• 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!

RT presenter choked by police

RT presenter choked by police — RT

police brutality and arrests took place in Washington DC as police brutally cracked down on a crowd of people for dancing by a Washinton DC memorial...

a new victory for American style democracy and free speech and expression..

You know what I see: some stupid ****ing idiots disobeying the law, causing problems, and defying police orders.

And then getting body slammed becaue that's what happens when you are beyond annoying, disrupting the public peace, causing problems, disobeying the law and defying direct police orders.

I would have wanted to slam them, too, for being so ****ing obnoxious.

Oh - and no where do I see 'flash mob at 12-o'clock high' as being procted freedom of speech . . . I see a bunch or weirdos being intentionally annoying for youtube hits and then crying when their milk spills and people don't find it amusing.
 
SCOTUS has outlined the limits. Maybe you weren't aware.

The National Parks has outlined fair and reasonable rules for demonstrations. Groups of 25 or less can demonstrate in numerous locations throughout the mall. The permit process is there to ensure public safety and protect the RIGHTS of regular tourists. SCOTUS has upheld reasonable restrictions on demonstrations.

The WBC and Fred Phelps get their permits wherever they go. They are the most vile and hateful group out there and SCOTUS upheld their rights. Free Speech in American is stronger than ever with the internet, Facebook, Twitter. But you CAN NOT infringe on the rights of others while exercising your rights.

Thomas Jefferson believed in the rule of law. These flash mob assholes didn't respect that.

Thomas Jefferson believed in the rule of just law. The law that was passed is an unjust law since it violates the part of the First Amendment that says, "Congress shall make no law..." Which part of shall make no law don't you understand?
 
Thomas Jefferson believed in the rule of just law. The law that was passed is an unjust law since it violates the part of the First Amendment that says, "Congress shall make no law..." Which part of shall make no law don't you understand?

Sorry, the law was upheld on appeal. There are many laws that restrict free speech in fair and reasonable ways.

Stop trying to play armchair lawyer, it's embarrassing.
 
Sorry, the law was upheld on appeal. There are many laws that restrict free speech in fair and reasonable ways.

Stop trying to play armchair lawyer, it's embarrassing.

Stop playing Appeal to Authority logical fallacy. The Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States are quite clear on the matter. It's a disgrace that this unjust law is on the books.
 
RT presenter choked by police — RT

police brutality and arrests took place in Washington DC as police brutally cracked down on a crowd of people for dancing by a Washinton DC memorial...

a new victory for American style democracy and free speech and expression..

These people went there to cause trouble and the video shows no brutality that I saw.

Code Pink is group of wackos who do what ever they can to raise hell.

One of their people was the one who yelled out during Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech before Joint meeting of Congress.

This is a BS story to me, that is heavily slanted.

This was at a Memorial not a dance party, and these fools showed no respect.
 
these people were protesting a new law that forbade dancing in front of the monument. they did so by dancing. the law is against freedom of expression and the police brutality and the arrests against all democratic decency.

The 1st Amendment doesn't protect illegal activity.
 
The 1st Amendment doesn't protect illegal activity.

And to organize and gather in large numbers for a specific purpose - in some places - you need a permit.

I just think this new fangled 'mass mob' thing is VERY annoying and immature - if I'm working somewhere I shouldn't have to be bothered by a bunch of dingdongs who don't belong there.

You can't just impose your desires and claim 'freedome of speech!' - because others have a freedom of peace, too.

Aside that - what's being 'said' or 'accomplished' the whole purpose of these flash mobs is to ANNOY PEOPLE. Not to spread the word, message or story about anything.
 
There was certainly no clear and present danger, those guys were halfheartedly dancing, which got them arrested.
If it were actually disturbing the peace, you'd have a point but you don't.

I'm not anti police, but I wish more would use their brains, instead of just following orders.

How about following the law?

A) When I go dancing, I don't show up with a camera crew. This was a flash mob stunt designed to test the law.

B) Demonstrations of 25 or less are only allowed w/o a permit in certain areas. That was not one of them.

C) When a police officer politely says you need to leave, you don't get fresh and start pretending to be an attorney.

D) Thomas Jefferson was a brilliant writer and thinker-- if these jackasses want to prove they're worthy of him, put pen to paper and show us. The flash mob crap is lame and uninspired.
 
How about following the law?

A) When I go dancing, I don't show up with a camera crew. This was a flash mob stunt designed to test the law.

B) Demonstrations of 25 or less are only allowed w/o a permit in certain areas. That was not one of them.

C) When a police officer politely says you need to leave, you don't get fresh and start pretending to be an attorney.

D) Thomas Jefferson was a brilliant writer and thinker-- if these jackasses want to prove they're worthy of him, put pen to paper and show us. The flash mob crap is lame and uninspired.

You like this.

Damn! That stings.
 
My permit is the Bill of Rights.... Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech... or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Im sorry, I don't see anywhere in that where it says you can do it at whatever location you wish to do so.

If so, I say we do it on someone's private lawn.
 
Stop playing Appeal to Authority logical fallacy. The Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States are quite clear on the matter. It's a disgrace that this unjust law is on the books.

Yes, the Constitution give the authority to SCOTUS to decide which laws are constitutional.

Perhaps you should enroll in a Civics class and get a better understanding how our Gov works.
 
Yes, the Constitution give the authority to SCOTUS to decide which laws are constitutional.

Perhaps you should enroll in a Civics class and get a better understanding how our Gov works.

Actually, the Constitution does not give the SCOTUS to decide what laws are constitutional. The power was seized in Marbury v. Madison 11 years after the Constitution was ratified. The only groups that can determine constitutionality of laws are the people and the state governments.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Cease with the back-handed insults. Either debate the topic civilly or be removed from the conversation or worse.
 
Police "brutality"?? HA-HA! If that was "brutality" I guess you are still hanging on to mamma's apron. Go eat a Twinkie.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Rhinefire is now banned from this thread.
 
If this law were followed in the strictest since, these places could become havens of dance crime.
My 4 year old dances everywhere he goes, without hurting people or causing a public nuisance.

That's exactly what I was thinking. How many toddlers are going to be arrested for this?
 
That's exactly what I was thinking. How many toddlers are going to be arrested for this?


Dancing is known to lead to a life of crime & debauchery. Might as well nip it in the bud to protect upstanding moral citizens. :mrgreen:
 
The 1st Amendment doesn't protect illegal activity.

Whats illegal about dancing in a public place when the constitution grants you freedom of expression? The point of a constitution is that any government cannot take away any rights given in it, or make laws that contradict it.
The only valid law that can nullify a constitution is a new constitution... Do you want that or will you defend your current constitution?
 
Sorry, the law was upheld on appeal. There are many laws that restrict free speech in fair and reasonable ways.

Stop trying to play armchair lawyer, it's embarrassing.

Then it is up to you if you want to defend the constitution or some stupid law that says you cannot dance in a public place like that.. whats next?

These individuals took a stance, for the constitution, and they demonstrated their point pretty well. If you think they are stupid or looked stupid you should look at your own stand on the constitution. Perphaps these people were making a point to all the idiots who do not protect the constitution and let the politicians make any laws, even laws that goes against the constitution.
You live in a society now that does not at all adhere to the constitution, you just failed to see how far from a constitutional society you have moved.

that is the shame.
 
Last edited:
Police "brutality"?? HA-HA! If that was "brutality" I guess you are still hanging on to mamma's apron. Go eat a Twinkie.

Considering the circumastance it was brutal. You have to react in an appropriate way to the situation. These people were resisting nothing, and was choked and thrown to the ground. First of all they should not have been arrested, secondly if they should have they should have been treated gently as they showed no violent signs. The police reaction here was appripriate for a situation were a crowd resist, perhaps run away a little, push the policeman or other people a little.
 
I agree with maximus that this was wrong but not with the tag of 'brutality' possibly 'unnecessarily-heavy-handedness'
 
Whats illegal about dancing in a public place when the constitution grants you freedom of expression? The point of a constitution is that any government cannot take away any rights given in it, or make laws that contradict it.
The only valid law that can nullify a constitution is a new constitution... Do you want that or will you defend your current constitution?

What if I want to express my dislike for someone by putting a bullet through their head?

The constitution says I am "free to express" (actually it doesn't, but...)
 
I agree with maximus that this was wrong but not with the tag of 'brutality' possibly 'unnecessarily-heavy-handedness'

Take it up with those who make the laws then.
 
Considering the circumastance it was brutal. You have to react in an appropriate way to the situation. These people were resisting nothing, and was choked and thrown to the ground. First of all they should not have been arrested, secondly if they should have they should have been treated gently as they showed no violent signs. The police reaction here was appripriate for a situation were a crowd resist, perhaps run away a little, push the policeman or other people a little.

You apparently didn't watch the video.

The officer was attempting to arrest the shaved head tattooed guy and he kept pulling his hands away and walking away from the officer. Thats resisting arrest. He was given several opportunities including a warning.
He still refused (as he was looking to get some sort of bad reaction from the police). He was picked up and dropped on the ground, on his side, where he was arrested.

Would you have the police following him around as he continued to walk from them and refuse to cooperate for an hour? I don't think so, this isn't mambi-pambi land.
 
People are threading in emotions - and forgetting that resisting arrest is resisting arrest. It doesn't matter WHAT you did to necessitate arrest *nor* does it matter whether the cop was WRONG to try ot arrest you.

Those two things are to be dealt with and determine *after* the event - by a 3rd party (judge, booker, magistrate, etc) . . . not by the individual(s) involved directly in the incident.
 
Back
Top Bottom