Arrested after saying verboten word

[presence]

I meant to say there is nothing in the constitution that grants you the right to stand in front of man's car blocking his way.

hmm

I find some of this troubling.

1) The constitution doesn't grant rights; rights are inherent; the constitution affirms rights.

2) The constitution doesn't allow for public roads

3) In most jurisdictions pedestrian comes first; you cannot ram a protester with a vehicle; the man on foot has right of way.


Which is why the only thing the man was charged with is the statutory and ambiguous "disorderly conduct".

disorderly conduct statutes give police officers and other authorities fairly broad discretion
to arrest people whose activities they find undesirable

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorderly_conduct

[juleswin]

hmm

I find some of this troubling.

1) The constitution doesn't grant rights; rights are inherent; the constitution affirms rights.

2) The constitution doesn't allow for public roads

3) In most jurisdictions pedestrian comes first; you cannot ram a protester with a vehicle; the man on foot has right of way.


Which is why the only thing the man was charged with is the statutory and ambiguous "disorderly conduct".




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorderly_conduct

You are right about the constitution part and thanks for the correction.

But I don't agree with you on the part about the law being ambiguous. This is because in most lines of work, the workers create categorizes to categorize items involved in it. So for example, obstructing traffic is a form of disorderly conduct and that is what it is under. This is why the charge was disorderly conduct and not "man standing in front of van and not moving when he is told to leave".

[presence]

So for example, obstructing traffic is a form of disorderly conduct

is it though?

or is it the emergent order of the catallaxy?

is the disorder actually the officer interfering in a statutory ambiguous manner to a non-violent non-thieving assertive interaction between two free men?

[TheCount]

LOL. You're the one claiming to be a "supporting member" when you are not. You voted for Obama twice and are for Clinton. You are violating the rules of the forum and have the nerve to use the word "false."

Nothing about your post is correct.

[juleswin]

is it though?

or is it the emergent order of the catallaxy?

is the disorder actually the officer interfering in a statutory ambiguous manner to a non-violent non-thieving assertive interaction between two free men?

Jesus H Christ. I can't believe you are trying very hard to complicate this simple issue of law enforcement and yes he was obstructing traffic. Standing in front of a van trying to move is traffic obstruction. I just love how you injected "free" men into the conversation like it would make a difference if either or both of the men weren't "free". Btw, aren't you one of those PRF members that believe we are all still slaves? if yes, then how can they be free men?

And no, the police officer is not interfering in anything because he was invited by one of the parties involved. I would like to see what you would do when a really muscular non violent(not to be confused with 0 potential for violence), non thieving assertive free man blocks the way to your house.

[Ender]

I just watched this last week. Anthony Andrews is fab.

Hmmmm, methinks I may watch it again.

Anthony Andrews is the best! Can't imagine anyone else as The Pimpernel.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Nothing about your post is correct.

Oh, but it is correct. You and your buddy ZippyJuan voted for Obama and will vote for Clinton.

[cajuncocoa]

//

[oyarde]

so, what's the bottom line? Was he arrested for saying the word, or for obstructing traffic?

Obstructing traffic by crack pipe .

[tod evans]

so, what's the bottom line? Was he arrested for saying the word, or for obstructing traffic?

Yes, no.............Depends?

All the above...

One thing's for sure, the black dude called the kops..

[juleswin]

Yes, no.............Depends?

All the above...

One thing's for sure, the black dude called the kops..

What does it depend on to be a yes he was arrested for using the n word? please tell me what it depends on. The video and the article (not headline) have made it perfectly clear that he was NOT arrested for the n word. Why are you being deliberately obtuse about this topic? there is really no ambiguity here. Watch the video, read the article and read what the "kops" gave as the reason for the arrest. It's like you want him to be arrested for using the n word.

Yes the black guy called the cops but that is not being disputed by anyone.

[cajuncocoa]

//

[tod evans]

What does it depend on to be a yes he was arrested for using the n word? please tell me what it depends on. The video and the article (not headline) have made it perfectly clear that he was NOT arrested for the n word. Why are you being deliberately obtuse about this topic? there is really no ambiguity here. Watch the video, read the article and read what the "kops" gave as the reason for the arrest. It's like you want him to be arrested for using the n word.

Yes the black guy called the cops but that is not being disputed by anyone.

What part of the initial spouting off of niqquer, (not the $#@!ing "N" word) do you have trouble grasping?

If there had been no initial name calling there would have been no escalation and no subsequent arrest.

It's extremely difficult to not be able to draw that line between uttering niqquer and being arrested at the beck and call of the very niqquer who was offended and who escalated the exchange instead of ending it there and then as most men would have, hell most women......

Good grief, "N" word..........What's become of society that people are so thin skinned?

I don't get my nickers all twisted up when people refer to me as a honky or a hillbilly...

[tod evans]

If the reason was obstructing traffic, why the misleading headline?

Mine, Drudges, or the person who wrote the article I cut-n-pasted?

I 'splained my translation........Not to juleswin's satisfaction but it's all I've got...

[cajuncocoa]

//

[tod evans]

I know why Drudge misleads. Usually when new information comes in some indication that a story has been debunked (or misleading) used to be added to the topic title.

I've never been able to edit a thread title after 5 minutes or so, has something changed?

I'll try it with this'n.......


[edit]

Well whadda ya' know........At some point a switch was flipped, fixed now.

[edit again]

switch didn't stay flipped....... I'd changed it to "Arrested after saying verboten word" which of course would be completely accurate but it didn't stick...

[juleswin]

What part of the initial spouting off of niqquer, (not the $#@!ing "N" word) do you have trouble grasping?

If there had been no initial name calling there would have been no escalation and no subsequent arrest.

It's extremely difficult to not be able to draw that line between uttering niqquer and being arrested at the beck and call of the very niqquer who was offended and who escalated the exchange instead of ending it there and then as most men would have, hell most women......

Good grief, "N" word..........What's become of society that people are so thin skinned?

I don't get my nickers all twisted up when people refer to me as a honky or a hillbilly...

You know, one of your previous posts you talked about how you didn't have time to read the article and that was why you put a misleading title to the article iin place of the sorta misleading original title. Now it seems like you don't consider the original thread title to be misleading.

Yes, I agree that if he did not say the N word, none of this would have happened. But that doesn't mean it is the reason why he was arrested. The n word led to the confrontation, the confrontation led to him standing in front of his car and which then led to the arrest. The way you reason, then one could say by extension that his mother birthing him led to his arrest. It just happened to take a few extra thousands steps but he was arrested because his mother birthed him in the USA. Sometimes I wonder if something is lost in translation.

I agree with you, the news was thinned skin, he should have let it go, should have pushed him to the side without calling the cops. I wish black people and other minority groups didn't get all hot and bothered by racial slurs. He could have done a dozen other things to resolve the problem before calling the cops but for whatever reason, he choose the easy way out. But the cops did not arrest him for saying the n -word. To say it in a different way, he could have done everything he did 5x over and still wouldn't have been arrested on that day had he not stood in front of the news van blocking them from moving. Hence standing and blocking his van(and drugs) is the reason why he was arrested.

[tod evans]

You know, one of your previous posts you talked about how you didn't have time to read the article and that was why you put a misleading title to the article iin place of the sorta misleading original title. Now it seems like you don't consider the original thread title to be misleading.

Yes, I agree that if he did not say the N word, none of this would have happened. But that doesn't mean it is the reason why he was arrested. The n word led to the confrontation, the confrontation led to him standing in front of his car and which then led to the arrest. The way you reason, then one could say by extension that his mother birthing him led to his arrest. It just happened to take a few extra thousands steps but he was arrested because his mother birthed him in the USA. Sometimes I wonder if something is lost in translation.

I agree with you, the news was thinned skin, he should have let it go, should have pushed him to the side without calling the cops. I wish black people and other minority groups didn't get all hot and bothered by racial slurs. He could have done a dozen other things to resolve the problem before calling the cops but for whatever reason, he choose the easy way out. But the cops did not arrest him for saying the n -word. To say it in a different way, he could have done everything he did 5x over and still wouldn't have been arrested on that day had he not stood in front of the news van blocking them from moving. Hence standing and blocking his van(and drugs) is the reason why he was arrested.

The kop would never have been there and the idiot would have still been sucking on his glass dick if the black guy had either punched him out or ignored him..

But................Without the utterance there would have been no interaction that lead to arrest.....

Wonder what inspired the crack whore to spout off in the first place? That seems to be mysteriously missing.....

Junkies and suits don't usually mix it up unless it's in a courtroom.

[juleswin]

The kop would never have been there and the idiot would have still been sucking on his glass dick if the black guy had either punched him out or ignored him..

But................Without the utterance there would have been no interaction that lead to arrest.....

Wonder what inspired the crack whore to spout off in the first place? That seems to be mysteriously missing.....

Junkies and suits don't usually mix it up unless it's in a courtroom.

Don't you see, all that is beside the point. He could have called him the N word 1000x times and nobody would have arrested him. The black guys would just have had his feelings hurt but that would be the end of it. He couldn't have called the cops on the count of someone calling him names, lucky for all of us n the US there are no verboten words in the law books. The arrest is because of the obstruction of traffic and the crack pipe and nothing else. Take those 2 factors out and leaving everything else in and he would be a free man today.

[cajuncocoa]

//

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I watched the video. White guy seemed to be high as a Jap.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

It's extremely difficult to not be able to draw that line between uttering niqquer and being arrested at the beck and call of the very niqquer ...

I know a totally open web site like RPF would never, ever censor such words that refer to black people, so that must be some kind of Cajun word.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

It's not like this source is the only one that composes headlines that might not match a story. Go to Yahoo news. Their headlines are the worst. Everybody else does it. Just part of competition.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

It's a van. He's a man. You do the math. The only way a man can block a van is if you don't slam on the gas, understand?

Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. The driver could have also inched up. He could have even backed up and side swiped the white guy, Tony Stewart-Kevin Ward style. He could have also stayed longer and possibly gotten a better news story than he already had. Dip$#@! honky lost all the way around.

[enhanced_deficit]

Miss the days of Iraqi Freedom war under Bush, there was so much racial unity then and never heard of such a single incidence during entire 8 years of Bush Presidency. He was not even a historic President. One wonders how did he do it.

[cajuncocoa]

//

[cajuncocoa]

//

[tod evans]

The Dago's and Pollacks still mix it up, same with the Micks-n-Joo's....

People are different and differences cause problems.

I don't want to live in a homogeneous society..

It's okay to be different, even more important it's okay to dislike someone who's different from you....

Good people are polite about their dislikes and differences but they still exist, and all people aren't good and polite..