It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Man assaulted for free speech

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   
Un-freaking believable. At least the people observing these assaults are starting to get more upset.




posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Your allowed to say whatever you want you just have to deal with the consequences sometimes that's someone else using their right to free speech sometimes its being punched out.


This man is being aggressive intone not being rational and his right to free speech isn't being ended merely he is refusing to deal with the consequences. If your verbally assaulting people trying to be rational of course things will escalate.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
I was watching that here at work, couldn't turn it up very loud, but didn't the security guard state that the man is on private property? The man replied, "with public access".

So, if this is private property, someone apparently has hired security and set rules.

It also appears that the only lady walks up and tells the man, that there is a place for protests he needs to go where they're at. The man refused to leave.

The man was yelling at security, refusing to listen and I don't blame them for physically removing him.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by boomadatigger
 


I disagree, no one in the crowd cares. The worst part about the video is no one helps the man. the youth would rather get pictures for facespace or twatter. this could have been stopped if the crowd would have stepped in. look at the numbers. the crowd far outnumbered the thugs. how many of these videos do we need to see before someone in the crowd steps in?



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by tracer7
 


Exactly..... NOT !

You do bring up a good point, another reason as to why the man had to be removed. You let him keep going and then you get the gang mentality going, things escalate and then there's chaos.

Security was there to prevent exactly this and they did the job.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by tracer7
 


WHAT? What are you talking about? They attempted to let the man leave on his own, not just once but several times. He didn't listen and got nailed with the consequences. He wasn't practicing free speech, he was trespassing on private property and got what he deserved. Quit looking for excuses to bash athority figures because this excuse is obviously wrong.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   
its public property

The loudmouth moron with the sign had every right to be there being an idiot...

If I was in that crowd, I would have been very vocal at the guards, making sure to get their names and all sorts, that crazy old man was wronged and the people whom grabbed him should be tried and convicted for assult.

you don't have to like what they say...but dont impede their voice.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by boomadatigger
 


I agree with the others,clearly this man was
on private property.
A word of advice,if you want to stage a protest...
1.Make sure you are on public land.
2.Have a group with you.
3.Don't make your sign too large.
4.Don't cuss because children might be present.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by mamabeth
 


couldn't find any info on the fairgrounds being public or private. regardless, two "security" guards performed the assault. A cop does not show up until after the man is been assaulted. since when are rent a cops allowed to perform take downs? They should have waited for the legal thugs to perform the beating. I am shocked they didn't shock the guy.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by tracer7
reply to post by mamabeth
 


couldn't find any info on the fairgrounds being public or private. regardless, two "security" guards performed the assault. A cop does not show up until after the man is been assaulted. since when are rent a cops allowed to perform take downs? They should have waited for the legal thugs to perform the beating. I am shocked they didn't shock the guy.


At the Cleveland Greyhound station rent-a-cops are allowed to viciously drag people into back offices and threaten them at gunpoint. Then they torture them until the feel justified to shoot them. The cops think it's justified (I went to the police station about it) because they say they can do "anything they want" if they "think that you fit a description". There's one that would do this in particular every time I went to catch a bus, until I realized it wasn't safe anymore...



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 12:40 AM
link   
It's fairly typically really and not at all surprising. So called free speech is very limited, especially if it's unpopular. Try for example, preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ from your new testament on a street corner in San Francisco or Berkeley CA. Many preachers have been arrested in these places and have had their belongings confiscated.

I actually feel sorry for the nutty LaRouche followers. They seem to routinely get the crap beaten out of them, and it's been happening this way for over 30 years.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:39 AM
link   
I am getting really sick of these wanna be tough guys beating up on the helpless.

If its not an old man, its a woman, if its not a woman, its a kid, if its not a kid, its a puppy.

Security should not be engaging in physical force unless they are being attacked, it is their duty to call the cops if there is a crime in progress, not take on the situation themselves, thats not their job. Their job is to be there as a WITNESS. Security guards live along the same rules as regular citizens, they have no authority to engage in physical contact unless they are being assaulted themselves or are assaulting other citizens. They dont have a badge, they are not sworn in to uphold the law. They are basically private watch dogs, thats it. If this man was committing a crime, the guards should have called the police, and stood by to make sure the man didnt do anything stupid in the meantime, then made their report.
They will be LUCKY if they(security guards) do not get sued over this. ESPECIALLY the guard who started it all by grabbing the man. THAT is assault. The old man was NOT a threat to anyone there, especially those big bad security guards. This should have been handled in a more professional matter IMO.

I want to know what the charges against him are.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 06:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by KILL_DOGG

he was trespassing on private property and got what he deserved.


so what then will you think when public property no longer exists,

and all land is owned in some fashion to a private individual?

should we then fall in line and obey?

public or private, i agree that any land with public access has public rights.

if you dont want protestors on your private property then do not allow public access.

besides it doesnt matter who's property he is on, free speech is an inalienable right, they took him away for trespassing, and they declared him as the only trespasser out of the crowd because of his speech.

that is not free speech.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 08:23 AM
link   
I suspect it is less of the political context of his message and more of the location of presenting that message.

The location of the State Fair Grounds is PRIVATE PROPERTY!

You only have the right to free speech on someones land until they ask you to leave. This man was asked to leave someones Private Property and he refused.

Someone walks onto YOUR property with a Giant Banner and starts yelling believe it or not you DO have the right to have them removed from your PRIVATE PROPERTY.

Be thankful that we still have that right.



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenThunders
It's fairly typically really and not at all surprising. So called free speech is very limited, especially if it's unpopular. Try for example, preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ from your new testament on a street corner in San Francisco or Berkeley CA. Many preachers have been arrested in these places and have had their belongings confiscated.

I actually feel sorry for the nutty LaRouche followers. They seem to routinely get the crap beaten out of them, and it's been happening this way for over 30 years.

Freedom of speech is not limited. It's the way it's presented that makes it offending and therefore takes away of other peoples rights is when it is no longer freedom of speech and just plain old rudeness. The man in the video was asked multiple times to leave. Even the lady in pink was nice to him and then he started yelling.


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

en.wikipedia.org...
As the Bill of Rights states it states to peacefully assemble. No lets look at the definition of a peaceful assembly: Using common sense you can connect peaceful, which is to act without violence and towards peace. assembly is a gathering of people.

Since the man responded with anger and a spouting of hateful words towards the security guards he broke his right to publicly assemble and speak his mind. The guards did not in any way shape or form break the Bill of Rights or any laws in place in (Alaska?).



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by pryingopen3rdeye

Originally posted by KILL_DOGG

he was trespassing on private property and got what he deserved.


so what then will you think when public property no longer exists,

and all land is owned in some fashion to a private individual?

should we then fall in line and obey?

public or private, i agree that any land with public access has public rights.

if you dont want protestors on your private property then do not allow public access.

besides it doesnt matter who's property he is on, free speech is an inalienable right, they took him away for trespassing, and they declared him as the only trespasser out of the crowd because of his speech.

that is not free speech.


Am I supposed to erect a razor wire fence around my property or petition the city to move the road I live on? How do I prevent public access to my private property? Private security? Oh the irony. When there is no public property left, we will all just come to your land and scream whatever we like, ok? If people come on my property to say anything I do not want to hear, chances are they will wish armed guards and a camera had been around. How does free speech trump private property?



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 10:43 PM
link   
That's not public property. This has been already posted and that established. Lemme find the other thread...

Here

[edit on 4/9/2010 by PsykoOps]



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 10:57 PM
link   

[size=10]OBAMA



2012



what? i have free speech.



_____________________________

is this on fair grounds? you know, where families take their children to have fun on rides and play games? eat cotton candy and blooming onions, and win stuffed animals?


if mommy and daddy wanted me to see this kind of stuff we could have stayed home and watched civil rights leader Glenn Beck on Fox "News".




obama 2012,
et



p.s. this is not politcal trolling. i have the right to free speech.


post post script: obama 2012



edited to add: i would have helped the guy, but prior to him getting manhandled, as best as i could. i aslo know if a person can yell, they can obviously breath. this guy had an agenda, and went there looking for a fight. he found it. if he didn't want conflict, he would have been less confrontational.


[edit on 4-9-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I'm all for free speech, ....

But at the same time, I dont want to hear some drunk old guy yell things at me while I'm trying to enjoy my goddam cotton candy.

He was arrested for disturbing the peace prolly, or some obscure law for being a public nuissance. I dont think they had anything against what the guy was saying, or him personallly.

But if you go anywhere yelling stuff that people dont want to hear, you best believe your goint to be removed, its bad for business, and they dont want people annoying customers/public.

If this guy was yelling about Jesus, you guys would be singing a different tune, he just so happened to be yelling about obama.



posted on Sep, 4 2010 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Xionmir
 


You seem not to recognize that the freedom of speech provision, and the right to assembly provision are quite separate. Which is surprising since not only are they separated by a semicolon and the word "or," but you even define the word "assembly" for us. Clearly this man is an individual, not a gathering of people. Angry speech is protected. Unpopular speech is protected. "Peace" is not part of that clause at all, hence your argument is misguided and incorrect.
Also, there is plenty of precedent for the protection of free speech rights on private property, and yes, public access is cited as a rationale.
I agree, however, that it is NOT expressly assured federally (though it is in some states' constitutions, such as California) That doesn't change the fact that the man was illegally assaulted. Not one bit.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join