They might not renew the permit, but I'll bet'cha they still hang out there and the city doesn't do much about it.

GAT_00: So, how are the people who always say that OWS doesn't have permits to protest going to spin a failure to renew their permit?

That the police are now totally justified in using deadly force to remove them?

FTA "You can't sit there and argue all day and fight and try to fight the law because, however you look at it, the law is going to win. But, at the same time, if you keep it peaceful, they're not going to mess with you," said protester David Ogonowski.


Wow.

GAT_00: So, how are the people who always say that OWS doesn't have permits to protest going to spin a failure to renew their permit?

If they don't respect the law and go home, they're all criminals who deserve whatever's coming to them, up to and including live ammo. Kent State everywhere! Show those hippies who's boss!

And keep the government out of my Medicare!

The Boston group was back in court today. I dont know how it went though.

And there you go,

No freedom to assemble for you!

GAT_00: So, how are the people who always say that OWS doesn't have permits to protest going to spin a failure to renew their permit?

"Demonstrators had hoped to extend their protest into April, but recreation and parks officials said permits only last five days and are limited to 150 people."

I don't think there's much spin required.

skullkrusher: GAT_00: So, how are the people who always say that OWS doesn't have permits to protest going to spin a failure to renew their permit?

"Demonstrators had hoped to extend their protest into April, but recreation and parks officials said permits only last five days and are limited to 150 people."

I don't think there's much spin required.

How long until one of them figures out all they have to do is fill out 25 protest forms under 25 different names each for a different 5 day period?

Good ol' Balmer...

Guelph35: skullkrusher: GAT_00: So, how are the people who always say that OWS doesn't have permits to protest going to spin a failure to renew their permit?

"Demonstrators had hoped to extend their protest into April, but recreation and parks officials said permits only last five days and are limited to 150 people."

I don't think there's much spin required.

How long until one of them figures out all they have to do is fill out 25 protest forms under 25 different names each for a different 5 day period?

if they haven't by now, I'd say never.

Where are all the colonial LARPers who cry, piss, and/or moan about their constitutional freedoms being trampled when constitutional freedoms are being trampled? Oh, right, stocking up on ammo to prepare for when the gubmint's gon' git their gunz because there's a half-black Democrat in the White House.

#SURPRISED

Sergeant Grumbles: GAT_00: So, how are the people who always say that OWS doesn't have permits to protest going to spin a failure to renew their permit?

That the police are now totally justified in using deadly force to remove them?





Are they that stupid?





Maybe so.

EyeballKid: Where are all the colonial LARPers who cry, piss, and/or moan about their constitutional freedoms being trampled when constitutional freedoms are being trampled? Oh, right, stocking up on ammo to prepare for when the gubmint's gon' git their gunz because there's a half-black Democrat in the White House.

so bring a case questioning the constitutionality of permits to use public space.

TFA: But, at the same time, if you keep it peaceful, they're not going to mess with you

Oh, you precious, naive little thing, you... I hope you bring a tissue when they decide to start hurling tear gas and stun grenades.

skullkrusher: so bring a case questioning the constitutionality of permits to use public space.

Or rightly realize it's yet another bullshiat attempt by modern-day aristocracy to limit your freedoms and keep your eyes on the prize. I'd much rather they keep on message about the income disparity and corruption of money and politics than try to whittle away at municipal ordinances.

skullkrusher: EyeballKid: Where are all the colonial LARPers who cry, piss, and/or moan about their constitutional freedoms being trampled when constitutional freedoms are being trampled? Oh, right, stocking up on ammo to prepare for when the gubmint's gon' git their gunz because there's a half-black Democrat in the White House.

so bring a case questioning the constitutionality of permits to use public space.

A case of what? Tea? Sam Adams beer?

Sergeant Grumbles: skullkrusher: so bring a case questioning the constitutionality of permits to use public space.

Or rightly realize it's yet another bullshiat attempt by modern-day aristocracy to limit your freedoms and keep your eyes on the prize. I'd much rather they keep on message about the income disparity and corruption of money and politics than try to whittle away at municipal ordinances.

Permits are not a new invention designed by the aristocracy to stifle your constitutional right to urban camping,

sendtodave: skullkrusher: EyeballKid: Where are all the colonial LARPers who cry, piss, and/or moan about their constitutional freedoms being trampled when constitutional freedoms are being trampled? Oh, right, stocking up on ammo to prepare for when the gubmint's gon' git their gunz because there's a half-black Democrat in the White House.

so bring a case questioning the constitutionality of permits to use public space.

A case of what? Tea? Sam Adams beer?

Mike's Hard Lemonade

wmoonfox: . I hope you bring a tissue when they decide to start hurling tear gas and stun grenades.

If they decide to do that, they're going to look really bad.

skullkrusher: Permits are not a new invention designed by the aristocracy to stifle your constitutional right to urban campingpeaceably assemble ,

But that's how they're being used.

Sergeant Grumbles: skullkrusher: Permits are not a new invention designed by the aristocracy to stifle your constitutional right to urban campingpeaceably assemble ,

But that's how they're being used.

laws requiring permits to use public space being enforced is evidence that these laws are used by the aristocracy to stifle freedoms? Like I said, fight against permit laws. Or occupy public land without a permit and deal with the legal consequences. Or get a permit. You just don't get to biatch about laws being enforced which apply to family reunion BBQs just as much as they do to political protests.

GAT_00: So, how are the people who always say that OWS doesn't have permits to protest going to spin a failure to renew their permit?

Permits are issued for 5 days at a time for 150 people. They want their permit to be for 6 months and be for unlimited people, and also allow them to set up a 24 hour a day permanent camp. So basically they are asking the city to completely throw away all the park rules for them, and were denied. No spin required.

Sergeant Grumbles: skullkrusher: Permits are not a new invention designed by the aristocracy to stifle your constitutional right to urban campingpeaceably assemble ,

But that's how they're being used.

No, they aren't. The right to peaceably assemble doesn't trump every other law in existance. The state has a right to manage its properties.

Eh, the group here isn't that big. At least not big enough for them to deploy riot cops or heavy equipment.

skullkrusher: EyeballKid: Where are all the colonial LARPers who cry, piss, and/or moan about their constitutional freedoms being trampled when constitutional freedoms are being trampled? Oh, right, stocking up on ammo to prepare for when the gubmint's gon' git their gunz because there's a half-black Democrat in the White House.

so bring a case questioning the constitutionality of permits to use public space.

Or bring a case petitioning the right of the state to manage it's public proeprties.

The first amendment != hall pass to do whatever you feel like doing. No really.

Protest... go home... protest... go home.

That said:

Either protest within what the law allows, or get guns (assuming you are willing to kill/die for your cause). The 2nd amendment is intended to enforce the 1st.

Given that the senate wants to give the military the authority to hold US citizens indefinitely, it may be coming to that. The modmins don't want us to talk about that today. So maybe you TRers can vote a link through. They killed mine. It's a damn sight more important than Lady Gaga's skin regimen, but no... we won't discuss the US becoming a police state here.

EWreckedSean: No, they aren't. The right to peaceably assemble doesn't trump every other law in existance. The state has a right to manage its properties.

Yes, they are. The right to peaceably assemble takes priority over "Park Hours are 8 AM - 8 PM". These citizens are the state and should be free to use public land to exercise their rights. The city would save money by helping provide santitation, for their own citizens, rather than telling the riot police to suit up.

EWreckedSean: skullkrusher: EyeballKid: Where are all the colonial LARPers who cry, piss, and/or moan about their constitutional freedoms being trampled when constitutional freedoms are being trampled? Oh, right, stocking up on ammo to prepare for when the gubmint's gon' git their gunz because there's a half-black Democrat in the White House.

so bring a case questioning the constitutionality of permits to use public space.

Or bring a case petitioning the right of the state to manage it's public proeprties.

the social contract only applies when you're trying to raise taxes on rich people. Remember that and you'll save yourself a bunch of time on Fark.

Sergeant Grumbles: EWreckedSean: No, they aren't. The right to peaceably assemble doesn't trump every other law in existance. The state has a right to manage its properties.

Yes, they are. The right to peaceably assemble takes priority over "Park Hours are 8 AM - 8 PM". These citizens are the state and should be free to use public land to exercise their rights. The city would save money by helping provide santitation, for their own citizens, rather than telling the riot police to suit up.

No, they don't. Sorry, no court in the world is going to hold up that the first amendment denies the state the right to manage it's own properties, including setting reasonable rules of operation. By your logic, you should be able to bring a gun into a court room. I mean what gives the state to right to say you can't bear arms on public property?

SkinnyHead: If one protest group is allowed to occupy the public square indefinitely, don't that interfere with the rights of others to assemble and express their views in the public square?

Keeping on topic and just saying this:

Occupy in Baltimore already forced a pancreatic cancer support group, that had reserved the space months in advance, to relocate.

That thread got redlit of course.

*poof* out

My god, only in America do people try and get permits to protest.

/no wonder they cant accomplish anything

farscape: My god, only in America do people try and get permits to protest.

/no wonder they cant accomplish anything

The permit isn't to protest, the permit is to use the park, which has rules governing its usage. If they want to stand out on the street corner, they can do it all day and night long with no permit what so ever.

EWreckedSean: By your logic, you should be able to bring a gun into a court room. I mean what gives the state to right to say you can't bear arms on public property?

I really don't have a problem with that.
Just as illegal to shoot a judge inside a courtroom as outside of it, so don't see what the issue is besides "safety".

skullkrusher: Sergeant Grumbles: skullkrusher: Permits are not a new invention designed by the aristocracy to stifle your constitutional right to urban campingpeaceably assemble ,

But that's how they're being used.

laws requiring permits to use public space being enforced is evidence that these laws are used by the aristocracy to stifle freedoms? Like I said, fight against permit laws. Or occupy public land without a permit and deal with the legal consequences. Or get a permit. You just don't get to biatch about laws being enforced which apply to family reunion BBQs just as much as they do to political protests.

I believe that's exactly what they're doing, isn't it?

SkinnyHead: If one protest group is allowed to occupy the public square indefinitely, don't that interfere with the rights of others to assemble and express their views in the public square?

the free market of protesting would work itself out in such a case.

Then they should assemble anyway. Build barricades. Make it as hard as possible to dispose them. Use shields. Use gas masks. Taunt the authorities. The way they win is by inciting police to over-reaction.

HeartBurnKid: skullkrusher: Sergeant Grumbles: skullkrusher: Permits are not a new invention designed by the aristocracy to stifle your constitutional right to urban campingpeaceably assemble ,

But that's how they're being used.

laws requiring permits to use public space being enforced is evidence that these laws are used by the aristocracy to stifle freedoms? Like I said, fight against permit laws. Or occupy public land without a permit and deal with the legal consequences. Or get a permit. You just don't get to biatch about laws being enforced which apply to family reunion BBQs just as much as they do to political protests.

I believe that's exactly what they're doing, isn't it?

So there protest is about the legality of permitting in parks for large groups? If that is the case, then I encourage them to stay there and bring to light this injustice using civil disobedience.

Robespierre: The way they win is by inciting police to over-reaction.

Don't have to do all that work to get an overreaction. Sitting quietly with arms locked is enough.

Don't register your organization or rent and office, and you'll never need a permit. Ever.

GAT_00: So, how are the people who always say that OWS doesn't have permits to protest going to spin a failure to renew their permit?

Go down to your local government office and ask for a 5 month use permit. You will be denied as well, the whole public use being for everyone and not one entity thing.

Sergeant Grumbles: Robespierre: The way they win is by inciting police to over-reaction.

Don't have to do all that work to get an overreaction. Sitting quietly with arms locked is enough.

I dunno man, i think someone is pretty much going to have to get shot. At least one.

SnatchTease: Don't register your organization or rent and office, and you'll never need a permit. Ever.

Yes you will. The permit is for use of the park.

Robespierre: I dunno man, i think someone is pretty much going to have to get shot. At least one.

And I wish it wasn't so depressing to think that some asshole cop isn't just itching to shoot at a row of silent, arms-locked protestors. My point is that the protestors don't even have to try. Showing up is enough. The less they actually do, the bigger the martyr when some protestor gets blasted for standing quietly.