• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michigan Suburb Tickets People For Swearing, Fine Is $200

ludin said:
no you can't. sure you can swear till the cows come home, but if you are out in public and doing it you can be considered disturbing the public or even disturbing the peace.

Disturbing the peace is a crime generally defined as the unsettling of proper order in a public space through one's actions. This can include creating loud noise by fighting or challenging to fight, disturbing others by loud and unreasonable noise (including loud music), or using profanity.

A violation of a noise ordinance is in most jurisdictions not considered a disturbance of the peace unless the perpetrator has disregarded an affirmative request that s/he reduce the noise to a reasonable level.
Click to expand...

It could be considered disturbing the peace, if you're screaming. However, talking in a normal conversational tone of voice, profanity is protected speech.
 
ludin said:
see public disturbance laws that say you are wrong. as i have already posted in this thread.

Disturbing the peace is a crime generally defined as the unsettling of proper order in a public space through one's actions. This can include creating loud noise by fighting or challenging to fight, disturbing others by loud and unreasonable noise (including loud music), or using profanity.

A violation of a noise ordinance is in most jurisdictions not considered a disturbance of the peace unless the perpetrator has disregarded an affirmative request that s/he reduce the noise to a reasonable level.

if you don't think this is the case go out and test it and come back with your results.
Click to expand...

I read the Wikipedia entry already. It's at best an oversimplification with regard to profanity. The speech has to incite others to violence. Just swearing is not good enough. There are a number of supreme and appeals court decisions stating so. Maybe you need to read beyond Wikipedia.

Laws that make swearing a crime are unconstitutional. Pennsylvania found that out a number of years ago when it lost 3 or 4 federal lawsuits over disorderly conduct citations that were issued for swearing.

Your test is meaningless. There are lots of unconstitutional laws on the books that remain simply due to inertia. My getting a ticket for disorderly conduct does not prove your point.
 
apdst said:
Probably not, but it shouldn't have to go to court. The cop issuing the citation should have enough common sense to know that it's wrong
Click to expand...
.
Click to expand...




I agree.

This kerfuffle could have been solved with a little intelligent conversation.
 
apdst said:
Probably not, but it shouldn't have to go to court. The cop issuing the citation should have enough common sense to know that it's wrong.
Click to expand...

Let's see, you're a cop ticketing a punk skateboarding where he shouldn't be and most likely putting others at danger as well as damaging property, and his punk buddy decides this is the time be a man and curse you out. After all, in his teenage mind, there's not a damn thing you can do about it and he's oblivious to the fact that he's in public and there are families with children around. So the punk's foul mouthed buddy gets a ticket too - and then flat out lies about his behavior to justify it.

You really want to defend this punk's behavior?
 
Gaius46 said:
I read the Wikipedia entry already. It's at best an oversimplification with regard to profanity. The speech has to incite others to violence. Just swearing is not good enough. There are a number of supreme and appeals court decisions stating so. Maybe you need to read beyond Wikipedia.

Laws that make swearing a crime are unconstitutional. Pennsylvania found that out a number of years ago when it lost 3 or 4 federal lawsuits over disorderly conduct citations that were issued for swearing.

Your test is meaningless. There are lots of unconstitutional laws on the books that remain simply due to inertia. My getting a ticket for disorderly conduct does not prove your point.
Click to expand...

sure it does it shows that there is a limit to free speech that free speech is not all encompasing.

just like you can't yell fire in a building and claim free speech. even profanity has it's limits when you become a public disturbment.
if you are asked to stop and calm down and you refuse then you can be cited.

it is right there in black and white.

again put it to the test. go out to a public park and just start cussing and see what happens. more than likely someone will call the cops or they will come over and ask you to stop.
if you won't stop they will call the cops.

the cops will ask you to stop and move on. if you refuse to do that they will cite you for disturbing the public.

you can then argue your 1st amendment in court.

the judge will probably agree to a certain degree then say that you violated others people right to peace and quiet as they have rights to. your right to cuss ends at someone else who has the same right not to hear you.

again i ask you to go try it. some how i don't think you will.
 
ludin said:
sure it does it shows that there is a limit to free speech that free speech is not all encompasing.

just like you can't yell fire in a building and claim free speech. even profanity has it's limits when you become a public disturbment.
if you are asked to stop and calm down and you refuse then you can be cited.

it is right there in black and white.

again put it to the test. go out to a public park and just start cussing and see what happens. more than likely someone will call the cops or they will come over and ask you to stop.
if you won't stop they will call the cops.

the cops will ask you to stop and move on. if you refuse to do that they will cite you for disturbing the public.

you can then argue your 1st amendment in court.

the judge will probably agree to a certain degree then say that you violated others people right to peace and quiet as they have rights to. your right to cuss ends at someone else who has the same right not to hear you.

again i ask you to go try it. some how i don't think you will.
Click to expand...

It shows no such thing. It simply shows that there are unconstitutional laws on the books. Unconstitutional laws that ILLEGALLY constrain speech. Your contention that I don't have a right swear because you have a right to not hear it is absurd. Under that standard any speech that someone finds offensive is illegal. You effectively criminalize ALL speech. That's a silly result.

Certainly there are limits to free speech. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater if there isn't one. You can't use "fighting words." You can swear. Here's some links, with excerpts, that you might want to read that show just how wrong you are

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-spee...-police-agree-stop-issuing-citations-swearing


The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and many other courts, have made it very clear that profanity — including dirty words, foul language, and rude gestures — is protected speech. Nevertheless, an ACLU investigation revealed that the state police had, on average, issued more than two such citations per day."Using profanity toward someone, whether an officer or not, is just not one of those things that you can put someone in jail for," explains Mary Catherine Roper, senior staff attorney for the ACLU of Pennsylvania. "It may not be very smart, but you have a constitutional right to do that."



UNITED STATES v. POOCHA - FindLaw

United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nolan L. POOCHA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-10283.
Decided: August 7, 2001

...

The Supreme Court has consistently held that the First Amendment protects verbal criticism, challenges, and profanity directed at police officers unless the speech is “shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest.”  City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451, 461, 107 S.Ct. 2502, 96 L.Ed.2d 398 (1987) (quotation omitted).   The government argues that Poocha's speech is not protected by the First Amendment because it constituted either fighting words or an incitement to riot.1

...

We have held that language directed at a police officer similar to that used by Poocha is protected by the First Amendment.   In Gulliford v. Pierce County, 136 F.3d 1345 (9th Cir.1998), police responded to a beach party after they received a complaint that someone had threatened a firefighter who had attempted to extinguish the group's fire.   The police told the group to go home, but the crowd did not disperse.   In response to the deputy's statement, “I'm tired of this.   This is a waste of government ․” Gulliford replied, “Then why don't you get the **** off the island.”  Id. at 1350.2  We held that the words spoken by Gulliford did not constitute fighting words.   Id. Similarly, in Duran v. City of Douglas, Arizona, 904 F.2d 1372 (9th Cir.1990), we held that Arizona's disorderly conduct statute did not permit a police officer to arrest an individual who directed a series of expletives and obscene hand gestures at the officer.   A police officer ejected Duran from a bar after he threatened the bartender, and Duran left the bar in a car driven by his wife.   Soon thereafter, the officer saw Duran making obscene gestures and yelling profanities at him from the car, and arrested him.  Id. at 1374-75.   We held that yelling obscenities at a police officer did not constitute fighting words proscribed by the Arizona disorderly conduct statute,3 and therefore that the officer had no cause to detain Duran.  Id. at 1377.






Annenberg Classroom - Speak Outs - Does a town


Nov. 19, 2012

When you’re riding on the school bus, attending a concert, or shopping at the mall, you're likely to hear people using curse words. Does it bother you? Does it depend on how loud it is? Or if the cursing is directed at you or your friends?

In Middleborough, Mass., a town of about 23,000, citizens decided last summer to enforce a 1968 bylaw by imposing a $20 fine for loud, public profanity. Supporters of law were concerned about groups of youths who gathered on streets or public parks. Mimi Duphily, a former town selectwoman, said in an interview with the Associated Press that she was concerned that loud, public profanity from the youths hurt downtown businesses and frightened away young children and senior citizens. “They’ll sit on the bench and yell back and forth to each other with the foulest language,” she said.

In September, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley recommended that the bylaw should not be enforced because it violates the First Amendment’s right to free speech. A spokeswoman for Coakley said the bylaw did not meet “constitutional standards” and “should be replaced by the town, and in the meantime, not actively enforced.”




I could go on.
 
Gaius46 said:
It shows no such thing. It simply shows that there are unconstitutional laws on the books. Unconstitutional laws that ILLEGALLY constrain speech. Your contention that I don't have a right swear because you have a right to not hear it is absurd. Under that standard any speech that someone finds offensive is illegal. You effectively criminalize ALL speech. That's a silly result.

Certainly there are limits to free speech. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater if there isn't one. You can't use "fighting words." You can swear. Here's some links, with excerpts, that you might want to read that show just how wrong you are

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-spee...-police-agree-stop-issuing-citations-swearing


The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and many other courts, have made it very clear that profanity — including dirty words, foul language, and rude gestures — is protected speech. Nevertheless, an ACLU investigation revealed that the state police had, on average, issued more than two such citations per day."Using profanity toward someone, whether an officer or not, is just not one of those things that you can put someone in jail for," explains Mary Catherine Roper, senior staff attorney for the ACLU of Pennsylvania. "It may not be very smart, but you have a constitutional right to do that."



UNITED STATES v. POOCHA - FindLaw

United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nolan L. POOCHA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-10283.
Decided: August 7, 2001

...

The Supreme Court has consistently held that the First Amendment protects verbal criticism, challenges, and profanity directed at police officers unless the speech is “shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest.”  City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451, 461, 107 S.Ct. 2502, 96 L.Ed.2d 398 (1987) (quotation omitted).   The government argues that Poocha's speech is not protected by the First Amendment because it constituted either fighting words or an incitement to riot.1

...

We have held that language directed at a police officer similar to that used by Poocha is protected by the First Amendment.   In Gulliford v. Pierce County, 136 F.3d 1345 (9th Cir.1998), police responded to a beach party after they received a complaint that someone had threatened a firefighter who had attempted to extinguish the group's fire.   The police told the group to go home, but the crowd did not disperse.   In response to the deputy's statement, “I'm tired of this.   This is a waste of government ․” Gulliford replied, “Then why don't you get the **** off the island.”  Id. at 1350.2  We held that the words spoken by Gulliford did not constitute fighting words.   Id. Similarly, in Duran v. City of Douglas, Arizona, 904 F.2d 1372 (9th Cir.1990), we held that Arizona's disorderly conduct statute did not permit a police officer to arrest an individual who directed a series of expletives and obscene hand gestures at the officer.   A police officer ejected Duran from a bar after he threatened the bartender, and Duran left the bar in a car driven by his wife.   Soon thereafter, the officer saw Duran making obscene gestures and yelling profanities at him from the car, and arrested him.  Id. at 1374-75.   We held that yelling obscenities at a police officer did not constitute fighting words proscribed by the Arizona disorderly conduct statute,3 and therefore that the officer had no cause to detain Duran.  Id. at 1377.






Annenberg Classroom - Speak Outs - Does a town


Nov. 19, 2012

When you’re riding on the school bus, attending a concert, or shopping at the mall, you're likely to hear people using curse words. Does it bother you? Does it depend on how loud it is? Or if the cursing is directed at you or your friends?

In Middleborough, Mass., a town of about 23,000, citizens decided last summer to enforce a 1968 bylaw by imposing a $20 fine for loud, public profanity. Supporters of law were concerned about groups of youths who gathered on streets or public parks. Mimi Duphily, a former town selectwoman, said in an interview with the Associated Press that she was concerned that loud, public profanity from the youths hurt downtown businesses and frightened away young children and senior citizens. “They’ll sit on the bench and yell back and forth to each other with the foulest language,” she said.

In September, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley recommended that the bylaw should not be enforced because it violates the First Amendment’s right to free speech. A spokeswoman for Coakley said the bylaw did not meet “constitutional standards” and “should be replaced by the town, and in the meantime, not actively enforced.”




I could go on.
Click to expand...

go on all you want to. the public has a right not to hear you cuss. you 1st amendment ends when you become a public nuessance.
you can call it unconstitutional all you want to. you will still be cited and a judge will probably still uphold the ticket because you are creating a public disturbance on purpose.

ps your case file has nothing to do with what i said.
 
Anybody seen the excellent film IDIOCRACY?

How long down the road before somebody will claim that not being permitted to wave their manhood around on the public streets is a violation of their freedom and liberty?
 
Beaudreaux said:
So much for freedom of speech.

What's next? Being forced to wear a scarlet letter?
Click to expand...

Use a few select swear words when talking about city council and see how far they get with the lawsuit trying to enforce it.
 
ludin said:
go on all you want to. the public has a right not to hear you cuss. you 1st amendment ends when you become a public nuessance.
you can call it unconstitutional all you want to. you will still be cited and a judge will probably still uphold the ticket because you are creating a public disturbance on purpose.

ps your case file has nothing to do with what i said.
Click to expand...

then what did you say?
 
clownboy said:
Let's see, you're a cop ticketing a punk skateboarding where he shouldn't be and most likely putting others at danger as well as damaging property, and his punk buddy decides this is the time be a man and curse you out. After all, in his teenage mind, there's not a damn thing you can do about it and he's oblivious to the fact that he's in public and there are families with children around. So the punk's foul mouthed buddy gets a ticket too - and then flat out lies about his behavior to justify it.

You really want to defend this punk's behavior?
Click to expand...

His behavior? Hell no. His rights? You're damn right.
 
MaggieD said:
Not quite. There's more to the story. The young man who got the ticket was ticketed for swearing (supposedly under his breath) at a police officer who had issued a ticket to his friend for skateboarding in an illegal area.

When are we ever going to hold people accountable for their inappropriate behavior?
Click to expand...

We can hold people accountable for their behavior. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it should be acceptable in polite society. Just because society doesn't prohibit something, does not mean society must condone it. Swearing doesn't hurt anyone (not even the Children!) so it shouldn't be legally prohibited, but people can still treat the guy who's dropping f bombs every two seconds like the brainless lout that he is. Social consequences can have a great impact when properly deployed.

That said, muttering under his breath about a cop who ticketing his friend hardly seems like something I'd say is worthy of a social response, let alone a legal one.
 
Psychoclown said:
We can hold people accountable for their behavior. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it should be acceptable in polite society. Just because society doesn't prohibit something, does not mean society must condone it. Swearing doesn't hurt anyone (not even the Children!) so it shouldn't be legally prohibited, but people can still treat the guy who's dropping f bombs every two seconds like the brainless lout that he is. Social consequences can have a great impact when properly deployed.

That said, muttering under his breath about a cop who ticketing his friend hardly seems like something I'd say is worthy of a social response, let alone a legal one.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not willing to believe all this guy did was mutter under his breath. That's his story. The judge found him guilty . . . *shrug*
 
MaggieD said:
Well, I'm not willing to believe all this guy did was mutter under his breath. That's his story. The judge found him guilty . . . *shrug*
Click to expand...

That may be. And if you mouth off to a cop, you won't get much sympathy from me just based on the utter futile stupidity of your actions, right or wrong. That said, I still say even if the guy called the cop every name in the book, he didn't harm anyone and shouldn't be punished. I know the law says otherwise, but that's my personal take on it.
 
Wiseone said:
Headline: Michigan Suburb Tickets People For Swearing, Fine Is $200

Actual Article: One guy gets a ticket for disorderly conduct because he swore around some children

Derp Brigade: MAH FREEDUMBSS!!!1
Click to expand...

**** the Michigan police. :lol:
 
Yes an assault.

It seems to me that censorship and speech limits, and reactionary policies are coming from the left.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom