• 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!

Woman with crude anti-Trump truck decal arrested for fraud

ReverendHellh0und

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,903
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
[h=1]Woman with crude anti-Trump truck decal arrested for fraud[/h]
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/woman-with-expletive-filled-anti-trump-truck-decal-arrested/

DALLAS -- The driver of a pickup displaying an expletive-filled message to President Donald Trump and his supporters in the Houston area was arrested Thursday on an outstanding warrant.
Fort Bend County Sheriff's Office records show Karen Fonseca was arrested about 2 p.m. Thursday on an outstanding fraud warrant issued in August by the Rosenberg Police Department. She was in the county jail Thursday night with bond set at $1,500.
Fonseca was released from jail Thursday night after her husband posted her bond, CBS affiliate KHOU reported.

ftrump-1510777485591-11710065-ver1-0.jpg


Click to expand...



Pro-tip: Do not try to be a peacock when you have warrants.
 
TheGoverness said:
Karma is a bitch. :2razz:
Click to expand...

True, but as it relates to the article I still don't understand why people have a problem with that bumper sticker but said nothing when there were bumper stickers that showed pictures of Hillary and Obama saying "How does my ass look?".

And no, I know you don't have a problem with the stickers. I just wish people would apply it consistently. Myself, it is a bumper sticker and nothing more.
 
Crovax said:
And of course the officer tried to over step his authority
Click to expand...



I think texas has obscenity laws, which I disagree with, but would not be overstepping his authority if they deemed her display was disrupting the peace.


The real news is the balls on this chick driving around texas like that. :lol:
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I think texas has obscenity laws, which I disagree with, but would not be overstepping his authority if they deemed her display was disrupting the peace.


The real news is the balls on this chick driving around texas like that. :lol:
Click to expand...

funny that Texas had no problem with bumper stickers that had pictures of Hillary and Obama that said "How does me ass look?". I guess it's ok to be obscene in Texas as long as it is a Dem being made fun of.
 
I've never wondered why people say criminals usually aren't that bright...
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I think texas has obscenity laws, which I disagree with, but would not be overstepping his authority if they deemed her display was disrupting the peace.


The real news is the balls on this chick driving around texas like that. :lol:
Click to expand...

Texas laws don't override constitional rights

The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas posted on Facebook that Fonseca's message is protected speech and urged her to reach out to the organization. The ACLU noted a 1971 U.S. Supreme Court case that overturned the conviction of a man for disturbing the peace for wearing a jacket with an expletive as part of an effort to protest the military draft and the Vietnam War.

A woman who raised her middle finger in October to Trump's motorcade as it passed her in Virginia was fired from a government contracting firm for violating the "code of conduct policy." But the Texas case differs in that a government entity threatened punitive action for vulgar material directed at the president.

Lynne Rambo, a law professor at Texas A&M University specializing in the First Amendment, said Thursday that the 1971 Supreme Court case made two points clear: the state's attempt to regulate profanity or civil discourse is not a sufficient reason to justify restricting speech, and profane language directed at a specific person is different from vulgar content that's broadly disseminated.
Click to expand...
 
Praxas said:
funny that Texas had no problem with bumper stickers that had pictures of Hillary and Obama that said "How does me ass look?". I guess it's ok to be obscene in Texas as long as it is a Dem being made fun of.
Click to expand...



I think the problem is not that it says "trump" on it, but that it has the word **** in big letters on it, leading moms and dads having to explain what that word is when they get behind her. I think that's thier concern.


Ass historically is not conisdered as vulgar as ****.
 
TheGoverness said:
Karma is a bitch. :2razz:
Click to expand...

Greetings, TheGoverness. :2wave:

:agree:, but I have never heard that she wasn't totally fair - which does gladden the heart and makes you smile when you read about it! :lamo
 
Crovax said:
Texas laws don't override constitional rights
Click to expand...



oh of course, I was going to point out that I think the supreme court spoke against it. I didnt have the details handy.


Let me ask you, could she have put "**** trump in his dirty a-hole that c word for vagina" without any consequences? (I'm a libertarian so, my answer is yes). but the point I am making is that because you can, doesn't mean you should.


Also posting political **** like that no matter what side you are on is asking to get your ride jacked up.
 
You know...for there being so many people that claim to be upset with the man for saying that certain star seeking women let you grab them by the *****, it sure does seem like a lot of them want to have sex with the man. And this one apparently wants to be gang banged by everyone that voted for him. She sounds naughty.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I think texas has obscenity laws, which I disagree with, but would not be overstepping his authority if they deemed her display was disrupting the peace.

The real news is the balls on this chick driving around texas like that. :lol:
Click to expand...


ReverendHellh0und said:
I think the problem is not that it says "trump" on it, but that it has the word **** in big letters on it, leading moms and dads having to explain what that word is when they get behind her. I think that's thier concern.


Ass historically is not conisdered as vulgar as ****.
Click to expand...



The constitutionality of arresting her simply for driving around that sticker was extensively addressed here:

https://www.debatepolitics.com/brea...driver-speaks-kprc-2-a-12.html#post1067854733

The exact concern you articulate was addressed there, specifically, how the Supreme Court rejected it back in 1971 (and the case is still good law on that front - Cohen, involving a man who wore a jacket reading "**** the draft" in public).

Basically, there's every reason to believe she could not constitutionally be charged with disorderly simply for driving around with the sticker.






Of course, if she's going to attract attention to herself she probably shouldn't have outstanding warrants, but that's a different matter and is her problem.
 
Praxas said:
funny that Texas had no problem with bumper stickers that had pictures of Hillary and Obama that said "How does me ass look?". I guess it's ok to be obscene in Texas as long as it is a Dem being made fun of.
Click to expand...

As would be said to the right: whataboutism! Hillary is irrelevant. You've posted the same thing a few times, gotta let it go.
 
Crovax said:
Thankfully you don't get a say in restricting constitional rights
Click to expand...

If a person was walking down the street waving a sign with the F word on it -- he'd be arrested in virtually every city in this nation.

The charge would likely be disorderly conduct, which means the woman was charged fairly.

I just keep thinking how sh*tty it would be to be her husband.
 
Mr Person said:
The constitutionality of arresting her simply for driving around that sticker was extensively addressed here:

https://www.debatepolitics.com/brea...driver-speaks-kprc-2-a-12.html#post1067854733

The exact concern you articulate was addressed there, specifically, how the Supreme Court rejected it back in 1971 (and the case is still good law on that front - Cohen, involving a man who wore a jacket reading "**** the draft" in public).

Basically, there's every reason to believe she could not constitutionally be charged with disorderly simply for driving around with the sticker.






Of course, if she's going to attract attention to herself she probably shouldn't have outstanding warrants, but that's a different matter and is her problem.
Click to expand...





I don't disagree with you. I am simply trying to see thier logic behind the notions.
 
VanceMack said:
You know...for there being so many people that claim to be upset with the man for saying that certain star seeking women let you grab them by the *****, it sure does seem like a lot of them want to have sex with the man. And this one apparently wants to be gang banged by everyone that voted for him. She sounds naughty.
Click to expand...

Wow. Your fantasies aren't really appropriate for a political forum, don't you think?
 
HowardBThiname said:
If a person was walking down the street waving a sign with the F word on it -- he'd be arrested in virtually every city in this nation.

The charge would likely be disorderly conduct, which means the woman was charged fairly.

I just keep thinking how sh*tty it would be to be her husband.
Click to expand...

And as long as we can be incensed by a mouth sound we are ****ed as a species.
 
HowardBThiname said:
If a person was walking down the street waving a sign with the F word on it -- he'd be arrested in virtually every city in this nation.

The charge would likely be disorderly conduct, which means the woman was charged fairly.

I just keep thinking how sh*tty it would be to be her husband.
Click to expand...

That is the sign of a somewhat sick society. It is not something the state of a country that produces films that any kid can the ****ing happen in any which way on her telephone should be wasting resources on. It's moronic.
 
Crovax said:
Thankfully you don't get a say in restricting constitional rights
Click to expand...

We will just call it hate speech then. That will make liberals want to ban it.
 
HowardBThiname said:
Sounds fair to me. No one wants their young children subjected to that word in public.
Click to expand...

I admit that I find the use of expletives without really good cause a sign of poor education or juvenile mentality. But it is not something I would want the state regulating it is the expression of her opinion and not for the state to suppress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom