-aged female clergy member trying to calm people down. The cops nailed that shifty terrorist with a rubber bullet. Thank god they got her before it was too late. > > Anyway, the heroes of the Ferguson PD need some time off, so Governor Nixon ordered the Missouri Highway Patrol to take over security. A reporter asked the HP if Ferguson residents should expect tear gas tonight. The fucking pansy said he told his officers to leave the gas masks behind ([https://twitter.com/alicesperi/statuses/500027758412451840](https://twitter.com/alicesperi/statuses/500027758412451840)). What will the HP do if they encounter another so-called religious figure? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/507 "2014-08-14T21:58:45Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > That depends on whether the press corps has learned its lesson. LOL. The people who are learning a very sharp lesson right now are not the press but the Keystone Kops in Ferguson [who are having their leash yanked by the governor](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/15/us/ferguson-missouri-police-shooting.html?_r=0). Let’s hope the Highway Patrol knows more about law enforcement that the morons who have been running the show for the last few days. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/508 "2014-08-14T21:59:33Z")
Well, it’s not Nixon who’ll have to tell those police wives that their husbands won’t be coming home. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/509 "2014-08-14T22:00:59Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > A reporter asked the HP if Ferguson residents should expect tear gas tonight. The fucking pansy said he told his officers to leave the gas masks behind. He’s letting the terrorists win! There will be police in body bags tomorrow I’m sure because of his cowardly decision! :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/510 "2014-08-14T22:01:12Z")
> [@LibrarySpy](#): > > I consider most laws with no qualifications to be vague and un-Constitutional, not just against the press but against the population at large. The Supreme Court has ruled pretty decisively on them, but some might have still been on the books in Missouri and exploited. So far as I can tell, the Missouri law at issue has never been struck down. Have you a cite to the contrary? > [@](#): > > The one you cited requires an [unlawful assembly](http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/chapters/chap574.htm) or a [riot](http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/chapters/chap574.htm), neither of which was the case here. Note “knowingly” and the stipulation about planning to commit a crime. Probably still used to illegally make arrests where there would never be a conviction. It’s perfectly legal to make arrests without having the requisite evidence to obtain a conviction. Arrests require only probable cause. However, you’re right that for this order to be lawful, thee must have been an unlawful assembly. Why do you say there wasn’t? ---
**Author:** ![BigAppleBucky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigapplebucky/32/178_2.png) [@BigAppleBucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAppleBucky)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/511 "2014-08-14T22:01:15Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > His video makes it clear that his taping was hindering his ability to evacuate in a timely manner. On the other hand why should he have been forced to evacuate? So the cops could dine in private? There certainly was no illegal activity going on at that store, nor did there appear to be any particular threat other than the video taping of the officers. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/512 "2014-08-14T22:01:16Z")
> [@The\_Hamster\_King](#): > > LOL. The people who are learning a very sharp lesson right now are not the press but the Keystone Kops in Ferguson [who are having their leash yanked by the governor](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/15/us/ferguson-missouri-police-shooting.html?_r=0). Let’s hope the Highway Patrol knows more about law enforcement that the morons who have been running the show for the last few days. Then I guess we can expect reporters to just try harder to get themselves arrested so they can create a story for their corporate masters to profit from. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/513 "2014-08-14T22:02:18Z")
> [@BigAppleBucky](#): > > On the other hand why should he have been forced to evacuate? So the cops could dine in private? There certainly was no illegal activity going on at that store, nor did there appear to be any particular threat other than the video taping of the officers. Asked and answered. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/514 "2014-08-14T22:12:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > However, I hope you understand that an accused cannot automatically defend himself against a charge that he failed to disperse by claiming he was going to disperse in a few minutes. There would appear to be no automatic defense except\* immediate\* dispersal. > [@](#): > > The element of the crime at issue is that he knowingly fails or refuses to obey the order to disperse. So when is that crime complete? > > More to the point here: when does probable cause exist that the subject is refusing or failing to obey? That last question is easy to answer: the moment the accused does anything that evinces an intent **to slow** or stop his dispersal. Where are you getting “to slow” from? You’re including “delaying” again by using a different term to mean the same thing. The statute you cite has quite black and white terminology. Did he refuse? No, neither verbally or in action if he was packing. Did he fail? Not through his own actions. He doesn’t have to be expeditious, per the cite, just comply. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/515 "2014-08-14T22:13:03Z")
> [@SmellMyWort](#): > > It would have been even faster for the police to demand that they abandon their gear. Would that have been a reasonable request? The cop was just looking for an excuse to harass these reporters and not moving fast enough was a convenient excuse. That’s certainly possible. But the police “true motives,” are not relevant to a determination of whether or not probable cause exists. ---
**Author:** ![LibrarySpy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f9ae1b/32.png) [@LibrarySpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LibrarySpy)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/516 "2014-08-14T22:13:20Z")
> [@Missouri](#): > > A person commits the crime of unlawful assembly if he knowingly assembles with six or more other persons and agrees with such persons to violate any of the criminal laws of this state or of the United States with force or violence. Please provide the criminal law the Washington Post reporter was agreeing to violate and the six people he was planning to violate the law with. Obviously the crime of “disobeying a lawful order” does not count. That would be circular. And I was referring generally to laws that have been struck down regarding “loitering” and associated protected assembly behaviors. But of course you knew that. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/517 "2014-08-14T22:15:02Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > There would appear to be no automatic defense except\* immediate\* dispersal. Where are you getting “to slow” from? You’re including “delaying” again by using a different term to mean the same thing. The statute you cite has quite black and white terminology. Did he refuse? No, neither verbally or in action if he was packing. Did he fail? Not through his own actions. He doesn’t have to be expeditious, per the cite, just comply. _sigh_ So let’s say he has a bag with five items. Could he comply with the statute by picking up one item, holding it for sixty seconds, then placing it in the bag, then waiting sixty seconds, picking up the second item, holding it for sixty seconds, then placing it in the bag? ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/518 "2014-08-14T22:18:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > _sigh_ > > So let’s say he has a bag with five items. Could he comply with the statute by picking up one item, holding it for sixty seconds, then placing it in the bag, then waiting sixty seconds, picking up the second item, holding it for sixty seconds, then placing it in the bag? Yes, of course. Stretch that out to an hour per item, even, and he could still comply with that statute. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/519 "2014-08-14T22:18:47Z")
> [@LibrarySpy](#): > > Please provide the criminal law the Washington Post reporter was agreeing to violate and the six people he was planning to violate the law with. I don’t think he was part of the assembly. I think the police had probable cause to believe he was violating RSMo §574.060. > [@](#): > > And I was referring generally to laws that have been struck down regarding “loitering” and associated protected assembly behaviors. But of course you knew that. No loitering law is at issue here. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2014, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354/520 "2014-08-14T22:20:10Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Yes, of course. Stretch that out to an hour per item, even, and he could still comply with that statute. Suppose he left, complying with the statute, and then returned. Would that be a defense? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ferguson-mo/695354.md?page=27)