Pro-life vid of day: Jackson PD interferes with free speech
by Hans Johnson
Last month police officers in Jackson, Mississippi were shown just standing by as pro-life signs being displayed by Created Equal were stolen and stored in a basement.
In a press release accompanying new video, Executive Director Mark Harrington describes the difficulty they were met with from the outset:
On Thursday July 17, 2014, Created Equal visited Jackson, MS, site of the state’s last remaining abortion facility as part of Day 4 of our Summer Justice Ride. Sixteen days before the event, we contacted the police to work out any details resulting in a conference call the day before with police and city officials. It wasn’t until after our arrival that police informed us of a sign ordinance that they intended to enforce against our first amendment-protected display.
The City of Jackson is required to guarantee everyone the right to free speech. Selective enforcement of commercial sign ordinances amounts to nothing more than harassment. The only reason the police were trying to require us to follow this obscure sign law is because we were opposing abortion outside the last remaining abortion mill in the state. I feel like I was transported back 50 years when Freedom Riders were harassed by Jackson police and business owners as white racists interfered with their right to use interstate commerce.
[youtube]http://youtu.be/keC99nixhcM?list=UU2kM_Q0sgCk9iVWAg8HNSFQ[/youtube]
Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
https://www.jillstanek.com/2014/07/video-jackson-ms-police-stand-vandals-steal-prolife-signs/#comments
Already had a couple hundred comments on this. Freedom of speech is fine, and signs could have been held if they were desired. Just don’t obstruct other people, sidewalks, etc., too much.
It’s not rocket science. “Created Equal” is obtusely and puerilely looking to play the victim, and they have a history of lawsuits against law enforcement. Pathetic.
And law enforcement has a history of bogus citations.
http://lldf.org/mississippis-jackson-police-department-civil-rights-violations/
I don’t see how holding a sign is any less obstructive on a public sidewalk than a standing display. Passersby have to walk past both.
Been here, done this…
BRB going to wait for Ex-GOP and his tazer.
Yeah John so have I,
If there was a violation of the law, it was the responsibility of the police to order the signs removed. End of story.
The police told them…
Created Equal has released more video showing the police telling them repeatedly that signs cannot be placed on the sidewalk, but instead must be held.
Over two weeks ago, it was obvious what was going on – an attempted scam. No sane person could watch the video and not get what was going on. And now we know that the police did in fact tell them, multiple times.
Jared,
Then the police should have confiscated the signs. Again, end of story.
Its like the police telling you that you are illegally parked. Either you move the car or they move it for you. You can be as theatrical as you want. Those are the options.
:: puts down bowl of popcorn… ::
The police knew it was an attempted set-up, and they were waiting on one of their commanders to come. It was prudent on their parts. Mr. Peters wasn’t at risk as they were.
“Created equal” = false pretenses; totally silly to pretend they were in any way “wronged” here.
Those are the options.
No, they aren’t. The police can also ticket you.
Then the police should have confiscated the signs. Again, end of story.
The police are not the sanitation crew. If you are caught littering, is it the police’s job to pick up the litter if you don’t? Of course not.
Doug,
Not the point.
The police are supposed to do their job.
Sure it’s the point, Mary, and the police knew it.
I think by now everybody knows it except you and Hans. ;)
I feel like I was transported back 50 years when Freedom Riders were harassed by Jackson police and business owners as white racists interfered with their right to use interstate commerce.
So few people know that the greatest harassment the Freedom Riders ever faced was having to hold signs in their hands instead of setting them on the sidewalk. Thanks to Mr. Harrington for putting it all in perspective.
LisaC,
Depends on where you are illegally parked. Also, I’m certain you have seen signs warning that you will be towed if you illegally park. Citations for more minor offenses, yes. But again, you obey the law or pay..or have your car confiscated.
LisaC, its about the law. Confiscating signs has nothing to do with sanitation.
As for your analogy, if I don’t pick up my litter or scoop my dog poop, I pay a fine. I get the message real quick that disobeying the law is going to get expensive.
Doug,
What part of “The police are supposed to do their job” do you not understand?
I have to agree that this situation in no way compares to the Freedom Riders, who were greeted by crowds with billy clubs and baseball bats…and police who did not do their jobs.
There is simply no case to be made that the police didn’t do their jobs. They informed the perpetrators of the law (which was apparently deliberately concealed by the makers of the first video). In no way were they under any time constraint to remove the signs, and as Lisa noted, they didn’t have to take the signs, period.
Let us salute Mr. Peters as a man of sense, conscience; calm, righteous deliberation, and heroic action when required.
LOL Doug,
Again my friend, what part of “The police are supposed to do their job” do you not understand?
BTW, since we’re talking about the Freedom Riders. Another example of police deciding not to do their job. To say Northerners coming south to help with voter registration generated resentment would be an understatement. Police saw no need to protect them. They should stay home and mind their own business.
“Let us salute Mr.Peters as a man of sense, conscience, calm, righteous deliberation, and heroic action when required”.
I recall pretty much the same thing was said about the people who beat the Freedom Riders senseless…as police did nothing.
I guess the rightness or wrongness of police inaction is a matter of perspective.
Oh mygosh Doug
Remember the crystal pepsi couple Jill posted about a few days back? If a Pro Life person gathered up their signs as offensive to their prayer vigil while the police looked idly on, would you hail that Pro Lifer as a hero?
Sharon, I gave your post a “like.” :)
I was trying to be intentionally humorous about Mr. Peters. “Heroic action” – this is supposed to be over-the-top, in that vein. If we are going to be entertaining thoughts of the incredible, universe-shattering, despicable “wrong” done to the Created Equal people, then let’s have some fun with the entire deal.
To be totally serious, Mr. Peters reminds me of Charlie Brown, and from what I saw, he trundles along, back and forth with the signs, and I imagine he isn’t doing it for the media exposure or to fulfill his dreams of fame. It would be interesting to talk to him.
Maybe the old dude just felt like a little exercise. ;) Or maybe (probably) he just wanted the stuff out of the way.
You have a good and valid point about pro-lifers gathering up the Crystal Pepsi signs. No, I would not say they would be heroes. And being 100% deadpan serious, I’m not saying Mr. Peters is, either, although there are differences – Mr. Peters had the law on his side, and I’m questioning if that would be the case with the pro-lifers and the Crystal Pepsi signs.
Okay, now back to our regularly scheduled program. I would have loved it if Mr. Peters had a Charlie Brown shirt on – you know, the yellow one with the black, zig-zaggy stripe around it?
Or, all the pro-lifers around the Crystal Pepsi signs would whip out their Japanese Samurai Warrior helmets, put them on, then advance on the Crystal Pepsi signs, snatching them up and putting them into a waiting wood-chipper; the wood-chipper’s engine revving high and a little lower, sounding out the notes of “Bringing In the Sheaves.”
As the last of the sign-sawdust appears, a young pro-lifer, let us say 5 years old, turns and faces the camera with an incredibly serious expression, then holds up a can of Coca-Cola.
Already had a couple hundred comments on this.
“John”/Rilka/David -this is a different video than the previous link.
My understanding (and it may be incorrect) is that the signs would have been fine if they had been held rather than sat on the sidewalk. This makes sense to me, be it for a cause a support or another, that having large display boards blocking a sidewalk is a bad idea for safety reasons. I’m sorry this group didn’t care enough about saving “babies” to pick up their signs and abide the law. The legality of the dude who removed them has been ripped apart to death but I personally think people have the rigbt to remove hazards illegally placed as private citizens. If my bratty neighbor kid has left his skateboard on the sidewalk and I know elderly Mrs. Jones is coming for her daily walk, I’m going to move it. I dont see why these folks can’t follow a simple law instead of being to lazy to hold signs. I think mostly this little stunt was far more about bringing attention to themselves than “counseling” women about to have an abortion.
Tenn,
If the PL people were advised by the police they were violating an ordinance and continued to do so, than the police had the responsibility to either issue citations and/or confiscate the signs.
Yes you indeed have a right to act on behalf of another person’s safety, but you don’t have the right to keep the skateboard or refuse to return it. Either you throw it on the bratty kid’s lawn or you inform his parents. If the problem persists you inform the police.
This “little stunt” never would have happened had the police done their job. That does not excuse the PL people if they knowingly violated the ordinance.
Which they did, Mary. A pro-choice person posted to their site over 2 weeks ago (when I saw it) that it was illegal to stand the signs on the sidewalk but not to hold them. This is the same thing as my bratty neighbor putting his skateboard on the sidewalk with the attempt to disrupt Mrs. Jones walk after bein told for three weeks he was not allowed to do this.
Regardless, this isn’t about free speech and it isn’t about saving babies. If I removed the skateboard from 4th sidewalk I would likely hold onto it until the police could arrive to take it and let them deal with it from there.
Comparing this to Freedom Riders is horrid (and l know you weren’t the one who said that).
In this case, an anti choice group acted like a bunch of brats. They refused to follow the law. They didn’t care about stopping abortion, they cares about people looking at them.
They need to be shamed by PLACE groups, not praised for acting like bad children.
Comparing them to the Civil Rights movement because OMG they had to hold their signs instead of leaning them is just disgusting.
Tenn,
The police had a job to do and did not do it. There would have been no “little stunt” or anything else if they had immediately confiscated the signs, maybe if they only threatened to do so.
People violate ordinances, either knowingly or unknowingly. The police have a responsibility to act no matter what.
Again, as for your bratty neighbor, you could either move the skateboard, speak with the parents, or call the police. You cannot confiscate, i.e. steal it. You cannot refuse to return it to the owner. If the police are there you let them handle the situation. That bratty neighbor will likely find them far more intimidating than he does you.
I personally remember the Freedom Riders and in no way do the situations compare, except that police stood by and did not do their jobs.
Well Doug, your reply made me smile just a little bit.
But I don’t find Mr. Peters cute, cuddly or just a wonderful Charlie Brown like figure. Bottom line, the man is a thief. I can’t say it any better than Mary has earlier in this thread.
Maybe he could blame it on listening to waaay too much Naughty by Nature back in the day? You know, cause he is down with OPP? (Other People’s Property)
But in the end, I just can’t smile and laugh about this issue. Because what we are discussing here is abortion. And abortion is…well…I was trying to find the word and what I came up with is monstrous. Abortion is monstrous. It’s the ending of innocent human life for profit. I go back and forth on graphic abortion signs. Not sure how I feel about them. But this PL group was trying to do something and that’s a good thing.
Anyway, welcome Doug. Look forward to your posts.
So it seems the arguement here is to this extent…If I were to see you illegally parked your car on a public space, I as a private citezen can pick your car up and take it to my place. It does not require a contract with the police or the city or any other public entity. I could just bring my truck on over and, without consideration to your property or concerns, drag your stuff off. That would be fine with you, right Doug, Tenn, LisaC? Your stuff placed illegally for whatever reason becomes mine to confiscate. To do as I wish. To place where I wish.
Furthermore, unless this ordinance is enforced without prejudice, it is a violation of the law to elect to enforce it in this situation. That is, citywide, no signs on the sidewalks and public spaces that are not being carried. The police cannot decide to enforce the ordinance for one group of people only. Any advertisement for diner specials, sidewalk sale tables and booths, etc. The police would have to allow anyone to remove these items from the entire public right of way or they would not be consitant with the enforcment of the ordinance. Standing by and watching the store owner remove the signs will once again cost the Jackson police department and ultimately city residents a pretty penny.
Sharon @ MLT: But I don’t find Mr. Peters cute, cuddly or just a wonderful Charlie Brown like figure. Bottom line, the man is a thief. I can’t say it any better than Mary has earlier in this thread.
Oh good grief, he’s not a “thief.” The local ordinance specifically states that property owners are supposed to get rid of stuff like that on the sidewalks, etc.
—–
Maybe he could blame it on listening to waaay too much Naughty by Nature back in the day? You know, cause he is down with OPP? (Other People’s Property)
The dude looks pretty darn mild to me. He evidently knows the law…
—–
But in the end, I just can’t smile and laugh about this issue. Because what we are discussing here is abortion. And abortion is…well…I was trying to find the word and what I came up with is monstrous. Abortion is monstrous. It’s the ending of innocent human life for profit. I go back and forth on graphic abortion signs. Not sure how I feel about them. But this PL group was trying to do something and that’s a good thing.
I don’t mind them protesting, but the pathetic attempts at baiting the police, hoping to “get something on them” that would make for a potential lawsuit – they have sued in the past – is just plain sorry.
The whole deal is an incredible attempt to obfuscate that Created Equal was in the wrong here, and beyond that, to try and construct mountains out of molehills.
Daven: So it seems the argument here is to this extent…If I were to see you illegally parked your car on a public space, I as a private citezen can pick your car up and take it to my place…
Daven, if the law said that it was your duty, like it does for what Mr. Peters did, then yeah.
Doug,
If I remove a skateboard from the sidewalk in front of my business and refuse to return it to the owner, I’m a thief.
Mr. Peters should have returned the signs to the owners or turned them over to police.
“Baiting” the police is an absurd argument. Its like arguing about a traffic ticket. The police simply say “Remove your signs or they will be confiscated”. The police will always have the upper hand. One good reason never to argue when you are pulled over.
As for the example of the car, not quite Doug. You would have the responsibility to call the police and have them remove it. I strongly advise you don’t take it upon yourself to move anyone’s car without their permission, unless of course its a life and death emergency.
Another thing Doug,
The owner of that car might be a 6’4″ 350lb foul tempered dock worker who is not at all happy you have driven off with his car, and intends to discuss this matter with you. As I have pointed out in the past confrontations can be extremely dangerous so it is always best to leave these matters to the police. Some people may not take kindly to you walking off with their property.
“In this case, an anti choice group acted like a bunch of brats. They refused to follow the law. They didn’t care about stopping abortion, they cared about people looking at them.”
Spot on. Any talk of the police “not doing their job,” here, is nonsense. The police told the would-be protesters numerous times that the signs could not be placed on the ground. All they had to do would be carry them. Somehow, they were incapable of understanding this?
This was not a “protest,” this was a bunch of clowns waving cameras at the police and others. These scammers bear the blame.
John says:
August 4, 2014 at 3:13 pm
“Already had a couple hundred comments on this. Freedom of speech is fine, and signs could have been held if they were desired. Just don’t obstruct other people, sidewalks, etc., too much.”
And Created Equal was told numerous times. They were not interested in protesting, they just wanted to make videos, and this time they got caught acting in bad faith all along.
Marko,
If the ordinance was being violated then the police had a responsibility to act. Whether people knowingly or unknowingly violate the ordinance is irrelevant, the police act. There would have been no incident if the police had done their job.
If an officer tells you that you must move your vehicle, does he ask several times? More likely its move it or it will be moved at great expense to you.
Mister Peters took care of the ordinance being violated. He removed the signs. People who think the police “should have done more” – would you have them wading into the protesters, batons a-swinging? The peace was maintained, and everybody went home safe and sound at the end of the day.
“And Created Equal was told numerous times. They were not interested in protesting, they just wanted to make videos, and this time they got caught acting in bad faith all along.”
This is evident, and what really seals the deal is that we see this while watching videos made by Created Equal. We are seeing a slanted, edited portion of things, intended to sway people towards the side of Created Equal. Were we to have an objective view of the happenings, the “bad faith” aspect of Created Equal would be so overwhelming that any pretense of concern about other things would be laughed away, and rightly so.
Cambria: Were we to have an objective view of the happenings, the “bad faith” aspect of Created Equal would be so overwhelming that any pretense of concern about other things would be laughed away, and rightly so.
I think that fact has been there all along, since the first video was posted. It would be good to interview Mr. Peters and hear what the police themselves have to say.
Regardless, let us not forget it was the sainted pro-life people who decided they were such special snowflakes they didn’t have to follow the laws. They saved no “babies” and just drew attention to themselves. They aren’t pro-life, they are pro look at me. If they are too lazy to lift signs 2 inches off the ground they aren’t really interested in babies. I cant believe PLs are rallying around them.
Cambria,
No, Mr.Peters walked off with someone else’s property. He should have returned it to the protestors or the police.
It is the responsibility of the police to enforce ordinances, not the responsibility of citizens, unless police are absent. Especially when 8 of them are standing around doing nothing.
Somehow you have missed the point when I have repeatedly stated that the police could have prevented the whole situation by ordering the signs removed, then removing them if the PL people did not. Just as a police officer would order you to move your illegally parked vehicle, then either cite you or have it towed if you don’t comply.
No Tenn,
The police for some reason did not do their job, even though 8 of them were standing around.
You may knowingly or unknowingly park your car illegally with the intention of returning in a matter of moments. Something I’m sure many of us have done. However, it doesn’t matter if we did it knowingly or unknowingly, the police still have the responsibility to tell you to move your vehicle or tow it if you don’t comply.
Steven,
You contradict yourself. You say the PL people were violating the law, yet the talk of police not doing their job is nonsense. If they were violating the law why didn’t police confiscate the signs? That would be the police officers’ job.
Mary, Mr. Peters did return the posters. It’s not like he still has them. ;)
In this case, it indeed is the responsibility of some citizens to enforce ordinances, i.e. “It shall likewise be unlawful for any person in charge of or occupying any property to permit goods, wares, merchandise, boxes, barrels, containers, dispenser, signs, basketball goals or other obstructions to remain on the street.”
The police do not have to do things to your schedule, i.e. you’re picking a point in time and complaining about the police, when the reality is that the situation was well in hand, i.e. order was maintained all the way through. Whether or not Mr. Peters had heroically stepped into the breach, things were fine, despite the protesters already having been told that they weren’t supposed to put the signs on the ground, and despite them not removing the signs themselves.
If the protesters were not cited, then they got off easy, so why would any pro-lifers be complaining?
As for an illegally parked car, if the law said, “It shall be unlawful for the property owner or tenant to allow the illegally parked car to remain on the street,” then in no way would the police necessarily have to be involved, just as is the case with the signs and Mr. Peters.
Doug,
Mr. Peters did not immediately return them to the protesters or the police. He held on to the items.
There was an ordinance violation, the police saw and did not take action. They were not doing their job. Mr. Peters should not have to do their job for them. Laugh all you want but this did create a potentially confrontational situation, which police should make every effort to prevent.
The police are responsible for removing the car, not you as a private citizen. This puts you at risk, especially if the car owner has a particularly nasty temper or isn’t very rational. Also, can you point to a law that says as a property owner you are responsible for parking violations on city streets?
Mary: Mr. Peters did not immediately return them to the protesters or the police. He held on to the items.
So what? The items weren’t supposed to be there in the first place and Mr. Peters didn’t make high-fiber soup out of them; the protesters got their stuff back, in the end. Created Equal was in the wrong, here, all along (at least until Mr. Peters removed their transgressions) and to pick on the actions of others, who were not in violation of the law, and to say in effect, “their timing was not perfect,” man-oh-man that’s bein’ awful darn picky.
—–
There was an ordinance violation, the police saw and did not take action. They were not doing their job.
They did their job just fine. Peace was maintained, they told Created Equal what the deal was, apparently several times, and they waited on the arrival of a supervisor to do more. It all worked out well in the end.
—–
Mr. Peters should not have to do their job for them.
He didn’t mind too much. If he had, he wouldn’t have been moving the signs.
—–
Laugh all you want but this did create a potentially confrontational situation, which police should make every effort to prevent.
The situation was obviously well in hand. Do you not think it makes sense that the officers on the scene were told to wait until a supervisor got there, to take any further action? This is, after all, a group that has sued the police, there, in the past.
—–
The police are responsible for removing the car, not you as a private citizen. This puts you at risk, especially if the car owner has a particularly nasty temper or isn’t very rational.
Sure, in general that is true. However, we are talking about a situation where the saw says that certain private citizens are not only not prohibited from doing it, but moreover that they have a responsibility to take action.
—–
Also, can you point to a law that says as a property owner you are responsible for parking violations on city streets?
None that I know of. However, you made the analogy of the illegally placed car (August 8, 2:49 p.m.). In Jackson, with the illegally placed signs, the law does say, in effect, “Get that stuff outta there.”
No Doug, like the skateboard analogy, I must return it to you or give it to the police. Its not my option to keep your property and return it when I get darn good and ready.
How many times must I tell you Doug? If the police had done their job by immediately removing the signs, there would have been no incident?
Since we’re talking about illegal parking. Let’s say someone’s vehicle is obstructing your driveway. They are still on public property, but your driveway is blocked. I hope you are wise enough to let the police handle this, as you have no idea who this person is and confronting him may be dangerous. You call the police. They say “Well Doug, we asked him several times to move and he still sits there. Hey we tried”.
Your reaction would be that the officers have done their job, right?
No Doug this situation was not “well in hand”, it never should have happened. You cannot predict what people will do or how quickly. Just like the newspaper article I mentioned of the woman with the brick inflicted skull fracture resulting from a “difference of opinion”. It is the responsibility of police to prevent such situations.
Yes, the law says “get that stuff out of here”, but that is why you have the police. I strongly advise you call them and avoid placing yourself in a confrontational situation.
No Doug, like the skateboard analogy, I must return it to you or give it to the police. Its not my option to keep your property and return it when I get darn good and ready
Different deal, Mary, because as it happens there is a law on the books in Jackson about property owners and operators,and stuff on the sidewalk.
—–
How many times must I tell you Doug? If the police had done their job by immediately removing the signs, there would have been no incident?
If if if…. If Created Equal had been in line with the law, that’s really where “there would have been no incident.”
After that, we can speak of any number of hypotheticals, but reality is that nobody got hurt, no property was destroyed, and Mr. Peters got a little exercise.
——
Since we’re talking about illegal parking. Let’s say someone’s vehicle is obstructing your driveway. They are still on public property, but your driveway is blocked. I hope you are wise enough to let the police handle this, as you have no idea who this person is and confronting him may be dangerous. You call the police. They say “Well Doug, we asked him several times to move and he still sits there. Hey we tried”. Your reaction would be that the officers have done their job, right?
Of course not, and of course that situation is different, on more than one count, from the Jackson deal. In Jackson, it wasn’t like Mr. Peters was pleading with the police to get the signs removed. He’d already taken care of it and the law is behind him.
—–
No Doug this situation was not “well in hand”, it never should have happened. You cannot predict what people will do or how quickly. Just like the newspaper article I mentioned of the woman with the brick inflicted skull fracture resulting from a “difference of opinion”. It is the responsibility of police to prevent such situations.
Again, and by far – the most prominent “never should have happened” is that Created Equal should have never plunked those signs down.
Jared had it exactly right, on the first thread:
July 19, 2014 at 3:24 pm
“As long as the signs are not larger, higher, etc., than what the local laws allow, then okay – as long as the protesters keep them on their own property, rather than messing things up for the townspeople, merchants, etc.”
—–
Yes, the law says “get that stuff out of here”, but that is why you have the police. I strongly advise you call them and avoid placing yourself in a confrontational situation.
Well, Mr. Peters had it handled. The police aren’t garbagemen – they don’t have to do it. It was obvious there wasn’t going to be a confrontation – Created Equal was just worried about waving cameras all over the place, and Mr. Peters is a mellow old dude.
If you seriously think the police did “wrong,” call them up and see what they have to say. I bet they tell you that all was calm, that they’d had trouble with Created Equal before, that the officers had been told to refrain from taking any more action than was necessary, and that eventually a supervisor came to finish things up.
Wrong Doug,
The law is the law, and it says obstructions must be removed. Whether its a skateboard or a sign, I don’t have the right to keep it. I either return it to its owner if he/she is standing right there or turn it over to police.
“No one got hurt and Mr.Peters got a little exercise”.
Not how it works Doug. Whether or not a person knowingly violates an ordinance the police have the responsibility to act.
As for the obstructed driveway analogy, again its about the police doing their job. An ordinance is being broken, whether or not the driver is aware of this is irrelevant, and the police have a responsibility to act. As a private citizen you should not be doing the police officer’s job while they stand around.
No the police aren’t garbagemen, they have a responsibility to enforce the law and could have ordered the signs removed, cited the protestors, or confiscated the signs. They should not have stood by while a private citizen puts himself into a potentially confrontational situation by doing THEIR job.
I seriously doubt the Jackson PD gives a fat flying about my opinion on anything. Again Doug, no excuse not to do their job.
Hi Mary,
This has really grown into quite the thread. I would like to know if this ordinance was explained to Created Equal when they talked to officials about setting uo the event.
It seems somehow wires were crossed. But the police only did half their job by telling them signs couldn’t be displayed on the ground.
The other half would have been to tell the property owner not to confiscate those signs.
Hi Hans,
All the police had to do was inform CE that they were in violation of an ordinance and what it was.
CE then had to comply with the ordinance and the police order to move the signs.
If they did not, then police had a responsibility to warn them their signs could be confiscated, then do it if necessary.
Mr. Peters, right or wrong, should never have had to get involved.
Doug says: August 9, 2014 at 11:13 am
“Jared had it exactly right, on the first thread:
July 19, 2014 at 3:24 pm
“As long as the signs are not larger, higher, etc., than what the local laws allow, then okay – as long as the protesters keep them on their own property, rather than messing things up for the townspeople, merchants, etc.”
In all these posts, this is the answer. The blame is first and foremost on Created Equal, for trying to scam the police (just look at the false pretenses presented in the videos), and for being in violation of the law. All the hand-wringing about “somebody else could have done something else differently at a later time” is a joke.
Teegan,
Why is this the equivalent of rocket science to some of you folks on this thread?
If the CE people knowingly violated the ordinance, they were in the wrong.
Whether or not people knowingly violate an ordinance is irrelevant. The police are supposed to act.
The police should inform CE that the law is being violated and they must remove their signs or they will be issued citations and/or have their signs confiscated. End of story, no incident.
Like the example I gave Doug. If someone illegally blocks your driveway, its irrelevant if they know they are in violation of the law or not. The police order them to move and if they don’t, the vehicle is towed.
It’s a bit puzzling. What does “public sidewalk” mean when the property owner is required to shovel snow? Protesters are allowed to keep walking back and forth I suppose, but can’t stand or display a sign?
https://www.google.com/#q=jackson+public+sidewalk
Hi Hans,
Snow could certainly be considered a dangerous obstruction.
Also its bad for business if customers can’t get in.
If I’m not mistaken homeowners must do the same. At least we always had to.
Seems to me its in the best interest of the business owner to shovel the snow.
Hi Mary,
I can certainly see both sides. My druthers would be for protests only directly in front of the offensive business, not the neighboring ones.
But it would certainly be harder to not be obstructive. That’s what I hated most about the old sit-ins at Columbia and other campuses.
Mary: The police should inform CE that the law is being violated and they must remove their signs or they will be issued citations and/or have their signs confiscated. End of story, no incident.
There wasn’t any “incident,” really, Mary. The police did tell CE. If this had been a pro-choice group, you’d have dozens of pro-lifers here correctly noting that the fault began and remained with the protesters.
The “story” developed because CE was really only interested in taking videos and trying to make something out of the situation.
Yeah, CE could have been cited, and if they weren’t, then they got off easy. Nobody else was “the loser” here. The police don’t have to operate according to your schedule, i.e. citing them right away – if that would have made any difference.
Like the example I gave Doug. If someone illegally blocks your driveway, its irrelevant if they know they are in violation of the law or not. The police order them to move and if they don’t, the vehicle is towed.
In this situation, the police told them of the law, and there was the equivalent of the “Mr. Peters Towing Service.” ;)
—–
Hans: It’s a bit puzzling. What does “public sidewalk” mean when the property owner is required to shovel snow? Protesters are allowed to keep walking back and forth I suppose, but can’t stand or display a sign?
Mostly true – only thing you didn’t take into account is they could have displayed a sign or many signs; they could have held a massive “fan” of signs in both hands, for that matter.
Lot of places do require the property owner/manager to shovel snow, put salt on ice, etc. I doubt that enforcement is too harsh, i.e. I bet there is a warning or multiple warnings before any penalties are laid on.
As for “obstructing,” most sidewalks are at least 4 feet wide in residential areas, and for commercial or ‘downtown’ areas it’s 6 feet or more. I’d think you could have a single line of people holding signs along the way, so they take up a couple feet, leaving room for people to walk through.
Hans: My druthers would be for protests only directly in front of the offensive business, not the neighboring ones.
I agree, Hans.
(Have to laugh – just had a vision of Mr. Peters, “The Mad Sidewalk Un-Obstructer of Jackson” firing up a snowblower and charging at the protesters…)
Hi Doug,
I have never maintained that the CE people were blameless so please refrain from any assumptions of favoritism.
Its not my “schedule” Doug, its the police officer’s responsibility. Had they acted immediately…end of story.
“Mr. Peters Towing Service”. Well not quite. “Mr.Peters Towing Service” would need police authorization to remove a vehicle. He also doesn’t keep the car as long as he pleases.
He tows it to the city garage or some other police designated area. It remains a police matter.
Mary: “Mr. Peters Towing Service”. Well not quite. “Mr.Peters Towing Service” would need police authorization to remove a vehicle. He also doesn’t keep the car as long as he pleases.
Mr. Peters was authorized by the law to remove the signs. And the CE people got the signs back. It’s not like ol’ Mr. P is still holding them.
—–
Its not my “schedule” Doug, its the police officer’s responsibility. Had they acted immediately…end of story.
I disagree. The police – as far as I can tell – had been told to lay off and await the arrival of their supervisor. This is understandable, as CE has sued them in the past. No harm to anybody came in them doing this.
—–
I have never maintained that the CE people were blameless so please refrain from any assumptions of favoritism.
Well, Mary, I can’t help but think it would make a difference, even to you. As to the many pro-lifers that aren’t posting on this thread because of the way it is, it’s obvious. If it was pro-choicers who were in the wrong, they’d be all over it.
Doug,
You’re making my argument for me. If the police had done their job, Mr. Peters wouldn’t have had to. Mr.Peters held on to the signs. He did not have that right. Sure he returned them. That’s like me saying “Doug, so what if I found your wallet and wouldn’t immediately return it to you even though you were standing right there. You eventually got it back, didn’t you? So what’s the problem?”
“Lay off” can have any number of interpretations, but it doesn’t excuse an officer from doing his/her job.
“Well Mary, I can’t help but think it would make a difference..”
Doug you shouldn’t assume. It makes an a@@ out or U and ME.
I’m correct in that assumption, though. I don’t think Mr. Peters cared, nor did the police, nor even did CE, once they saw that the police weren’t going to take the bait.
Mary, between you and me, you can have the last word on this one. I have one picture to post, but that’s not arguing one way or the other.
Doug,
Its not about “baiting” police, ok? The police had only to do their job.
http://i1377.photobucket.com/albums/ah56/porkloin1/MrPetersCharlie_zps5913742e.png
LOLLLL,
You son of a gun!!
of a gun
Oh, so now you takin’ it easy on me… :p
Come on Doug,
We have our differences but you know I am very fond of you! :)