Thanks for the warning. I tend to get confused by inane rhetoric and misstatements about Constitutional Law. At least you warned me your link would be replete with it. I especially liked the fact that they made all these arguments to Judge Barbara Jones, and she rejected them. I’m sure there were no sour grapes at all, while they were whining about the “diminishment of the Constitution.”
The fact, to no one’s surprise overlooked by the NYCLU, was, after September 11th, the city instituted a policy of banning ALL demonstrations, parades, or public events outside of the United Nations. The judge, rightly so, found this to policy to be content neutral in that it “makes no reference to the content of the regulated speech, and does not distinguish between event organizers or their views.”
The Judge also relied, in part, on the fact that the organizers had failed to provice police with contact names for participating groups to help the police do their duty and protect public safety.
But thanks for the link. It definitely answered my question regarding your appeal to rhetoric over analysis.
Worldeater ive asked him this question now for the third time. He complains that he stated his position many times yet when i try to come up with reasonable hypotheticals to help understand where his position is on issues he just ignores me.
I find it pathetic that you won’t even weight in on the whole point of this OP; which may I remind you is about people lying in the streets stopping traffic being a valid form of protest.
If Ace won’t bite, I will. I support lying in the streets stopping traffic as a valid form of protest. Fuck, I support the video for “Where the Streets Have No Name.”
Yes, it would be a damn shame if people died because an ambulance or fire truck couldn’t get past the prone protesters. But that’s all quite academic; whether the protesters were standing up or lying down in the streets, they’d still be blocking them. I’d like to see some real statistics about how many unattended fires, deaths, robberies, rapes, etc. can be directly attributed to the protesters’ effect on traffic. Perhaps then we could compare those statistics to the effect of other sanctioned gatherings and actually get some idea of what real damage was done by the traffic impasse.
Other than that, all I hear is whining from people who were made late to work. Had you lived in Revolutionary times, I’m sure you’d have been saying, “Hey, I support American independence as much as anybody, BUT NOW I DON’T HAVE ANY TEA, ASSHOLES!!!”
Well let your ability to at least answer show the difference between some anti-war folk that make an attempt at a point, and those who just beat on drums shouting “no blood for oil”.
Ace, you remind me of a politician trying to squirm out of answering a simple question. You are no better then they are.
In your scenario, commuters (and, more importantly, first-response crews) are being inconvenienced because of an artificial situation. You created the situation, and now you try to backpedal by saying, “Well, it’s good for them! It’ll make them think!”. Is that a deliberate cause-and-effect on the part of the protestors, or are you grasping at another one of the stalks that keep falling out of your strawman?
And why can’t you get it through your cement skull that if you don’t exercise your constitutional rights to assembly and free speech in accordance with local laws, then you don’t have those constitutional rights.
I believe there were some protests back in the day, like the takeover of the dean’s office at Columbia by students and some (not all) demonstrations during the Free Speech Movement, during which protestors purposely assembled without a permit. That’s because their goal was to be arrested. As such, they didn’t claim brutality: what they focused on were bureaucratic flaws: not being read their rights and so forth. And they didn’t claim a legal right to assemble: the right to assemble was one of the things they were lobbying for. They wanted the local laws changed to accommodate the constitutional right to free speech.
Now you live under those laws, Ace. And despite what you said in your post at 3/31 11:43am, the enforcement of them is not a game. I bet if Mario Savio met you, he would puke.
Well at least you admit it. And for the record, if you’re blocking my way home from work to express your OPINION on something you fully deserve a baseball bat to the head and one to the groin as well. As everyone with even minimal sense has already said, protest all you want but don’t take up my time or city resources to do it. Assholes.