Mr. Jefferson Would Not Approve

[Roadie]

And this a problem why? They were given notice of what NOT to do, and they did it anyway.... Trespassing, right? Kudos to the officers, they were respectful, and weren't "badge heavy" in the slightest. The people were looking for trouble.... and found it.

Are Americans this stupid? Dance has many political, cultural, religious, and even military meanings to a variety of cultures around the world. Hell, at he very least, it's disrespectful.... to the honor bestowed upon Jefferson.

Further, courts have held for eons that monuments and memorials are "non-public" forums.

The Supreme Court has held that as to such nonpublic forum property, the government’s authority is indeed quite broad, so long as the restriction is reasonable and viewpoint-neutral. The Memorial is a good example of a nonpublic forum, a place not open, by tradition or by government decision, for public expression;

Wait, I missed this post..

Body slamming and choking a man for dancing is not

"badge heavy" in the slightest

?? Really??

When you are asked what the charges will be if you arrest someone, you feel a proper reply is "you'll find out"??

 

[rambone]

STOP RESISTING YOU DANCING TERRORIST

 

[TRWXXA]

First of all... IMHO, if you're a big enough loser to take part in a "flash mob", you probably need to be bludgeoned over the head with a baton.

That being said...

The US Park Police and the DC Capitol Police are just about the biggest bunch of thugs ever to don uniforms (yes, that might include the Gestapo). They're cut from the same cloth as your typical TSA tyrant.

I feel great empathy for the guy with the video camera who get shoved out of the memorial @ 2:06. In 1999, I was escorted out of Arlington National Cemetery because my video camera was "too high of a capacity" -- whatever that means. Three of the US Park Police's "finest" grabbed me from behind at JFK's tomb and ushered me out the front gate. When I demanded to see a supervisor, and be shown the statute I was violating, I was told, "Go f#%& yourself!", and threatened with arrest if I didn't "keep walkin'".

Nice, huh?

 

[serpicostraight]

No, it's not.... unless you deem anything owned by the govt public property. As for requiring a permit, that depends. If permits are universally given, with consideration given to the ability to control the crowd (ie to protect the rest of the public), then I would say no. If permits are approved denied on the whim of an individual, I'd say yes.

anything owned by the government? the government owns nothing it belongs to we the people. the government works for us but its mindsets like that causing the attitude that we work for them.

 

[jsharmon7]

Wait, I missed this post..

Body slamming and choking a man for dancing is not ?? Really??

When you are asked what the charges will be if you arrest someone, you feel a proper reply is "you'll find out"??

Without getting into the debate of what I think about this video, I have a question for you. This question applies here, but I see it all over INGO and this prompted me to ask it. So:

You're a police officer. There is a rule at a park/building/etc. that someone is breaking. You walk up to them and inform them that they are breaking this rule. They continue to do what you just asked them not to do. Your next move is most likely to ask them to leave the property for repeatedly breaking the rules that you've informed them not to break. Now they refuse to leave and continue to break the rule. What does Officer Roadie do? How long are you going to stand there asking them to stop breaking the rule and leave? Do you give up? Do you arrest them? If you elect to handcuff them and arrest them for trespassing, what do you do when they resist? What do you do when others jump in to help them when you're trying to put them in handcuffs?

Edit: I'm just looking for insight into how people here would have handled it better. If we can armchair QB the police, I think it's fair to give suggestions as to what they could have done better.

 

[hornadylnl]

Without getting into the debate of what I think about this video, I have a question for you. This question applies here, but I see it all over INGO and this prompted me to ask it. So:

You're a police officer. There is a rule at a park/building/etc. that someone is breaking. You walk up to them and inform them that they are breaking this rule. They continue to do what you just asked them not to do. Your next move is most likely to ask them to leave the property for repeatedly breaking the rules that you've informed them not to break. Now they refuse to leave and continue to break the rule. What does Officer Roadie do? How long are you going to stand there asking them to stop breaking the rule and leave? Do you give up? Do you arrest them? If you elect to handcuff them and arrest them for trespassing, what do you do when they resist? What do you do when others jump in to help them when you're trying to put them in handcuffs?

Edit: I'm just looking for insight into how people here would have handled it better. If we can armchair QB the police, I think it's fair to give suggestions as to what they could have done better.

I wouldn't enforce a no dancing rule. If the protesters were defacing the monument, it would be a different story.

I'll ask the question again. Do you guys acknowledge every tantrum your child throws?

 

[rambone]

I wouldn't enforce this lame-assed rule either. Get real. Sit back and wait for some real criminal activity. Quit looking for an excuse to flex your taser finger and start unnecessary confrontations.

Its the difference between Peace Officer mentality and Enforcer mentality.

 

[serpicostraight]

I wouldn't enforce this lame-assed rule either. Get real. Sit back and wait for some real criminal activity. Quit looking for an excuse to flex your taser finger and start unnecessary confrontations.

Its the difference between Peace Officer mentality and Enforcer mentality.

but da law is da law. they are only following orders. its for officer safety. think about the children. save the whales. did i miss anything?

 

[Roadie]

Without getting into the debate of what I think about this video, I have a question for you. This question applies here, but I see it all over INGO and this prompted me to ask it. So:

You're a police officer. There is a rule at a park/building/etc. that someone is breaking. You walk up to them and inform them that they are breaking this rule. They continue to do what you just asked them not to do. Your next move is most likely to ask them to leave the property for repeatedly breaking the rules that you've informed them not to break. Now they refuse to leave and continue to break the rule. What does Officer Roadie do? How long are you going to stand there asking them to stop breaking the rule and leave? Do you give up? Do you arrest them? If you elect to handcuff them and arrest them for trespassing, what do you do when they resist? What do you do when others jump in to help them when you're trying to put them in handcuffs?

Edit: I'm just looking for insight into how people here would have handled it better. If we can armchair QB the police, I think it's fair to give suggestions as to what they could have done better.

Well, considering the guy he body slammed appeared to be letting the Officer lead him, and the only "resistance" was him refusing to go to his knees, I think that if *I* were a LEO I would have continued to lead him out of the building, only using force if force were applied by the citizen.

That being said, I would not have arrested anyone, especially a couple that were just arm in arm swaying back n forth. My conscience would not have allowed me to sleep at nite knowing I arrested someone for slow dancing.

 

[Roadie]

I wouldn't enforce a no dancing rule. If the protesters were defacing the monument, it would be a different story.

I'll ask the question again. Do you guys acknowledge every tantrum your child throws?

Agreed. If the Union "protesters" at the WI Statehouse weren't arrested for THEIR type of protest, defacement, violent threats, and so on, I SURE as heck am not arresting someone for slow dancing!

 

[NYFelon]

but da law is da law. they are only following orders. its for officer safety. think about the children. save the whales. did i miss anything?

that tickled me somethin' awful.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Agreed. If the Union "protesters" at the WI Statehouse weren't arrested for THEIR type of protest, defacement, violent threats, and so on, I SURE as heck am not arresting someone for slow dancing!

I believe the protesters at the Wisconsin Statehouse were in a public assembly gallery. When they started to be disruptive to the vote, they were removed.

So just so I'm clear.... protesting without permission should be allowed at any National Parks Service facility, in any fashion, at anytime, regardless of the place, with no prohibition as to where?

 

[thompal]

I believe the protesters at the Wisconsin Statehouse were in a public assembly gallery. When they started to be disruptive to the vote, they were removed.

So just so I'm clear.... protesting without permission should be allowed at any National Parks Service facility, in any fashion, at anytime, regardless of the place, with no prohibition as to where?

Do you not find it just slightly ironic that what you advocate results in people asking the government for permission to protest the government?

Can you guess what the government's answer would be when you went to the with hat in hand, and politely asked them for permission to protest against their infringement of rights?

I mean really. Did Jefferson ask the King permission to protest? Did the the people in Boston ask the King for his permission to throw some tea in the harbor?

 

[ElsiePeaRN]

I guess I am just missing something. The POINT of civil disobedience is to get arrested. The protestors got exactly what they were after in order to call attention to a stupid law. I am not uinderstanding all the outrage. Their mission was accomplished.

 

[Roadie]

I guess I am just missing something. The POINT of civil disobedience is to get arrested. The protestors got exactly what they were after in order to call attention to a stupid law. I am not uinderstanding all the outrage. Their mission was accomplished.

If arrest was indeed their goal, then so be it, but for a LEO to body slam a guy and choke him, and another LEO to kneel on a guy's back, for the crime of dancing, is unconscionable.

I have seen murder suspects on COPS treated better..

 

[thompal]

I guess I am just missing something. The POINT of civil disobedience is to get arrested. The protestors got exactly what they were after in order to call attention to a stupid law. I am not uinderstanding all the outrage. Their mission was accomplished.

The outrage isn't over the fact that they were arrested. Civil disobedience REQUIRES that they be arrested, and the more people that get arrested, the more effective the protest.

However, PEACEFUL civil disobedience requires that both sides play by the rules. A protester exists where the government doesn't want them. The police ask them to leave. The protester refuses to leave. Two or more officers carry, without injury, the protester to waiting police cars. They are then taken to a processing station where they are processed and given court dates.

If the police have decided to escalate to the point where their response is violence against the protesters, then the protesters will adjust their tactics and response to be less passive.

If the police who were on that film are not dealt with by their superiors, and if the police tactics shown on that film are now the normal procedure, then I fear that things are going to be considerably less passive at future protests.

Heavy-handed tactics rarely have the result that the government wants in the long run.

 

[rambone]

I guess I am just missing something. The POINT of civil disobedience is to get arrested. The protestors got exactly what they were after in order to call attention to a stupid law. I am not uinderstanding all the outrage. Their mission was accomplished.

The mission is to restore free expression in public places.

Mission not yet accomplished.

However, attention is being drawn to the infringements of citizen's rights and to the strong-arm tactics used by the enforcers. People are waking up to the magnitude of our country's problems. It finally clicked out there in someone's head... Wow... You can't even slow dance in front of Thomas Jefferson without getting a knee on the back of your skull. Are we still a free country?

 

[ElsiePeaRN]

If the police have decided to escalate to the point where their response is violence against the protesters, then the protesters will adjust their tactics and response to be less passive.

If the police who were on that film are not dealt with by their superiors, and if the police tactics shown on that film are now the normal procedure, then I fear that things are going to be considerably less passive at future protests.

Heavy-handed tactics rarely have the result that the government wants in the long run.

I guess I'll have to watch the video again, because what I remember from watching it is that everything was going along as expected until one of the protestors jumped on the other one to try to prevent him from being handcuffed or something (actually, I have no idea why he did what he did. It was stupid. Coming from someone who has participated in a number of non-violent civil disobedient actions, that is not a technique we ever used in the 70s Maybe I'm just an old fart, but we used to just go limp - not try to dry hump our fellow protestor's legs to try to prevent the officer taking him into custody. I don't remember anyone ever putting a knee on any of our necks and shouting "Stop resisting!" That dude did appear to be resisting in my opinion and it was him that started the escalation.

I agree the law or court decision -whatever it was-- it outrageous, I approve of calling attention to it, and as rambone said, "Mission is not yet accomplished" and he's right. While this mission may be accomplished, there is more that needs to be done.

But I'm not going to demonize the cops in this case. Some of these protestors were nimrods.

 

[rambone]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGw2e7P8g-s[/ame]

 

[lashicoN]

My conscience would not have allowed me to sleep at nite knowing I arrested someone for slow dancing.

But you've got morals. Not everyone has morals and I'm sure the people who arrest couples for slow dancing sleep like babies...until Judgment Day.

So just so I'm clear.... protesting without permission should be allowed at any National Parks Service facility, in any fashion, at anytime, regardless of the place, with no prohibition as to where?

Without permission? Are you serious? Yes, free people should be free to protest their government on public property, without causing damage or impeding business, without first getting permission from said government.