Feds say man deserved arrest because of "Occupy Everything" coat.
39 replies, posted
[quote]A Florida man deserved to be arrested inside the Supreme Court building last year for wearing a jacket painted with “Occupy Everything,” and is lucky he was only apprehended on unlawful entry charges, the Department of Justice says.[/quote]
[url]http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/man-deserved-arrest/[/url]
it's quite interesting that a place of so-called justice in the usa is also a place where your human rights end.
"to leave the building or remove the coat."
What the fuck? You're telling a someone to leave or be arrested because of the sign on his shirt and the ideas they represent? Do you arrest people that go near the supreme court when they wear a shirt that says "suprem court sux dix lol"?
I mean, there are laws against what he did apparently, but those laws are pretty dumb. If someone wore a shirt that said "Obama 2012" (or Romney) then technically they would have to be arrested. Fuck the "display clause".
#occupyjail
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39792095][URL]http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/man-deserved-arrest/[/URL]
it's quite interesting that a place of so-called justice in the usa is also a place where your human rights end.[/QUOTE]
Ignoring the fact that they went easy on the guy to begin with. If they truly didn't like the guy they would have as the article said charged him with the display clause. I'm pretty sure he could have found a better way to protest than just parading around the supreme court. The reason on the arrest is dumb but that doesn't mean going around trying to get arrested for it is going to help things.
wtf is up with all these florida men
[QUOTE=galenmarek;39792145]Ignoring the fact that they went easy on the guy to begin with. If they truly didn't like the guy they would have as the article said charged him with the display clause. There is no human right no go around protesting randomly.[/QUOTE]
Freedom of Expression/Speech is vital. If countries use their laws to the code just because they dislike a certain movement, and pick and choose which movements they persecute, then that's violating the laws themselves.
As far as I see it, he wasn't in there bashing shit up and causing a ruckus, he was merely wearing a shirt that represented what he believed in. I don't think any decent person should be persecuted for that.
Don't get me wrong, I don't really support the occupy movement or support any of the ideals he was displaying. I just think that people should be free to express themselves as long as they fit into society and don't cause harm. And strict adherence to laws rather than decency is what screws this situation up.
[QUOTE=galenmarek;39792145]Ignoring the fact that they went easy on the guy to begin with. If they truly didn't like the guy they would have as the article said charged him with the display clause. I'm pretty sure he could have found a better way to protest than just parading around the supreme court. The reason on the arrest is dumb but that doesn't mean going around trying to get arrested for it is going to help things.[/QUOTE]
the idea of a human right to expression and protest is precisely because protest and expression should be non-conditional. you should not be forced to submit because you are in some public building, [i]especially[/i] if that public building is a symbol of tyranny and oppression.
of course he would get arrested, but that doesn't mean it is right.
And another case of un-warranted force that will go by, just be ignored by our society's general apathy and will serve as precedent for future events.
Get pissed now, or shut up later.
My cousin received a warning from police a year or two ago just for wearing a shirt that read "Heavy Fucking Metal".
"Wearing offensive material", apparently. >_<
One of those laws created to get rid of specific groups of people you don't like with minor infractions, opinion law rubbish.
[QUOTE=lifehole;39792117]"to leave the building or remove the coat."
What the fuck? You're telling a someone to leave or be arrested because of the sign on his shirt and the ideas they represent? Do you arrest people that go near the supreme court when they wear a shirt that says "suprem court sux dix lol"?
I mean, there are laws against what he did apparently, but those laws are pretty dumb. If someone wore a shirt that said "Obama 2012" (or Romney) then technically they would have to be arrested. Fuck the "display clause".[/QUOTE]
No, they wouldn't "have to be arrested", they would have to leave or change shirts.
I can't think of any museum that wouldn't call the police if a visitor ignored repeated instructions to leave the premises.
[QUOTE=endorphinsam;39792148]wtf is up with all these florida men[/QUOTE]
[url=https://twitter.com/_FloridaMan]Florida Man just can't catch a break[/url]
As much as I think going by rules you set like 500 years ago is silly the phrase "A first amendment-free zone" doesn't really sound like something you'd describe an important American building with
Well it's kind of like what the police do for meetings of political figures or stuff like that, they arrest anyone trying to protest outside the event, but you're free to protest in the 'free speech zone' 4 blocks away where the people you're protesting against can neither see nor hear you with cops breathing down your neck just waiting for someone to start shit.
It's a cheap and risk-free way of silencing dissent without infringing the 1st amendment, and protestors can't do shit about it unless they want to spend a night in jail and end up on like 3 different government watch lists.
What was he doing there?
I believe the display cause is to keep the audience of a trial from swaying the opinion of a jury for a certain case, right? So he should've just taken off the coat.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;39792991]I believe the display cause is to keep the audience of a trial from swaying the opinion of a jury for a certain case, right? So he should've just taken off the coat.[/QUOTE]
I'd have said the same thing. A court is not the place to be wearing political statements. I'm not sure whether he was there for a trial or what, but still.
[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;39793011]I'd have said the same thing. A court is not the place to be wearing political statements. I'm not sure whether he was there for a trial or what, but still.[/QUOTE]
It's not like he was a damn juror or something, it basically amounts to how mad you want to get over someone displaying their opinion. You could not care, and everything would be fine, or you could freak the fuck out and have him arrested.
since when the police became the fashion police. It's just a jacket :v:
I believe that USG is well within its right to expel all foreign occupiers from its soil, and that this intruder was lucky to escape the death penalty.
[QUOTE=kaze4159;39792755][url=https://twitter.com/_FloridaMan]Florida Man just can't catch a break[/url][/QUOTE]
Florida Man is my favorite super hero.
Isn't it nice to know our benevolent Federal government is protecting us from these terrorists? We're so lucky to have such excellent leadership.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;39792991]I believe the display cause is to keep the audience of a trial from swaying the opinion of a jury for a certain case, right? So he should've just taken off the coat.[/QUOTE]
he was not in any trial, he was looking at a display on slavery when he was arrested.
Is it just me, or does having any passing affiliation with the Occupy movement make you a huge target for any and all law enforcement? The Tea Party gets to hold blatantly racist rallies about how Obama is a secret Kenyan socialist, but if you protest about real issues like wealth inequality, you get tear gas and nightsticks for your trouble.
Somehow I doubt somebody wearing a "Where's the Birth Certificate?" shirt would have been treated the same way.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;39797492]Is it just me, or does having any passing affiliation with the Occupy movement make you a huge target for any and all law enforcement? The Tea Party gets to hold blatantly racist rallies about how Obama is a secret Kenyan socialist, but if you protest about real issues like wealth inequality, you get tear gas and nightsticks for your trouble.
Somehow I doubt somebody wearing a "Where's the Birth Certificate?" shirt would have been treated the same way.[/QUOTE]
it's because occupy has refused to fully sell out and continues resistance and disobedience. the tea party started out similarly, but "legitimized" their political approach and then got bought out by corporate and special interests.
occupy is an opponent to the current american political and economic system; the tea party is just another branch of the system now.
[quote]Fitzgerald was not disturbing anybody, but was repeatedly told by court staff to leave the building or remove the coat. Outside the building, about a dozen “Occupy” protesters were arrested.[/quote]
What the fuck
Ironic, that in that very same building, it was determined that you could openly [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohen_v._California"]wear a jacket saying "Fuck the Draft" into a court[/URL].
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39797556][B]occupy is an opponent to the current american political and economic system[/B][/QUOTE]
lmao
AMERICA, THE LAND OF THE FREEEEEEunless you are not rich.
[QUOTE=Tacosheller;39792991]I believe the display cause is to keep the audience of a trial from swaying the opinion of a jury for a certain case, right? So he should've just taken off the coat.[/QUOTE]
Supreme Court doesn't have a jury
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.