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.

 

Federal War on Sidewalk Chalk Begins! 2 Arrested.

page: 3
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by PayMeh
And... Perhaps we should arrest people who pour water on the sidewalks.

It's not a permanent marker people. It's just friggen sidewalk chalk. Next, they should go out and spell their messages out with flower stalks and see if they get the same treatment. All we have are a bunch of people in an assumed position of authority who think people should do things simply because they are told to do so. "Sir!! Give me 10 jumping jacks or I'll arrest you for disobeying a lawful order!" Never mind they have no idea what a lawful order actually is.


But who should be responsible for cleaning up their mess? City workers? What they are doing will need to cleaned up by someone, with a cost associated.




posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by james404

Originally posted by abecedarian
For instance: as most anyone can walk up to and upon it, would you consider your porch 'public property' or a sidewalk (assuming you do not have a fence surrounding your property)?

If you paid for my porch, then I would consider it your property.


Fair enough.

Who's to say any 'public' money paid for the building occupied by the federal government in the OP video? Perhaps the building is owned by an individual or a property management company and leased to the federal government... does that make it public property? There are many unknowns here and assuming something without full knowledge of everything concerning the situation is unjustified.

The federal government built the Lincoln Memorial. Is it okay to write on it with chalk? Is it okay to disobey the law enforcers who have jurisdiction over the area and are responsible for enforcing laws regarding defacing property (regardless of the intent of the defacement)?

It's not the message being delivered that's the issue but rather the means of delivering it. We are a nation of laws and are free to operate within the boundaries established by those. We have the freedom to assemble, protest peacefully, etc. and when the individual chose to ignore the stern requests of the officer to cease defacing public property "peaceful" went out the door as did any restraint being excersised by the officer.

Looks to me like maybe both sides went a little too far.


edit on 11/17/2010 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miraj
reply to post by james404
 


It wasn't a violent knee jerk response.

You want to see a violent knee jerk response, you would have seen me arresting that guy that was still drawing. He would have more than just his fake scream. Those cops were EXTREMELY kind to him compared to what they could have done. Nor were they violent with the woman.

I can be more violent than that, too, but only if the situation demands it. These people were simply annoying and posed no threat to anyone. Police officers can be annoying, too. Next time one annoys you, try twisting his arm behind his head like that and see if they don't call it an excessive act of violence. And in court, try using the defense that you were EXTREMELY kind to him compared to what you could have done.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I don't have a big problem with this at all. These people acted like complete and total idiots and someone should duct tape the mouth closed of that screeching women who is so worried about her friends. Her voice alone should be a crime against humanity


The first women was not chalking on a public sidewalk. She was doing it on the walkway to the building, that is private property. It would be the same as if she was chalking on the side of the building. Granted it is only chalk, not a big deal at all, but she put the cop in a position to have to actually do his job.

The second arrest is misleading. The guy appears to be on a public sidewalk, but the video does not show what he was doing to cause his arrest. All the video does show is that he was resisting arrest. If he was so worried about having his arms broken or that he was being hurt from dragging, then he should have stood up and walked like a man. If he was man enough to defy authority, you can be man enough to accept the consequences of your actions. Had it been me, and I believed what I was doing was not wrong and I was arrested, I would have gladly been arrested, walked inside with my head held up high and looked forward to my day in court.

If anything this video made the cops look good. The screeching lady put her hands on a cop making an arrest, they removed her hand but did not arrest her for it which would have been well within their rights to do so.

The end with the little girl is also VERY misleading. The little girl appears to be on the Public Sidewalk drawing and NOT on the walkway of the building which is private property and she was clearly left alone to draw her little heart out. I'd say the adults could learn a lot from that little girl as clearly she was the only one there with some common sense.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kilber

But who should be responsible for cleaning up their mess? City workers? What they are doing will need to cleaned up by someone, with a cost associated.


It's chalk,
which is dust in stick form.
It will vanish just from being walked on.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by james404
 


Here's a thought though..

Maybe if everyone stopped being such assholes to cops then people wouldn't get such an asshole response. Cops are humans.. and I know quite a few cops. They are great people but you have no idea the # that they have to deal with, let alone that people act like jerks when they see them.

But here's a clue. If you don't want your arm twisted, don't keep writing on the side walk when they asked you to stop. What do you think the cop is going to do, nothing?



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   


I guess these guys would be classed as criminals? That IS criminal.. what they do is amazing!

www.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miraj
reply to post by james404
 

But here's a clue. If you don't want your arm twisted, don't keep writing on the side walk when they asked you to stop. What do you think the cop is going to do, nothing?

Once a cop starts saying "I'm exercising my authority," yes, it's a good idea to feed his ego for the moment before he escalates the situation and possibly hurts himself or someone else. Even if the abuse of power is caught on tape, he will have plenty of cheerleaders to support whatever he needs to do to prove to himself that he has fully exercised his authority.

By the way, from the looks of it, disobeying a lawful order (i.e., not obeying the officer when he starts exercising his authority for no good reason) is the only crime that was committed in this video.

edit on 17-11-2010 by james404 because: by the way



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by berkeleygal


I guess these guys would be classed as criminals? That IS criminal.. what they do is amazing!

www.huffingtonpost.com...


Possibly.... They are commissioned to create these works of art, not motivated by policital considerations to deface property; quite a bit of difference, and presumably they would obtain the proper permits / permission to do this... otherwise they very well could be criminals.



posted on Nov, 18 2010 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Miraj
reply to post by civilchallenger
 


The human mind is horribly easily influenced. Any messages other than what they see in the court room can cause an unfair bias. They did this infront of court house. Not only did they do this infront of a court house, they did this in front of and on the entrance to the court house

Now here's the real question; What were they protesting in that place? Who was being tried there that day. I guarantee there is more to this story.

Freedom of expression is not freedom to draw on public property.


Lets say that I see video tape of John Doe stealing a lamp from Kmart in court. You think I'm going to change my mind if I had seen "Free John Doe" written in the sidewalk on the way in? Obviously not. Give me and people at least some credit. We are not so retarded we base everything we decide on chalk drawings. The *only* way sidewalk chalk is going to bias the jury into changing their mind is if the case is incredibly weak in the first place. There is no possible way some plain appeal for mercy written in sidewalk chalk is going to change a strong case either way.

Therefore the bias created is a FAIR bias, not as you claim an unfair bias. So once again I will re-state that it can't be wrongful tampering unless the jury is either being harassed or threatened. Whats going on here is that you think you ought to be able to assert what you think is fair or unfair on other people by force, and fail to see that what you think is fair is simply your own opinion. I'm sorry but forcing your notion of fairness on others isn't right.

There has to be someone getting hurt before you can have grounds to use force against them. People should be able to draw anything they wish on the sidewalk in sidewalk chalk, because the next rain will wash it away. Its a practical and down to Earth idea. If its a public sidewalk I should get to decide what I write on it. Not some pie in the sky idealism. The people who don't like what I'm writing may wash it away at will.

The courtroom could have washed the words off if they disliked them so much rather than using violence.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join