GOP and the right to assemble

[tpahl]

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?objectID=E76A7FDC-B259-4D8B-9A2482E5E909B7B6

The main umbrella organization for protesters, United for Peace and Justice, had requested a permit to hold a rally in Central Park, but was repeatedly turned down by the city. Jim Lesczynski, who chairs the Libertarian party, a group involved with United for Peace and Justice, says they will gather there anyway.

"The First Amendment is pretty clear that you have the right to peacefully assemble," he said. "And it's not a right if you have to ask somebody's permission."

 

[DKSuddeth]

well, this will be an event to tie up the courts for years, what with all the arrests and appeals to the supreme court and stuff and junk.

 

[tpahl]

well, this will be an event to tie up the courts for years, what with all the arrests and appeals to the supreme court and stuff and junk.

I would hope any person speaking out political in central park would not be arrested. If one is, I would hope they would not have to take thier case all the way to the supreme court.

Travis

 

[DKSuddeth]

I would hope any person speaking out political in central park would not be arrested. If one is, I would hope they would not have to take thier case all the way to the supreme court.

Travis

Its going to happen, not because of violence per se, but because there is no permit the police will either cite them, or arrest them when they refuse to leave. then the court go-round begins and we'll be talking about the constitution alot.

 

[Annie]

I would hope any person speaking out political in central park would not be arrested. If one is, I would hope they would not have to take thier case all the way to the supreme court.

Travis

You are delusional. It's not 'any person' but up to a million people orchestrated to be hitting NYC for the convention. While 'any person' might be allowed to speak, it would be impossible in this time frame. Many have vowed to disrupt the city, actually endangering the citizens, as well as delegates:

from the 'official' group, which if you dig at the endnotes, you'll find moveon as well as communist party backing:

http://www.rncnotwelcome.org/fighttheman.html

opening statement: Code of Nonviolence:

"We are fighting to dismantle the system of violence that is being inflicted upon the earth and its inhabitants by political and corporate powers that be; the violence which leads to the destruction of earth's biodiversity and integrity, the torture and extinction of its species, and the oppression and genocide of its peoples, in the interests of capital profit. With compassion and respect for all life we will fight, by any means necessary, to end this violence of injustice." - Wild and Free

....

I'm not giving the addresses, but some are giving 'tips' on how to mess with chem/bio detection equipment, hurt police dogs sniffing for explosives, etc.

The courts have ruled correctly, it's not just the protestors who have rights, so does the RNC. All must be safe. In order to do that, the police must be able to have control, if problems break out, Central Park is not a controllable arena:

http://www.wnet.org/centralpark/centralpark.html

Today, the 843 acres that comprise Central Park remain, as always, a peaceful oasis amid the whirlwind of urban life.

 

[tpahl]

Its going to happen, not because of violence per se, but because there is no permit the police will either cite them, or arrest them when they refuse to leave. then the court go-round begins and we'll be talking about the constitution alot.

Do you think it is right that they be arrested for being in a public park exercising their free speech? Why would someone order the police to arrest them for that?

 

[dmp]

Do you think it is right that they be arrested for being in a public park exercising their free speech? Why would someone order the police to arrest them for that?

I hope that exactly happens. If any group fails to get approval for their disruptions, they should be arrested if they don't vacate the area. Our cities have rules - nobody's 'rights' supercede MY right to have citizens obey the law.

 

[tpahl]

You are delusional.

Must you begin every debate with these words?

It's not 'any person' but up to a million people orchestrated to be hitting NYC for the convention. While 'any person' might be allowed to speak, it would be impossible in this time frame.

So they should all be arrested? no. And the park is big enough to handle all the protestors that show up.

Many have vowed to disrupt the city, actually endangering the citizens, as well as delegates:

Endangering others is different from protesting in a park. I doubt that even 1% of the people arrested will be arrested fo endangering others, it will be for being in a park speaking (either with a sign (which are illegal if they have a stick on them in NYC) or verbally). You should be upset when a fellow citizen is arrested for speaking out. Instead you seem to be cheering for it to happen. Why?

I'm not giving the addresses, but some are giving 'tips' on how to mess with chem/bio detection equipment, hurt police dogs sniffing for explosives, etc.

Is this what we are discussing? No. I am discussing people being arrested for being in a park speaking out politically. If that is all a person is doing, do you beleive they should be arrested? Yes or no?

The courts have ruled correctly, it's not just the protestors who have rights, so does the RNC. All must be safe. In order to do that, the police must be able to have control, if problems break out, Central Park is not a controllable arena:

I doubt the courts are implying that the 1st amendment be overridden. If a person decides to go to the park and speak out politically he has that right. If another person decides to join him, he has that right. If a third person decides to join him, they have that right as well. if 100,000 people decide to join them, they have that right as well.

Central Park has enjoyed many large crowds on numerous occasions. in fact i bet there was a large crowd there today. There usually is on almost any day in the summer. there are large concerts held there, Large road races like the NYC marathon end there, etc... In other words large crowds can be there peacefully for other reasons. For the city to say no to this crowd when the only difference is their reason for going is to speak out politically, is outrageous.

As Leczynski said, ""The First Amendment is pretty clear that you have the right to peacefully assemble," he said. "And it's not a right if you have to ask somebody's permission."

 

[JIHADTHIS]

Its going to happen, not because of violence per se, but because there is no permit the police will either cite them, or arrest them when they refuse to leave. then the court go-round begins and we'll be talking about the constitution alot.

I seriously doubt the NYPD has the desire nor the capability to place 1 million people under arrest. It's not going to happen. Any violent individuals and whoever they deem to be the aggitators will be arrested. If they break the law or incite a riot should they not be locked up?

 

[tpahl]

I hope that exactly happens. If any group fails to get approval for their disruptions, they should be arrested if they don't vacate the area. Our cities have rules - nobody's 'rights' supercede MY right to have citizens obey the law.

A right is something you do not have to ask permision for. Laws that violate rights outlined in the constitution are unconstitutional and thus are not valid laws. If you want to live in a society where citizens obey the law, then you should start looking at the NYC government who is vilating the supreme law of the land (if it decides to arrest people assemblilng in central park).

Travis

 

[tpahl]

I seriously doubt the NYPD has the desire nor the capability to place 1 million people under arrest. It's not going to happen. Any violent individuals and whoever they deem to be the aggitators will be arrested. If they break the law or incite a riot should they not be locked up?

If they cause damage to others or others property they should be arrested. If not, they should be allowed to assemble and speak.

 

[dmp]

A right is something you do not have to ask permision for. Laws that violate rights outlined in the constitution are unconstitutional and thus are not valid laws. If you want to live in a society where citizens obey the law, then you should start looking at the NYC government who is vilating the supreme law of the land (if it decides to arrest people assemblilng in central park).

Travis

The laws telling groups they must seek a permit for a mass-assemble HAVE proven constitutional; thus, they are valid. Simply because you can't or won't understand that doesn't mean the judges who have rule so are wrong.

How old are you?

 

[dmp]

I seriously doubt the NYPD has the desire nor the capability to place 1 million people under arrest. It's not going to happen. Any violent individuals and whoever they deem to be the aggitators will be arrested. If they break the law or incite a riot should they not be locked up?

I'd be surprised to see 1/10th that number.

 

[insein]

The fine line between safety and freedom will be very tangible next week. ! million people, of which 95-99% of them will be peaceful. But 1% of 1 million is how much kiddies? Thats right 10,000 or so people that will be raising hell.

I am 100% for their right to say whats on their mind. I draw that line when they begin attacking property and other people. I disagree with needing a permit to protest. Thats another way for cops to get on your ass about something. Cops have too much power as it is. With that said, i think they are going into battle grossly out manned this week.

Things WILL get ugly. NY dems will get to see who their most vehoment supporters are though and so will the world.

 

[tpahl]

The laws telling groups they must seek a permit for a mass-assemble HAVE proven constitutional; thus, they are valid. Simply because you can't or won't understand that doesn't mean the judges who have rule so are wrong.

How old are you?

old enough to understand what a right is and old enough to know that judges are human and make mistakes.

Please tell me what you define as a right and tell me how it differs from a priveledge.

Travis

 

[jon_forward]

opening statement: Code of Nonviolence:

"We are fighting to dismantle the system of violence that is being inflicted upon the earth and its inhabitants by political and corporate powers that be; the violence which leads to the destruction of earth's biodiversity and integrity, the torture and extinction of its species, and the oppression and genocide of its peoples, in the interests of capital profit. With compassion and respect for all life we will fight, by any means necessary, to end this violence of injustice." - Wild and Free

If this aint an oximoron I dont know what is. code of nonviolence= we will fight,by any means necessary.......what the hell is wrong with these delusional people????? have they listened to their esteamed leader[Kerry] so much its turned their grey-matter to mush????

 

[dmp]

old enough to understand what a right is and old enough to know that judges are human and make mistakes.

Please tell me what you define as a right and tell me how it differs from a priveledge.

Travis

Why not just answer the question?

You are in favour of the 'rights' of one group to trump the 'rights' of another. That's the wrong answer my friend.

 

[tpahl]

The fine line between safety and freedom will be very tangible next week. ! million people, of which 95-99% of them will be peaceful. But 1% of 1 million is how much kiddies? Thats right 10,000 or so people that will be raising hell.

I doubt there will be a million people and I doubt even 1% of those that do show up will be violent and deserve to be arrested.

I am 100% for their right to say whats on their mind. I draw that line when they begin attacking property and other people. I disagree with needing a permit to protest. Thats another way for cops to get on your ass about something.

Glad to see someone else here agrees that the need for a permit to exercise a right is wrong!

Things WILL get ugly. NY dems will get to see who their most vehoment supporters are though and so will the world.

Just because people are protesting Bush and the RNC does not mean they are democrats. In fact, most the ones that got violent and deserved arrest in the Seattle WTO riots were not democrats. I mention that riot because I was there and observed it firsthand. I imagine most others are the same. Most the violent ones are warped greens and/or communists who call themselves anarchists. I am no fan of the democrats, but It is unfair to try and associate stupid violence against NYC while Bush is there as a democrat thing is not fair.

 

[5stringJeff]

I favor the right to assemble peacefully. I also favor the right - and responsibility - of the police to prepare for the chance that some of the assemblers will not be peaceful.

 

[Annie]

Must you begin every debate with these words?



So they should all be arrested? no. And the park is big enough to handle all the protestors that show up.



Endangering others is different from protesting in a park. I doubt that even 1% of the people arrested will be arrested fo endangering others, it will be for being in a park speaking (either with a sign (which are illegal if they have a stick on them in NYC) or verbally). You should be upset when a fellow citizen is arrested for speaking out. Instead you seem to be cheering for it to happen. Why?



Is this what we are discussing? No. I am discussing people being arrested for being in a park speaking out politically. If that is all a person is doing, do you beleive they should be arrested? Yes or no?



I doubt the courts are implying that the 1st amendment be overridden. If a person decides to go to the park and speak out politically he has that right. If another person decides to join him, he has that right. If a third person decides to join him, they have that right as well. if 100,000 people decide to join them, they have that right as well.

Central Park has enjoyed many large crowds on numerous occasions. in fact i bet there was a large crowd there today. There usually is on almost any day in the summer. there are large concerts held there, Large road races like the NYC marathon end there, etc... In other words large crowds can be there peacefully for other reasons. For the city to say no to this crowd when the only difference is their reason for going is to speak out politically, is outrageous.

As Leczynski said, ""The First Amendment is pretty clear that you have the right to peacefully assemble," he said. "And it's not a right if you have to ask somebody's permission."

I begin the 'delusional' because you persist in presenting yourself as. In this case, you are acting as if one person is wanting to make a statement in Central Park. A statement that is all talk and no 'incitement.' Problem is, there are another X number that want to do the later, which you are ignoring.

Can't let 'one' and not the 'rest.' Any 5 year old knows that. Which is the reason the court ruled as it did. d'oh!

That park is not 'manageable', which is necessary.