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.

 

City puts cost of Quran-burning security at $200,000, sends bill to church

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   

City puts cost of Quran-burning security at $200,000, sends bill to church


www.nwfdailynews.com

Authorities say security for last weekend's canceled Quran burning at a central Florida church cost around $200,000. City officials say they expect the church to pay.

more than 200 officers were on duty last weekend patrolling the church
Another 160 sheriff's deputies were also working because of the planned protest at Dove World Outreach Center.

Gainesville City Manager Russ Blackburn said he doesn't know if the city has legal authority to compel the church to pay.

Pastor Terry Jones
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   
In other News Pastor Jones says he wants to move his church to Tampa Bay
www.msnbc.msn.com...





Before he goes, though, Gainesville authorities say they want him to cover the cost of policing the Dove World Outreach Center for the planned Quran burning that never happened, The Gainesville Sun reported.


Lol, well although this does seem like a very excellent expection, of course we all know it doesn't make any sense, this is not like the parents who pulled that hoax by pretending their son was in that flying aluminum foil spaceship that was flying over states.

This is a very very big potential discussion on several things
1) Should the state govt. allow the forcing of the church to pay?
2) Should this set as a precedence against free speech?

I'm not saying these are legitimate debates, but you know how govt. likes to expand it's powers, so perhaps it's a inevitable discussion.

Thoughts?

www.nwfdailynews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


I think that the Balloon boy's dad was ordered to pay some kind of restitution as part of his sentencing, wasn't he?

This Pastor Jones is a nut case and if I lived in that city, I wouldn't want to pay for his security, would you?

He wouldn't have to think about wanting to move he'd probably get thrown out of town just like they did in Germany a year or two ago. I read that people there in Cologne Germany were afraid to go to church for fear the church would be attacked while they were in it.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Usually I would maybe say I'm against something like this. He didn't ask for protection, so on and so forth, but its about time A State gets ANY money from a Church.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   
I understand what you guys are saying, I completely 100% do.
But this will set a precedence for govt. involvement in free speech
Next thing you know legislation and a new social issues watchdog govt. department will be created

Do not stray from the path!

The economy, personal responsibility MUST be left to the people... and it's us who failed here!



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   
While I don't particularly like what this Pastor Jones tried to pull off, the question is whether or not cities charge other groups for providing them security. I'm talking about union protests, gay pride parades, Minute Men/Arizona 1070 law protesters, and other instances where a large group of people gather and need to be supervised so that things don't spiral out of control. Does the city ask that these groups pay for the security provided to them? Or is the cost of security for any event already paid for by tax payers every year? I don't know how the city budget works when it comes to these things, but it's worth asking. If they don't charge these other groups for security, how do they determine who gets charged and who doesn't? Hmmm.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
I understand what you guys are saying, I completely 100% do.
But this will set a precedence for govt. involvement in free speech
Next thing you know legislation and a new social issues watchdog govt. department will be created

Do not stray from the path!

The economy, personal responsibility MUST be left to the people... and it's us who failed here!


I think you may be making a good point. If groups are expected to foot the bill for security every time they want to publicly (in large groups) discuss any controversial topic, they may think twice before organizing anything. I'd really like to know if everyone is expected to pay the security bill, whether it's the love parade or the Ku Klux Klan marching down the street.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


What, about this case. is related to free speech?

I think the church should pay.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   
The Uk should do the very same and send the pope's bill back to the vatican.

I'd drink to that.




posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
What, about this case. is related to free speech?

I think the church should pay.


Everything!
The loophole however is a hate crime, but they weren't hating on an individual belonging to a particular race or set of beliefs, just rather a book.

Everything about this is about free speech, here it is free speech completely based on hate and ignorance.
Nonetheless........



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by 2manyquestions
 


Churches don't pay taxes therefore they are not paying for that security the city is providing them. If the church is provoking acts of violence, then it is only 'just' to ask them for the costs of security. Everyone else pays taxes, hence gay groups pay taxes, so for the city to provide security for them is a must, without any cost.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   
If the church asked for protection, sure pay up.

Otherwise, all these policemen would have been on the clock anyway at taxpayer expense. Who told them all to take a break at the same place?



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by hinky
If the church asked for protection, sure pay up.

Otherwise, all these policemen would have been on the clock anyway at taxpayer expense. Who told them all to take a break at the same place?


Churches don't pay tax..



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
Churches don't pay tax..


Hi, excuse me for my ignorance
But are you saying that instituations that do not pay tax also do not pay for security?

Do you have any links to prove this?
I am not trying to prove you wrong here, if this is something that I did not know, then I would like to educate myself and know.

Thanks



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Ask yourself this, what are taxes used for? One of them is for security, hence the law enforcement agencies..

This is not about paying for security, this story is about a church provoking violence and wasting taxpayer's money, which makes it unjust.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism

Ask yourself this, what are taxes used for? One of them is for security, hence the law enforcement agencies..

This is not about paying for security, this story is about a church provoking violence and wasting taxpayer's money, which makes it unjust.



Ok, I guess I kind of read what you said as private security, even though from a public resource
my train of thought was not on the right track

thanks

EDIT: Wait... what does this have to do with Tax?


edit on 18-9-2010 by ModernAcademia because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   
More Proof there is a Price On
Free Speech in America.

Think of what you own as firewood
as long as you own it you should be able to burn it.
If he was going to seize other peoples books and burn those then
there is a problem.

Whats next after I read the paper I can't use it to start a fire?



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism

Ask yourself this, what are taxes used for? One of them is for security, hence the law enforcement agencies..



Police/fire respond to Churches for any problems all the time, for free. Taxes are money paid by people for a civilized state of which security is part of. (we agree)





This is not about paying for security, this story is about a church provoking violence and wasting taxpayer's money, which makes it unjust.



Provoking violence by whom? I saw no rioting in the streets of America, I saw no one killed over this in America. I saw nothing more than a citizen wishing to express his right of free speech, what exactly did you see? More importantly, where was this violence and illegal action taking place?



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
This isn't about government getting involved in free speech, this is about protecting that right to free speech.


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.


No where in that does it say that the government has to pick up the tab to protect that right of free speech.

The church should have to pay for the cost of protecting this church even though the event did not go off, the police still had to expend resources in order to protect the church.

The church should pay, that cost is not protected under the 1st Amendment.



posted on Sep, 18 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
So the police do not believe that
God was protecting his House of Worship?
I thought Faith always took care of these kind problems.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join