Its legal for your Facebook friends to show your profile to police - Polidicks

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319334]Exactly! What fucking victim is there to their crime? [/QUOTE] I'm really not following you here. They where arrested for not leaving the building after being told too, not for applying for a marriage license.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319334] ahahaha MLK Jr. was a terrorist to you? [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] Peaceful protest does nothing, civil disobedience is better.[/QUOTE] Yeah and civil disobedience is seriously a synonym for refusing to follow the law. You don't follow/break the law, guess what? You get fined/arrested. While civil protest may not get stuff done immediately, civil disobedience doesn't help much either. I feel as though I have proven my point that they didn't get arrested solely because they asked for a marriage license (whether you refuse to see it or not) so I am going back to lurk mode in this thread.

It wasn't a victimless crime because it wasn't a crime. [editline]19th August 2012[/editline] grrr my automerge

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319262]Yes it was! They refused to leave until they got something they have a right to. The government arrested them for it.[/QUOTE] They weren't arrested for asking for a marriage license, they were arrested for refusing to leave the building.

[QUOTE=Paramud;37319448]They weren't arrested for asking for a marriage license, they were arrested for refusing to leave the building.[/QUOTE] Who was the fucking victim? [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=legolover122;37319393]Yeah and civil disobedience is seriously a synonym for refusing to follow the law. You don't follow/break the law, guess what? You get fined/arrested. While civil protest may not get stuff done immediately, civil disobedience doesn't help much either. I feel as though I have proven my point that they didn't get arrested solely because they asked for a marriage license (whether you refuse to see it or not) so I am going back to lurk mode in this thread.[/QUOTE] This just in, the civil rights movement didn't help anything.

[QUOTE=legolover122;37319132]Lol. Thats like if I robbed a store and shot someone because they were running and I said "I wouldn't have shot them if they didn't run" as an excuse to get out of it.[/QUOTE] standing around killing someone yeah totally comparable bro

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319489]Who was the fucking victim?[/QUOTE] There really wasn't a victim, it was just disrupting to the general public. I suppose you could say the general public where the victims if you wanted too. Those laws are in effect for that reason. There wouldn't really be a victim if I parked my car in the middle of the road, its just very disrupting. I'm really not sure where you are going with this.

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;37319521]standing around killing someone yeah totally comparable bro[/QUOTE] Please read [quote] [QUOTE=yawmwen;37319100]They would have left if they weren't denied a service.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=legolover122;37319132]Lol. Thats like if I robbed a store and shot someone because they were running and I said "I wouldn't have shot them if they didn't run" [B]as an excuse[/B] to get out of it.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=yawmwen;37319205]Because asking for a marriage license is robbing a store. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=legolover122;37319241] And I NEVER said asking for a marriage license is like robbing a store. NOT ONCE. I was comparing your "they wouldn't have stayed (breaking the law) if they allowed them to get married" and was comparing it to "I wouldn't have shot the guy (breaking the law) if he didn't run" [B]pointing out how flawed that logic was if someone used those two [I]excuses[/I].[/B][/QUOTE] [/quote] These posts. I was comparing his excuse. NOT the action. I NEVER said standing around on government property = shooting someone. Jesus fuck its like I have this conversation every goddamn time I make a comparison...

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;37319558]There really wasn't a victim, it was just disrupting to the general public. I suppose you could say the general public where the victims if you wanted too. Those laws are in effect for that reason. There wouldn't really be a victim if I parked my car in the middle of the road, its just very disrupting. I'm really not sure where you are going with this.[/QUOTE] My point is that there are victimless crimes dude.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319489]Who was the fucking victim?[/QUOTE] You can't stand around and disrupt a business without them attempting to force you off the premises. If they ask you to leave and you refuse to, they're fully within their legal rights to have you escorted out.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319578]My point is that there are victimless crimes dude.[/QUOTE] The example you originally used made absolutely no sense at all, because it wasn't a crime to begin with. And the example you are using now is not necessarily victimless as I said, it is a law that is in effect for a reason.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;37319666]because it wasn't a crime to begin with. [/QUOTE] Hey BusterBluth, what is the opposite of legal?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319709]Hey BusterBluth, what is the opposite of legal?[/QUOTE] Asking for a marriage license is legal. You said that it was a victimless crime, but it wasn't , because its not a crime to ask for a marriage license. [B]It is not illegal to ask for a marriage license[/B]

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;37319752]Asking for a marriage license is legal. You said that it was a victimless crime, but it wasn't , because its not a crime to ask for a marriage license. [B]It is not illegal to ask for a marriage license[/B][/QUOTE] Then why were these people arrested for asking for a marriage license? [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] There was no reason to ask them to leave except for the fact that they were asking for something they could not legally get.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319489]Who was the fucking victim? [/QUOTE] The victim(s) would be anyone trying to use the building for its correct purpose.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319761]Then why were these people arrested for asking for a marriage license? [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] There was no reason to ask them to leave except for the fact that they were asking for something they could not legally get.[/QUOTE] [quote]After being denied, the pair handcuffed their arms together and sat down on the office floor at the front of the line of applicants. [/quote] That is in the very article you posted. Did you even read it? [editline]19th August 2012[/editline] Come on

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319761]Then why were these people arrested for asking for a marriage license? [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] There was no reason to ask them to leave except for the fact that they were asking for something they could not legally get.[/QUOTE] They were more than likely asked to leave due to causing a nuisance. Can you really not understand this? Is it really that complex?

Would these people have been asked to leave if they were straight?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319916]Would these people have been asked to leave if they were straight?[/QUOTE] If they refused to leave and handcuffed themselves, blocking other people from entering? Of course.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319916]Would these people have been asked to leave if they were straight?[/QUOTE] If they handcuffed themselves in front of the line of applicants, yes.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319916]Would these people have been asked to leave if they were straight?[/QUOTE] No because they would not have been in their wasting everyone's time, they would have gone in and got what they were legally entitled to and left. Are you [B]really[/B] not understanding this? I am genuinely starting to wonder if you are dumb. Its a bit like if a 13 year old goes and attempts to get some sort of driving license and is refused due to their age. This itself is not a crime (they are just trying to obtain a service that does not exist to them), however if they were to then cause a nuisance (for example, by hand cuffing themselves in a way that prevents others entering the building) they would be committing a crime for which they could well be arrested for.

[QUOTE=BusterBluth;37319941]If they handcuffed themselves in front of the line of applicants, yes.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Paramud;37319932]If they refused to leave and handcuffed themselves, blocking other people from entering? Of course.[/QUOTE] Why did they handcuff themselves?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319973]Why did they handcuff themselves?[/QUOTE] To protest the fact that in that state they do not have the legal right to get married. Jesus christ, this is just going round and round in circles.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319973]Why did they handcuff themselves?[/QUOTE] Because they were pissed off. It doesn't really matter, their crime wasn't asking for a marriage license, it was disrupting the work flow and refusing to leave when asked.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37319973]Why did they handcuff themselves?[/QUOTE] Why are you doing this?

[QUOTE=Jsm;37319987]To protest the fact that in that state they do not have the legal right to get married. Jesus christ, this is just going round and round in circles.[/QUOTE] So if they were straight, they would have gotten their marriage license, they wouldn't have handcuffed themselves, and therefore wouldn't have been asked to leave. Therefore, they were arrested for trying to get a marriage license. [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] Do I need to spell it any more clearly?

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37320034]So if they were straight, they would have gotten their marriage license, they wouldn't have handcuffed themselves, and therefore wouldn't have been asked to leave. Therefore, they were arrested for trying to get a marriage license. [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] Do I need to spell it any more clearly?[/QUOTE] I give up, you are quite clearly dumb as a rock and or a troll.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37320034]So if they were straight, they would have gotten their marriage license, they wouldn't have handcuffed themselves, and therefore wouldn't have been asked to leave. Therefore, they were arrested for trying to get a marriage license. [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] Do I need to spell it any more clearly?[/QUOTE] Your logic is astounding.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37320034]So if they were straight, they would have gotten their marriage license, they wouldn't have handcuffed themselves, and therefore wouldn't have been asked to leave. Therefore, they were arrested for trying to get a marriage license. [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] Do I need to spell it any more clearly?[/QUOTE] No, you're spelling it crystal clear. You're just wrong. It doesn't matter why they were refusing to leave. They could've been protesting Obama's health care policies. They would've been arrested [b]for refusing to leave[/b].

[QUOTE=Paramud;37320058]No, you're spelling it crystal clear. You're just wrong. It doesn't matter why they were refusing to leave. They could've been protesting Obama's health care policies. They would've been arrested [b]for refusing to leave[/b].[/QUOTE] In other words, for being gay. [editline]20th August 2012[/editline] And trying to get a marriage license.