Evict OWS Protesters...

[Lumpy 1]

Many pay taxes themselves.
Do you guys ever do research on the people who dismiss and judge?

Lets see your research Sweets...or are you just blowing out your butt...as usual..

Blowing out my butt?
I am surprised you even bothered to start a thread that didn't have to do with rep whoring.

Google demographics of OWS, which has been posted here a few times. And also get a clue.

and I'm surprised you wrote a post that didn't involve whoring in general...

 

[conner700]

Your grasp of the law is marvelously non-existent.

Hey, don't believe me...believe your Republican groonies.
I never went to college and I don't have five degrees like you.
I never went to law school and litigated cases and have others dislike me because I am right.

Nope not me. Your so smart and educated, I should move out of your way---and let you walk all over me.

You think because they squat in a public place that it then makes that public place their "home".

Amazing bit of fail on your part.

A home by definition does not have to be a structure with four walls, a window, and a door. Now this is fundemental to the constitution and the fourth amendment.

At present there are numerous cases that have been decided in regards to the issue. Google--read and learn.

In regards to Occupy Oakland for example the issue will surely come up. When the occupy-occupied Oscar Grant Plaza--their first eviction was illegal. Since their re-occupation of the plaza the Mayor allowed them to stay. Now she wants to remove them without due process. Oh, yeah...they have fourth admendment rights. Huge! Big!

In other occupy movements--many law suits have been filed by wonderful lawyers who claim the tenth amendment. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Local codes stating once can not camp is superseded by the first amendment---redress your grievces to your gov and free speech and assembly.

Those tents are homes. And taking it away without due process process of law is unconstitutional. And cities that have not allowed people to put up tents and protest after 11:00pm are being sued.

 

[Luissa]

Lets see your research Sweets...or are you just blowing out your butt...as usual..

Blowing out my butt?
I am surprised you even bothered to start a thread that didn't have to do with rep whoring.

Google demographics of OWS, which has been posted here a few times. And also get a clue.

and I'm surprised you wrote a post that didn't involve whoring in general...

And you call them bums.

 

[Luissa]

now do most of the protesters go home at night? especially with winter here? how did they eat living in those tents? man can only live so long eating baloni sandwitches and banana's!

Most do, some stay.

 

[Zander]

Hose the feculant Flea baggers down...

 

[Luissa]

Hose the feculant Flea baggers down...

And you guys say the left hates freedom.

I love how the right wingers keep saying they want them shut down, then in another post talk about how the left hates freedom.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Hey, don't believe me...believe your Republican groonies.
I never went to college and I don't have five degrees like you.
I never went to law school and litigated cases and have others dislike me because I am right.

Nope not me. Your so smart and educated, I should move out of your way---and let you walk all over me.

You think because they squat in a public place that it then makes that public place their "home".

Amazing bit of fail on your part.

A home by definition does not have to be a structure with four walls, a window, and a door. Now this is fundemental to the constitution and the fourth amendment.

At present there are numerous cases that have been decided in regards to the issue. Google--read and learn.

In regards to Occupy Oakland for example the issue will surely come up. When the occupy-occupied Oscar Grant Plaza--their first eviction was illegal. Since their re-occupation of the plaza the Mayor allowed them to stay. Now she wants to remove them without due process. Oh, yeah...they have fourth admendment rights. Huge! Big!

In other occupy movements--many law suits have been filed by wonderful lawyers who claim the tenth amendment. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Local codes stating once can not camp is superseded by the first amendment---redress your grievces to your gov and free speech and assembly.

Those tents are homes. And taking it away without due process process of law is unconstitutional. And cities that have not allowed people to put up tents and protest after 11:00pm are being sued.

Apparently the word "public" is beyond your ken. And therefore why it can't be their "home".

Google it if you have problems

 

[Teals_Of_Wonder]

can you imagine the OWS crappers all sharing a swimming pool?

 

[Luissa]

I wonder if Lumpy would call these guys bums?

 

[Luissa]

You think because they squat in a public place that it then makes that public place their "home".

Amazing bit of fail on your part.

A home by definition does not have to be a structure with four walls, a window, and a door. Now this is fundemental to the constitution and the fourth amendment.

At present there are numerous cases that have been decided in regards to the issue. Google--read and learn.

In regards to Occupy Oakland for example the issue will surely come up. When the occupy-occupied Oscar Grant Plaza--their first eviction was illegal. Since their re-occupation of the plaza the Mayor allowed them to stay. Now she wants to remove them without due process. Oh, yeah...they have fourth admendment rights. Huge! Big!

In other occupy movements--many law suits have been filed by wonderful lawyers who claim the tenth amendment. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Local codes stating once can not camp is superseded by the first amendment---redress your grievces to your gov and free speech and assembly.

Those tents are homes. And taking it away without due process process of law is unconstitutional. And cities that have not allowed people to put up tents and protest after 11:00pm are being sued.

Apparently the word "public" is beyond your ken. And therefore why it can't be their "home".

Google it if you have problems

He might be wrong about the home part, but other judges and even one in New York City have ruled that even tents and even when one is sleeping in them it can be considered a form of expression. Google if you have a problem.

 

[conner700]

That wasn't what I stated and you know it so stop being dishonest.

Yes. In so many words that is exactly what you said. Your a fascist Naxi Pig who has no morals or ethic or compassion for others who are less fortunate.

I gather you enjoy watching others suffer? Because it is clear you don't pick up the telephone to call your congress representitive in support of ending starvation of children in the United States. Nor do you care if they can see a doctor when they get sick. These things above are in your statement are entitlements. And the people who would like food, medical attention, and education are low lifes.

Surely your mother is proud of you. You do such wonders for humanity.

Interesting, partisan observation. I spent 100 hours in 110 degree heat picking up debris and body parts in the worst tornado in modern history while you were probably sitting in your drum circle getting high watching "The View". Don't lecture me boy because you don't know me. I have more compassion for scumbags like you then 99% of the conservatives and libertarians on this site. Your nonsensical stereotype of me, someone you don't even know, lives down to your already low reputation, strawman argument and predictable Nazi party assertion noted. <Yawns and pats junior on head>

Run along now.

It sounds like you did good things to help others to suit your alterisic ego.
How did the event go---Did you pick up the body parts and turn around and tell the family not to apply for foodstamps?

 

[Dr.House]

Ahhh... Scott Olsen....

Founder of Ihatetheusmc.com...

What a fine young gentleman....

New details surface from 'Occupy Oakland' protester Scott Olsen's past | abc7news.com

 

[RadiomanATL]

A home by definition does not have to be a structure with four walls, a window, and a door. Now this is fundemental to the constitution and the fourth amendment.

At present there are numerous cases that have been decided in regards to the issue. Google--read and learn.

In regards to Occupy Oakland for example the issue will surely come up. When the occupy-occupied Oscar Grant Plaza--their first eviction was illegal. Since their re-occupation of the plaza the Mayor allowed them to stay. Now she wants to remove them without due process. Oh, yeah...they have fourth admendment rights. Huge! Big!

In other occupy movements--many law suits have been filed by wonderful lawyers who claim the tenth amendment. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Local codes stating once can not camp is superseded by the first amendment---redress your grievces to your gov and free speech and assembly.

Those tents are homes. And taking it away without due process process of law is unconstitutional. And cities that have not allowed people to put up tents and protest after 11:00pm are being sued.

Apparently the word "public" is beyond your ken. And therefore why it can't be their "home".

Google it if you have problems

He might be wrong about the home part, but other judges and even one in New York City have ruled that even tents and even when one is sleeping in them it can be considered a form of expression. Google if you have a problem.

I never disputed that a tent can be home, nor that it can be a form of expression.

But when it's pitched on public land, or land you do not own and do not have permission to be on it is not legally your "home".

 

[conner700]

A home by definition does not have to be a structure with four walls, a window, and a door. Now this is fundemental to the constitution and the fourth amendment.

At present there are numerous cases that have been decided in regards to the issue. Google--read and learn.

In regards to Occupy Oakland for example the issue will surely come up. When the occupy-occupied Oscar Grant Plaza--their first eviction was illegal. Since their re-occupation of the plaza the Mayor allowed them to stay. Now she wants to remove them without due process. Oh, yeah...they have fourth admendment rights. Huge! Big!

In other occupy movements--many law suits have been filed by wonderful lawyers who claim the tenth amendment. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Local codes stating once can not camp is superseded by the first amendment---redress your grievces to your gov and free speech and assembly.

Those tents are homes. And taking it away without due process process of law is unconstitutional. And cities that have not allowed people to put up tents and protest after 11:00pm are being sued.

Apparently the word "public" is beyond your ken. And therefore why it can't be their "home".

Google it if you have problems

He might be wrong about the home part, but other judges and even one in New York City have ruled that even tents and even when one is sleeping in them it can be considered a form of expression. Google if you have a problem.

Thank you...I forgot that the tent has been stated to be a form of speech in addition to being a persons home in which they inhabit.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I wonder if Lumpy would call these guys bums?

It's always interesting to me how many Democrats use the military...generally for convenience and political gain.. sad really.

The military and their families have earned the right to protest in my eyes, even if I truly disagree with them.

..Most of these OWS protesters are too used of a free ride with no repercussions...someone else has to pay..that not American, that's anarchy.

 

[Ropey]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYpYs9GBXwY]Classic Movie Line #50 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What is going on at the OWS encampments are not legal evictions. I don't know if you know of the term "Due Process"? What the police are doing is not due process of law. The only branch to government that can legally evict anyone from their home is the judical branch.

None of these cities have gone to court to evict the protesters. They just call the police, throw tear gas and take down tents. These actions are a total violation of the due process clause and surely the cities will pay dearly in legal settlements.

But I gather you side with the Red Coats philosophy during the American Revolution.

So tents illegally pitched in Public parks are suddenly peoples homes? Really?

 

[RadiomanATL]

What is going on at the OWS encampments are not legal evictions. I don't know if you know of the term "Due Process"? What the police are doing is not due process of law. The only branch to government that can legally evict anyone from their home is the judical branch.

None of these cities have gone to court to evict the protesters. They just call the police, throw tear gas and take down tents. These actions are a total violation of the due process clause and surely the cities will pay dearly in legal settlements.

But I gather you side with the Red Coats philosophy during the American Revolution.

So tents illegally pitched in Public parks are suddenly peoples homes? Really?

He swears its true because the googles told him so

 

[Luissa]

I wonder if Lumpy would call these guys bums?

It's always interesting to me how many Democrats use the military...generally for convenience and political gain.. sad really.

The military and their families have earned the right to protest in my eyes, even if I truly disagree with them.

..Most of these OWS protesters are too used of a free ride with no repercussions...someone else has to pay..that not American, that's anarchy.

I had no idea I was a democrat.
So only the military has earned the right to protest? But no one else?
I thought the constitution gave everyone the right to protest. And do you know any OWS protesters or are you assuming they have always had a free ride?

 

[Ropey]

What is going on at the OWS encampments are not legal evictions. I don't know if you know of the term "Due Process"? What the police are doing is not due process of law. The only branch to government that can legally evict anyone from their home is the judical branch.

None of these cities have gone to court to evict the protesters. They just call the police, throw tear gas and take down tents. These actions are a total violation of the due process clause and surely the cities will pay dearly in legal settlements.

But I gather you side with the Red Coats philosophy during the American Revolution.

So tents illegally pitched in Public parks are suddenly peoples homes? Really?

He swears its true because the googles told him so

And it's their right to be taken care of as long as they are protesting. For life...