wow, this isn't the America we used to know?..
- Thread starter meme
- Start date
Specifically when rented for political purposes (caucuses, town hall meetings, etc) the laws that protect freedom of expression override almost all restrictions.
The school at any other time does not allow a single political sign on the lawn of the school, when they are a polling place they must so long as it is a specific distance from the entrance. (just one example)
It is rubbish that this sign was not allowed while others were because there "is a picture"...
LOL. It is rented.
Just as it was for our caucuses and polling places, just as it is for the boy scouts and the churches.
And it really doesn't matter, once it is for something political restrictions become almost non-existent except for distance restrictions. They were clearly not near the entrance.
evince
Truthmatters
listen to the tape again , they are talking about him not putting it up again or he will be in trouble. Yes the Security guard doesnt even know why he it inforcing it but the guy standing with the guard starts to explain the laws to the protestor and funny thing the tape ends before the explanation it heard.
Gee I wonder why they didnt put the whole tape on line huh?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
because it was irrelevant. the whole issue was that he wasn't allowed to put that one single poster up. The guard said so, RIGHT ON THE TAPE. all the others were allowed, just not the one with the picture.
The guy trying to "explain" was wrong.
First amendment rules are different for schools is correct, however when the school is used for a political meeting first amendment laws override almost all restrictions except distance from the entrance restrictions.
You are simply wrong Desh, they applied the law incorrectly and with bias, they specifically did not want his sign while they allowed others. And there is no restriction on "pictures" in any of the laws dealing with signs in this arena. All of it was simply wrong. It was badly done by people who foolishly enforced "rules" they were not supposed to enforce because of the political gathering.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
clear as mud. put up or held made no difference to the guard or the guy lying about the laws. it was pure political crap of which you'd have raised holy hell about during the reign of GW.
you are a political hack.
They were put up, Desh. The security guard clearly indicated the only difference between those posters and his was the "picture".
And the laws are indeed clear, so long as he did not damage the property and it was removed at the end of the event he is allowed to put it up so long as it was not within 100 feet of the main entrance.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Desh is clearly racist since she is blind to the fact that the security guard was racially motivated.
evince
Truthmatters
Again, when used for the purpose of a political meeting such as a caucus or town hall meeting almost all restrictions except the distance restriction and the damage restrictions no longer apply. This is because of free speech rulings by courts that specifically uphold the rights of citizens at political gatherings. These people were applying a rule that should not be applied and they did it specifically against one sign while allowing others. They actually could win a lawsuit if the dude really wanted to bring it.
evince
Truthmatters
Prove they were put up.
He said what about those signs, we never see them do we. The SG is obviously not aware of why the other guy instructed him to enforce the rules. The guard is uninformed, the other guy trys to explain and the tape is cut off before he explains.
Prove they were not. It is your assertion.
The guard clearly states, "The difference is yours has a picture." after the guy pointed out where signs had been put up elsewhere. It is very clear in the video.
The other guy was equally uninformed, I am explaining to you what courts have ruled and why they must allow these signs at open political gatherings.
Truck Fump / h1b
Verified User
yer brain is fuckt.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
and since there is no law prohibiting the act, both the guard and the guy explaining the bullshit 'law' were lying.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
Damo provided the links proving you were wrong. try rereading them.