• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Man Arrested Outside Calif. DMV for Reading His Bible Out Loud

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Ninjahedge said:
Not directly associable.

You are comparing a protest to a man yelling at bus riders.

I assume that you were also against the Tea Party "rally's", or do you believe political dissonance can only be expressed at a scheduled, and paid for, gathering?
Click to expand...

yea you are right, this guy didnt cost cities MILLIONS in over time for city workers or cost millions in lost revenue and property damage.

if he was reading the communist manifesto or the bill of rights would he still be arrested?
 
DominionSeraph said:
You gave an unsupported assertion of a thing.
I said, "Prove it."
You then gave another unsupported assertion of the thing.

That is not proof.

Prove that God has commanded such a thing. For you to do this you must prove that God exists.
Either do this or admit you have nothing.
child of wonder is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Ah, so you are talking about something other than the discussion that you interjected yourself into. You really need to use your "superior intellect" and say such things from the start. If you enter an already existing coversation but change the topic, you really need to make that clear. They way you did it makes people doubt you have this "superior intellect" you proudly proclaim you have.

Now that you have clarified what you muddied up, it is easy. I use faith to say God exists.
 
OutHouse said:
yea you are right, this guy didnt cost cities MILLIONS in over time for city workers or cost millions in lost revenue and property damage.

if he was reading the communist manifesto or the bill of rights would he still be arrested?
Click to expand...

The bill of rights, yes. Libs find that offensive. The communist manifesto, of course not. That is something everyone needs to be force fed. They have nothing to lose but their chains, after all.
 
cybrsage said:
Ah, so you are talking about something other than the discussion that you interjected yourself into. You really need to use your "superior intellect" and say such things from the start.
Click to expand...

I used the word "prove." You have the internet, thus you have access to a dictionary. Your inability to follow standard English is no failing of mine.

L2Read.

cybrsage said:
I use faith to say God exists.
Click to expand...

If you're going to be delusional, why not go with something that's actually won some awards?

mahoushoujoyesypuellama.png


You really can't top Madoka.

P&N is not the place for such graphics. You've been asked/told before not to "so express yourself" outside of your OT pony thread. Consider this your last formal warning on the matter.

Perknose
Forum Director
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DominionSeraph said:
I used the word "prove." You have the internet, thus you have access to a dictionary. Your inability to follow standard English is no failing of mine.
Click to expand...

You are one of those people who butt into a conversation, says something barely related to what they were discussion, then goes about saying how everyone is not as smart as you are when they look at you like you are a freak, right?
 
IBMer said:
I don't have a problem with freedom of speech at all. What I do have a problem with is someone harassing people and then calling it free speech.
Click to expand...

harassment (either harris-meant or huh-rass-meant) n. the act of systematic and/or continued unwanted and annoying actions of one party or a group, including threats and demands. The purposes may vary, including racial prejudice, personal malice, an attempt to force someone to quit a job or grant sexual favors, apply illegal pressure to collect a bill, or merely gain sadistic pleasure from making someone fearful or anxious. Such activities may be the basis for a lawsuit if due to discrimination based on race or sex, a violation on the statutory limitations on collection agencies, involve revenge by an ex-spouse, or be shown to be a form of blackmail ("I'll stop bothering you, if you'll go to bed with me"). The victim may file a petition for a "stay away" (restraining) order, intended to prevent contact by the offensive party. A systematic pattern of harassment by an employee against another worker may subject the employer to a lawsuit for failure to protect the worker. (See: harass, sexual harassment)

I don't think this applies.
 
child of wonder said:
The people waiting outside in line for the DMV to open.
Click to expand...

So he has the right to free speech in a public place as long as there's no one there to listen to him? If there are people there to listen to him as they wait for something to open then he loses his right to free speech?
 
OutHouse said:
yea you are right, this guy didnt cost cities MILLIONS in over time for city workers or cost millions in lost revenue and property damage.
Click to expand...

Waaaah. Cross thread. Take it to the appropriate one and B+M there.

if he was reading the communist manifesto or the bill of rights would he still be arrested?
Click to expand...

Yep. Especially if he was yelling it at the top of his lungs to people who were a captive audience.
 
monovillage said:
So he has the right to free speech in a public place as long as there's no one there to listen to him?
Click to expand...

So long as they are not being held there is my guess.

If people are free to come and go then he is free to talk to them, but if they are waiting for something that they need to be there for (lets face it, DMV is not a "Oh I will do this later when it is less crowded...") then no.

If there are people there to listen to him as they wait for something to open then he loses his right to free speech?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant.
 
Ninjahedge said:
Waaaah. Cross thread. Take it to the appropriate one and B+M there.
Yep. Especially if he was yelling it at the top of his lungs to people who were a captive audience.
Click to expand...

The captive audience is not so cut and dried.

Does the First Amendment Protect a Right to Annoy Other People?

If one is a captive at home, at work, and, at least as seen by some judges, in transit between home and work, it might seem that the captive audience rationale applies nearly everywhere. But in fact, that would be a considerable exaggeration. The Supreme Court in Frisby and other cases has clearly stated that the captive audience principle generally does not apply.
Click to expand...
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20060426.html

I'm also worried that some people are so ready to embrace limits on free speech in this religious case, but if it's applied in their own political case they'd scream bloody murder. I will always choose to stand with free speech, even when it's something I despise.
 
monovillage said:
So he has the right to free speech in a public place as long as there's no one there to listen to him? If there are people there to listen to him as they wait for something to open then he loses his right to free speech?
Click to expand...

See Ninjahedge's response.

He has the freedom to speak so long as the audience is not held captive AND he is not doing so on state property.

Both were the case here.

You and I cannot go to the State capitol and scream about the evils of this or that, read Harry Potter aloud, or rap along to a Vanilla Ice tune. One, we're on state property and don't have a permit to demonstrate and two, we have no right to audibly bombard people who have no choice but to visit the capitol to conduct business.
 
child of wonder said:
See Ninjahedge's response.

He has the freedom to speak so long as the audience is not held captive AND he is not doing so on state property.

Both were the case here.

You and I cannot go to the State capitol and scream about the evils of this or that, read Harry Potter aloud, or rap along to a Vanilla Ice tune. One, we're on state property and don't have a permit to demonstrate and two, we have no right to audibly bombard people who have no choice but to visit the capitol to conduct business.
Click to expand...

You find nothing amusing or outrageous that you have to get a permit to have free speech on public property (state property)? I do, I find it laughable that there are those type of restrictions on free speech, protest, religious speech on public land.
 
Ninjahedge said:
Waaaah. Cross thread. Take it to the appropriate one and B+M there.



Yep. Especially if he was yelling it at the top of his lungs to people who were a captive audience.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't someone compare OWS to this incident, this is P&N where false equivalencies rule the day...
 
monovillage said:
You find nothing amusing or outrageous that you have to get a permit to have free speech on public property (state property)? I do, I find it laughable that there are those type of restrictions on free speech, protest, religious speech on public land.
Click to expand...

If the person is using their free speech to hold some sort of organized demonstration, then, yes, I feel they should have a permit to do so. The men in the article are free to speak to each other about the Bible, ask others if they'd be willing to speak about it, and so forth. They're not allowed to simply read the Bible or any other book aloud ad nauseum to people who either have to listen to it or give up on visiting the DMV that day.
 
child of wonder said:
If the person is using their free speech to hold some sort of organized demonstration, then, yes, I feel they should have a permit to do so. The men in the article are free to speak to each other about the Bible, ask others if they'd be willing to speak about it, and so forth. They're not allowed to simply read the Bible or any other book aloud ad nauseum to people who either have to listen to it or give up on visiting the DMV that day.
Click to expand...

Nice that you added in that "organized demonstration" it kind of changes your earlier post doesn't it?
 
monovillage said:
Nice that you added in that "organized demonstration" it kind of changes your earlier post doesn't it?
Click to expand...

You're right, it does.

So do you feel everyone has the right to make an impromptu choice to head for the State capitol building and loudly read "War and Peace?" It's not organized.
 
monovillage said:
I agree 100%! The guy is a jerk, but the city was wrong.
Click to expand...

Why was the city wrong here? OWS had to get permits for protests and were only allowed to protest at certain times and in certain places. When they violated these restrictions, which they did on multiple occasions, the police took actions including pepper spray and many arrests. Speech in the public square is subject to time, place and manner restrictions. If they apply to political protests - and clearly they do - then they apply in this case as well.
 
woolfe9999 said:
Why was the city wrong here? OWS had to get permits for protests and were only allowed to protest at certain times and in certain places. When they violated these restrictions, which they did on multiple occasions, the police took actions including pepper spray and many arrests. Speech in the public square is subject to time, place and manner restrictions. If they apply to political protests - and clearly they do - then they apply in this case as well.
Click to expand...

My bet is that if you check only a few of the OWS protests got permits, most protests don't get permits and in my opinion shouldn't have to get them. You think the 3 or 4 month occupy stays at various public areas across the country had permits?

I'm of the opinion that the 1st Amendment recognizes our right to free speech, not right to free speech as long as you pay for a permit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top