Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sun News Network)   News: People arrested at a protest. FARK: They were arrested for protesting a bylaw which requires protesters to submit a route prior to the start of the demonstration. Irony: They didn't submit a route   (sunnewsnetwork.ca ) divider line
    More: Ironic, mass arrest, Montreal, demonstrations, roads, objections  
•       •       •

2277 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Apr 2013 at 5:12 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-04-06 11:55:00 AM  
Subby, there's a slight difference between a gathering of a few dozen people who stand on the sidewalks and don't impede traffic versus a march of over 300 people who fully intend to make use the streets. But you knew that.

Lesson #1 on how NOT to have your protest taken seriously:
www.sunnewsnetwork.ca
 
2013-04-06 12:10:52 PM  
The only thing ironic about this is how little subby understands irony.

NutWrench: Subby, there's a slight difference between a gathering of a few dozen people who stand on the sidewalks and don't impede traffic versus a march of over 300 people who fully intend to make use the streets. But you knew that.

FTA: Police declared the protest illegal and less than 30 minutes later, the city's police force had cornered all the protesters and started fining them $637 each for participating in an illegal assembly.


A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.
 
2013-04-06 12:22:10 PM  

vartian: A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.


Don't worry citizen, you can pay it in full and hire a lawyer to fight it later.
 
2013-04-06 04:36:59 PM  
I wonder what prevents them from outlining their route to include just about anywhere they might go.

As a side note- At Grey Cup 1998 in Vancouver, the city did not allow a parade through the busy downtown.  So a group of fans asked for, and got, a protest permit that included a route.  We had a 'protest' that included fans in costume, mascots, drunken revelry, and several police pipe bands from other cities.  We picked up random citizens along the way and added to our numbers.  We marched down Robson the wrong direction and brought traffic to a standstill.

The people stuck in traffic were generally in favour, The cops wanted to do something, but how do you bust up a parade without looking like assholes?

It was glorious.

/thats how Calgarians roll
 
2013-04-06 04:38:45 PM  
How is this irony?
 
2013-04-06 04:52:58 PM  

SilentStrider: How is this irony?


It seems like the opposite of irony. You would expect those protesters not to submit a route.

However, this is Fark, so I don't expect irony to accompany the ironic tag.

/Not an expert on irony.
 
2013-04-06 05:15:17 PM  
All I need is a knife
 
2013-04-06 05:15:21 PM  
How is this irony? Isn't the whole point of their protest the fact that they have to submit a route in the first place? If anything, it's Misson Accomplished or something.
 
2013-04-06 05:18:57 PM  
And here I was, all ready to post Inigo Montoya and complain about subby's lack of grasp on irony. Instead, all you jerks who got here first ruined it for me.
 
2013-04-06 05:20:07 PM  
"(The law) is a repressive manoeuvre that favours social peace"

Darn those law makers wanting everyone to have a peaceful day despite some hippies wanting to get all in their faces over tragic things like having the lowest tuition costs in north america being slightly less lower then everywhere else and other socially catastrophic injustices.

/Meanwhile, the french did have that whole revolution thing and I think we're pretty close to due for another one, plus they coined the term sabotage in relation to that.
 
2013-04-06 05:21:18 PM  
Kafka tag?
 
2013-04-06 05:21:52 PM  

vartian: The only thing ironic about this is how little subby understands irony.


Just like that song about irony in which nothing mentioned is ironic. I find that ironic.
 
2013-04-06 05:22:24 PM  
The OWS morans had this same argument in Portland last year.  The police were willing to shut down roads and assign officers to keep them safe if they'd just tell them their route.  Instead the SEIU and other "anarchists" just marched wherever they felt like and got all pissy when people tried to drive down streets and shiat.  Fark them.
 
2013-04-06 05:23:04 PM  

vartian: The only thing ironic about this is how little subby understands irony.

NutWrench: Subby, there's a slight difference between a gathering of a few dozen people who stand on the sidewalks and don't impede traffic versus a march of over 300 people who fully intend to make use the streets. But you knew that.

FTA: Police declared the protest illegal and less than 30 minutes later, the city's police force had cornered all the protesters and started fining them $637 each for participating in an illegal assembly.

A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.


They wouldn't have been fined if they had gotten the permit. Which isn't exactly an incredibly expensive or difficult process.

They got slapped with a big fine because they were morons who thought they were above the law. Tough titties.
 
2013-04-06 05:26:33 PM  
Keep hiding in your houses and asking for permission.
 
2013-04-06 05:26:55 PM  
Yeah, I'm the guy who always rolls my eyes at people who every post try to say that wasn't ironic, but that wasn't ironic.
 
2013-04-06 05:27:34 PM  

NutWrench: Subby, there's a slight difference between a gathering of a few dozen people who stand on the sidewalks and don't impede traffic versus a march of over 300 people who fully intend to make use the streets. But you knew that.

Lesson #1 on how NOT to have your protest taken seriously:


So right, I mean look at those absurd black costumes.

Hey, why's that panda there?
 
2013-04-06 05:28:07 PM  

vartian: FTA: Police declared the protest illegal and less than 30 minutes later, the city's police force had cornered all the protesters and started fining them $637 each for participating in an illegal assembly.

A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.


Fines increase until the illegal behavior falls to acceptable levels.  Has nothing to do with economic class, fairness, or justice.
 
2013-04-06 05:29:31 PM  
Pick up that can, citizen.
 
2013-04-06 05:30:17 PM  
Alanis is more ironic then this story.
 
2013-04-06 05:31:08 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: vartian: FTA: Police declared the protest illegal and less than 30 minutes later, the city's police force had cornered all the protesters and started fining them $637 each for participating in an illegal assembly.

A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.

Fines increase until the illegal behavior falls to acceptable levels.  Has nothing to do with economic class, fairness, or justice.


'Fines' are sanctioned force by those who have a monopoly on force, and have nothing to do with justice.

/whos the victim?
 
2013-04-06 05:41:06 PM  
Tests for Irony:

1.) The Two Audience Test. Is it possible that two different audiences could hear the story, but one, with the benefit of extra insight, sees the events in a completely different way?

2.) Can any of the key elements of the story be placed in "quotations" to highlight or underline the ironic element?
 
2013-04-06 05:41:44 PM  

Todd300: /whos the victim?


People who want to use the roads?


I'm perfectly fine with it when the state slaps down some anarchist morons for being stupid. Seriously, you give them your route and get your permit, you don't get fined. Magic!
 
2013-04-06 05:45:09 PM  

unyon: I wonder what prevents them from outlining their route to include just about anywhere they might go.

As a side note- At Grey Cup 1998 in Vancouver, the city did not allow a parade through the busy downtown.  So a group of fans asked for, and got, a protest permit that included a route.  We had a 'protest' that included fans in costume, mascots, drunken revelry, and several police pipe bands from other cities.  We picked up random citizens along the way and added to our numbers.  We marched down Robson the wrong direction and brought traffic to a standstill.

The people stuck in traffic were generally in favour, The cops wanted to do something, but how do you bust up a parade without looking like assholes?

It was glorious.

/thats how Calgarians roll


*head scratch*?  Grey cup 1998 was in Winterpeg.  I know some Calgarians, they *do* tend to know what city they are in :)

When I drove Taxi in Saskatoon, I did pick up a guy from Edmonton who had no idea what city he was in. He kept asking me to take him to a bar in Edmonton's north end. I kept having to explain to him he was not in Edmonton. Too the point that I put the radio on and asked the other cab drivers what city we were in, when they all responded Saskatoon then he realised I wasn't just trying to fool him.
 
2013-04-06 05:46:17 PM  

fusillade762: vartian: The only thing ironic about this is how little subby understands irony.

Just like that song about irony in which nothing mentioned is ironic. I find that ironic.


Well, there's the black fly in the Chardonnay. I was totally expecting it to go for the Riesling because it's sweeter.
 
2013-04-06 05:46:57 PM  

AzDownboy: 2.) Can any of the key elements of the story be placed in "quotations" to highlight or underline the ironic element?


Who are you quoting? You mean italics or, as you say, an underline?

Interesting test, though.
 
2013-04-06 05:51:36 PM  

SilentStrider: How is this irony?


Maybe it rained.
 
2013-04-06 05:58:14 PM  
IRONY DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.  GOODNIGHT.
 
2013-04-06 05:58:17 PM  
That will teach people to protest.
 
2013-04-06 06:01:45 PM  

The Southern Dandy: SilentStrider: How is this irony?

Maybe it rained.


everybody had well pressed shirts? crisp pleats?
 
2013-04-06 06:03:35 PM  
Hey grammar nazis.. anne frank here.

According to MW dictionary, the third definition of irony is :


3: a) : incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result; an event or result marked by such incongruity

wouldn't you say that the intent of their sequence of events was not in line with the actual result?  Whilst i personally believe they INTENDED to get arrested, and it's therefore not ironic, subby was saying they were protesting to change the law, without being arrested.  So, yeah, ironic works here.  Sorry folks, you'll have to find some other trivial thing to feel superior about.
 
2013-04-06 06:05:54 PM  
I don't know much about irony, but my gut tells me that this should be tagged as Obvious.

My gut is also gnawing on my backbone right now, so it could be distracted enough to make a bad call.
 
2013-04-06 06:09:16 PM  
Irony is saying one thing and meaning another. That's all. Funny or appropriate coincidences are not ironic.
 
2013-04-06 06:16:53 PM  
No, this is how you properly protest an improperly written law. I don't know how they do it in Canadia, but in the US, if a law improperly conflicts with the 1st Amendment (by being overly broad or vague or restricting time/place/manner in a way it's not supposed to), standing requirements prevent someone from just taking the thing to court; someone has to have suffered "injury" by the law's enforcement. So you have your parade or whatever in violation of the statute, get fined or arrested, and then proceed to court on the grounds that it was an invalid law.

Then if the court is any good, the law is struck down and you are found not guilty since you can't violate an invalid law. Which, I assume, is what these protestors in Montreal were doing. So good for them.
 
2013-04-06 06:20:00 PM  

NutWrench: Subby, there's a slight difference between a gathering of a few dozen people who stand on the sidewalks and don't impede traffic versus a march of over 300 people who fully intend to make use the streets. But you knew that.

Lesson #1 on how NOT to have your protest taken seriously:
[www.sunnewsnetwork.ca image 431x242]


That panda is there because the Prime Minster of Canada can take the time out to do a photo op with some pandas that are going to the Toronto Zoo, but not meet with mayors who are going on hunger strikes, people that have walked thousands of miles to meet him, etc.

The only way to get the PM's attention seems to be to dress up like a panda.
 
2013-04-06 06:20:08 PM  
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble as long as they give the police their route, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 
2013-04-06 06:23:32 PM  

Todd300: BarkingUnicorn: vartian: FTA: Police declared the protest illegal and less than 30 minutes later, the city's police force had cornered all the protesters and started fining them $637 each for participating in an illegal assembly.

A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.

Fines increase until the illegal behavior falls to acceptable levels.  Has nothing to do with economic class, fairness, or justice.

'Fines' are sanctioned force by those who have a monopoly on force, and have nothing to do with justice.

/whos the victim?


It's a cromulently democratic monopoly provided by the ultimate source of power, the victims whose freedom of movement was restricted by the protesters.
 
2013-04-06 06:25:17 PM  

fusillade762: vartian: The only thing ironic about this is how little subby understands irony.

Just like that song about irony in which nothing mentioned is ironic. I find that ironic.


A Scotsman cloning a sheep: Now, THAT is ironic.
 
2013-04-06 06:28:02 PM  

theMagni: NutWrench: Subby, there's a slight difference between a gathering of a few dozen people who stand on the sidewalks and don't impede traffic versus a march of over 300 people who fully intend to make use the streets. But you knew that.

Lesson #1 on how NOT to have your protest taken seriously:
[www.sunnewsnetwork.ca image 431x242]

That panda is there because the Prime Minster of Canada can take the time out to do a photo op with some pandas that are going to the Toronto Zoo, but not meet with mayors who are going on hunger strikes, people that have walked thousands of miles to meet him, etc.

The only way to get the PM's attention seems to be to dress up like a panda.


or export resources.

/Because we cant refine, mill, or manufacture anything on our own anymore or do science. Thanks Steve.
 
2013-04-06 06:36:50 PM  
Not ironic. We expect them to not submit a route. It would be ironic if the submitted a route for their protest of the requirement to submit a route.
 
2013-04-06 06:40:03 PM  

Mr Rogers is aroused: Whilst i personally believe they INTENDED to get arrested, and it's therefore not ironic, subby was saying they were protesting to change the law, without being arrested.  So, yeah, ironic works here.


Ironic.
 
2013-04-06 06:40:12 PM  
Yea I don't click on foxnews north, but if this was in the country of Queebec, this is an unconstitutional law in Canada. And since its not in Canada, well fark the French up their backsides with a 2 day old bagel and then fart in their general direction.

/French law, you are guilty til proved innocent and can be taken into custody for no reason at all.

//English law you are innocent til proved guilty and really shouldn't be held without actual evidence presented of a crime for your future lawsuit against the police. No ticket = No crime = free money!!!

///Damn people getting all uppity, so you gotta slam them young ones down to restore the police state.
 
2013-04-06 06:45:00 PM  
Ah yea I forgot...
Charter of Rights and Freedoms: Right to peaceful protest.

/Except when the plain clothes cops meld into the protest to cause a disturbance, in order to allow the uniformed cops to come in and beat heads.

//Read somewhere where at some protest the cops pretending to be protesters wore their cop boots. Ooooooops.
 
2013-04-06 06:45:30 PM  
Montreal has a yearly protest against police brutality, held and organised exactly the way the protest in the article went down: no route, no security. The last one, on march 15th. had for the first time in 9 years no broken windows, no fires, and no arrests that didn't have the use of force unjustified. These people want images of cops doing bad things so much one of the arrestees even had a GoPro-camera-equipped helmet.

If you look for police brutality videos on youtube, don't forget one thing: over the last spring, there were over 100 protests in Montreal alone, so editing all of this together isn't too hard.
 
2013-04-06 06:46:22 PM  

beta_plus: Progressive liberal socialists, especially of the NDP variety, like being difficult assholes.

What the NDP considers to be peaceful and legal protest.


Did anyone let the cop know he was parking on top of a fire?
 
2013-04-06 06:49:50 PM  

vartian: The only thing ironic about this is how little subby understands irony.

NutWrench: Subby, there's a slight difference between a gathering of a few dozen people who stand on the sidewalks and don't impede traffic versus a march of over 300 people who fully intend to make use the streets. But you knew that.

FTA: Police declared the protest illegal and less than 30 minutes later, the city's police force had cornered all the protesters and started fining them $637 each for participating in an illegal assembly.

A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.


Everybody must obey the law because this is a nation of laws

EXCEPT WHEN IT COMES TO BUYING GUNS

GUNS

GUNS

FAP FAP FAP FAP FAP FAP
 
2013-04-06 06:59:46 PM  

Gyrfalcon: if a law improperly conflicts with the 1st Amendment (by being overly broad or vague or restricting time/place/manner in a way it's not supposed to), standing requirements prevent someone from just taking the thing to court; someone has to have suffered "injury" by the law's enforcement.


That's horrific.

It's like saying "We can't arrest a guy holding a gun to your mom's head and saying 'give me the money or I shoot the biatch.' but we have to wait until he actually shoots her or accepts money."

farkin' bullshiat.
 
2013-04-06 07:00:11 PM  

LordOfThePings: Mr Rogers is aroused: Whilst i personally believe they INTENDED to get arrested, and it's therefore not ironic, subby was saying they were protesting to change the law, without being arrested.  So, yeah, ironic works here.

Ironic.


What I believe and what works aren't related at all.  One is my personal opinion, the other an admission that whilst i dont personally agree, the submitter is correct.  I know I know, we don't do that here.. here being america, not fark.
 
2013-04-06 07:01:26 PM  

theMagni: NutWrench: Subby, there's a slight difference between a gathering of a few dozen people who stand on the sidewalks and don't impede traffic versus a march of over 300 people who fully intend to make use the streets. But you knew that.

Lesson #1 on how NOT to have your protest taken seriously:
[www.sunnewsnetwork.ca image 431x242]

That panda is there because the Prime Minster of Canada can take the time out to do a photo op with some pandas that are going to the Toronto Zoo, but not meet with mayors who are going on hunger strikes, people that have walked thousands of miles to meet him, etc.

The only way to get the PM's attention seems to be to dress up like a panda.


He knows better than to say "No" to Panda.

www.deviantart.com
 
2013-04-06 07:02:36 PM  

vartian: The only thing ironic about this is how little subby understands irony.

NutWrench: Subby, there's a slight difference between a gathering of a few dozen people who stand on the sidewalks and don't impede traffic versus a march of over 300 people who fully intend to make use the streets. But you knew that.

FTA: Police declared the protest illegal and less than 30 minutes later, the city's police force had cornered all the protesters and started fining them $637 each for participating in an illegal assembly.

A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.


and it's posts like this that keep you on my favourite list.
agree 100%
 
2013-04-06 07:02:58 PM  

Mr Rogers is aroused: What I believe and what works aren't related at all.


I have absolutely no trouble believing this.
 
2013-04-06 07:03:05 PM  

cptjeff: morons who thought they were above the law.



You mean like cops?

/just this afternoon I watched a town cop speed through the village on his way to set up a speed trap by the state border
 
2013-04-06 07:04:01 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: vartian: FTA: Police declared the protest illegal and less than 30 minutes later, the city's police force had cornered all the protesters and started fining them $637 each for participating in an illegal assembly.

A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.

Fines increase until the illegal behavior falls to acceptable levels.  Has nothing to do with economic class, fairness, or justice.


that's nonsense.
hopefully protests continue until until unconstitutional violations of liberty fall to acceptable levels.
 
2013-04-06 07:04:19 PM  
cptjeff
you give them your route and get your permit

Unless they decide to not give you a permit, whether for legitimate safety reasons or bullshiat "safety" reasons such as that the PM doesn't want any filthy protestors within view of his economic summit.
 
2013-04-06 07:05:29 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: It's a cromulently democratic monopoly provided by the ultimate source of power, the victims whose freedom of movement was restricted by the protesters.


did they have a permit? you dont have a right to no traffic, you do have a right to assemble
 
2013-04-06 07:07:42 PM  

cptjeff: Todd300: /whos the victim?

People who want to use the roads?


I'm perfectly fine with it when the state slaps down some anarchist morons for being stupid. Seriously, you give them your route and get your permit, you don't get fined. Magic!


you don't have a right to no delays. you do have a right to assemble.
 
2013-04-06 07:09:45 PM  

LordOfThePings: Mr Rogers is aroused: What I believe and what works aren't related at all.

I have absolutely no trouble believing this.


I live with my mom.
 
2013-04-06 07:09:52 PM  

unyon: I wonder what prevents them from outlining their route to include just about anywhere they might go.


One presumes any such submission would be subject to some kind of approval by whatever governing body you're submitting it to (possibly at the least so that local law enforcement and civic workers are aware of it in case some third party calls asking what's going on), so it is likely any attempt to circumvent the spirit of such a requirement would be rejected.

If there is no approval process involved (and I could see a need for one, depending on the size and location of the intended protest), it is pretty much a waste of everyone's time. Not that I wouldn't put it past any governing body from enacting legislation that is principally designed to waste everyone's time. See: Kennesaw, Georgia, where it is mandatory to own a gun... unless you're a conscientious objector, in which case you get a pass.
 
2013-04-06 07:10:58 PM  

James F. Campbell: Irony is saying one thing and meaning another. That's all. Funny or appropriate coincidences are not ironic.


This law is just as ironic as those "Free Speech Zones" during Dubya's administration

s9.postimg.org
War is peace
Freedom is Slavery etc etc..
 
2013-04-06 07:17:32 PM  

libranoelrose: All I need is a knife


It's like raaaaain just before a cold front.
 
2013-04-06 07:22:56 PM  
If they would have followed the yellow brick road,  none of this would have happened.

Auntie Em.
 
2013-04-06 07:32:00 PM  
A protest is SUPPOSED to make life hell for the city. It's supposed to Shut. Down. Everything. And inconvenience everyone else so they know you are pissed off. That is the point of a protest.

In this day and age if you follow the damned rules, you are better off just doing a worthless internet petition rather than wasting all that energy.
 
2013-04-06 07:37:20 PM  

beta_plus: [media.tumblr.com image 200x150]

Progressive liberal socialists, especially of the NDP variety, like being difficult assholes.

What the NDP considers to be peaceful and legal protest.

[farm5.staticflickr.com image 640x440]


Nonsense.
 
2013-04-06 07:42:21 PM  
Isn't this exactly what they wanted?  Now they can challenge the law in court.
 
2013-04-06 07:44:08 PM  

Acharne: beta_plus: [media.tumblr.com image 200x150]

Progressive liberal socialists, especially of the NDP variety, like being difficult assholes.

What the NDP considers to be peaceful and legal protest.

[farm5.staticflickr.com image 640x440]

Nonsense.


There's absolutely no way a police car could be on fire unless some godless anarchists set it on fire. None. Nope, not a one.
 
2013-04-06 07:44:52 PM  
Free Speech Zone is under that lake over there
 
2013-04-06 07:56:55 PM  

doglover: Gyrfalcon: if a law improperly conflicts with the 1st Amendment (by being overly broad or vague or restricting time/place/manner in a way it's not supposed to), standing requirements prevent someone from just taking the thing to court; someone has to have suffered "injury" by the law's enforcement.

That's horrific.

It's like saying "We can't arrest a guy holding a gun to your mom's head and saying 'give me the money or I shoot the biatch.' but we have to wait until he actually shoots her or accepts money."

farkin' bullshiat.


Sometimes you make sense and then you do shiat like this.  Good job!
 
2013-04-06 07:59:54 PM  

Pathman: BarkingUnicorn: It's a cromulently democratic monopoly provided by the ultimate source of power, the victims whose freedom of movement was restricted by the protesters.

did they have a permit? you dont have a right to no traffic, you do have a right to assemble


Then why would they need a permit?  No, they didn't have one.  That was part of the protest.

Yes, I do have a right to travel freely.  There's a balance to be struck between my right and yours.
 
2013-04-06 08:04:59 PM  
Except this is Quebec, those schmucks have been protesting for over a year now because they don't want to pay for school.
 
2013-04-06 08:10:07 PM  
BarkingUnicorn:
Then why would they need a permit?  No, they didn't have one.  That was part of the protest.

Yes, I do have a right to travel freely.  There's a balance to be struck between my right and yours.


you say that as if i said you don't have the right to travel freely.  I addressed that in my original post: you don't have a right to no traffic, you do have a right to assemble.

the first amendment does not read Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances as long as they have a permit.

the fact that they're being required to get a permit violates the first amendment once and the fact that they're not free to protest that first violation is the second.
 
2013-04-06 08:10:37 PM  
Seeing the GI police makes my stomach turn
 
2013-04-06 08:11:29 PM  
oh jeez - this was Canada, not the US.  Now I am both stupid AND embarrassed.

Carry on with your freedom violatin', Oh Canada

my bad!
 
2013-04-06 09:38:01 PM  
Welcome to Obama's America Canadia.
 
2013-04-06 10:19:38 PM  

Pathman: oh jeez - this was Canada, not the US.  Now I am both stupid AND embarrassed.

Carry on with your freedom violatin', Oh Canada

my bad!


It's okay, although we don't have the Bill of Rights, we have the  Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Article 2 states:

Fundamental freedoms2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;

(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and

(d) freedom of association.
 
2013-04-06 11:04:15 PM  

fusillade762: vartian: The only thing ironic about this is how little subby understands irony.

Just like that song about irony in which nothing mentioned is ironic. I find that ironic.




Wrong, some of that song is ironic.
 
2013-04-07 12:58:44 AM  

beta_plus: [media.tumblr.com image 200x150]

Progressive liberal socialists, especially of the NDP variety, like being difficult assholes.

What the NDP considers to be peaceful and legal protest.

[farm5.staticflickr.com image 640x440]


Looks fine to me. fark the police.
 
2013-04-07 01:32:07 AM  

cptjeff: I'm perfectly fine with it when the state slaps down some anarchist morons for being stupid. Seriously, you give them your route and get your permit, you don't get fined. Magic!


I'm not sure how they're morons here. If they submitted a route, right then and there they've defeated the entire point of the protest against having to submit routes and completely invalidated their reason for being there. They're caught in this Kafkaian circular logic.
 
2013-04-07 03:16:10 AM  

Pathman: BarkingUnicorn:
Then why would they need a permit?  No, they didn't have one.  That was part of the protest.

Yes, I do have a right to travel freely.  There's a balance to be struck between my right and yours.

you say that as if i said you don't have the right to travel freely.  I addressed that in my original post: you don't have a right to no traffic, you do have a right to assemble.


Again, there's a balance to be struck.

"The nature of a place, 'the pattern of its normal activities, dictate the kinds of regulations of time, place, and manner that are reasonable.'" In determining what is reasonable, the Court stated that "[the] crucial question is whether the manner of expression is basically incompatible with the normal activity of a particular place at a particular time."
 
2013-04-07 05:53:52 AM  

doglover: vartian: A fine like that is set up to freeze out mid and lower-income people from even considering the idea of protest. Regardless of the intent or incompetence of the group protesting, that is an absurd penalty.

Don't worry citizen, you can pay it in full and hire a lawyer to fight it later.


I dont agree with you much, but I have come to realize in the last few days that you understand how the legal system really works. I laugh at all the FARK lawyers in here sometimes. "Go ahead, charge ME with a crime, after I'm cleared in court, I'll OWNZ YER ASS"

Like it works that way...
 
2013-04-07 05:58:17 AM  

cptjeff: They wouldn't have been fined if they had gotten the permit. Which isn't exactly an incredibly expensive or difficult process.


Unless it's free, and all you have to do is ask for it, then its and abridgement on freedom of speech, but by your username, I see you dont exactly care about shiat like that.
 
2013-04-07 06:11:23 AM  

Madbassist1: cptjeff: They wouldn't have been fined if they had gotten the permit. Which isn't exactly an incredibly expensive or difficult process.

Unless it's free, and all you have to do is ask for it, then its and abridgement on freedom of speech, but by your username, I see you dont exactly care about shiat like that.


i disagree with cptjeff on this issue, but i am a little puzzled by what you mean by what said about his username?
 
2013-04-07 07:04:18 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: doglover: Gyrfalcon: if a law improperly conflicts with the 1st Amendment (by being overly broad or vague or restricting time/place/manner in a way it's not supposed to), standing requirements prevent someone from just taking the thing to court; someone has to have suffered "injury" by the law's enforcement.

That's horrific.

It's like saying "We can't arrest a guy holding a gun to your mom's head and saying 'give me the money or I shoot the biatch.' but we have to wait until he actually shoots her or accepts money."

farkin' bullshiat.

Sometimes you make sense and then you do shiat like this.  Good job!


There should be no reason to have people directly injured by poor legislation before that legislation can be challenged. It's the opposite of the purpose of checks an balances.

You should be able to challenge bullshiat laws WITHOUT sacrificing innocent citizens at the altar of lex ex recto.
 
2013-04-07 09:15:05 AM  

Pathman: Madbassist1: cptjeff: They wouldn't have been fined if they had gotten the permit. Which isn't exactly an incredibly expensive or difficult process.

Unless it's free, and all you have to do is ask for it, then its and abridgement on freedom of speech, but by your username, I see you dont exactly care about shiat like that.

i disagree with cptjeff on this issue, but i am a little puzzled by what you mean by what said about his username?


Well I was referring to 'cpt' which typically means 'captain' but I read his profile and I am as puzzled by that as you are at my reference to it.
 
2013-04-07 09:26:59 AM  

Madbassist1: Well I was referring to 'cpt' which typically means 'captain' but I read his profile and I am as puzzled by that as you are at my reference to it.


and do you think someone in the military or even the police is automatically opposed to principles of freedom and liberty?
 
2013-04-07 09:58:26 AM  
I think people in the military or police are prone to automatically defer to authority figures without question.
 
2013-04-07 10:34:55 AM  
Thats not ironic its apropos.
 
2013-04-07 03:39:32 PM  
This is the definition of not irony.
 
2013-04-07 04:58:52 PM  
Words to watch out for that have already appeared in the USA:

Designated free speech area

Unsanctioned rally
 
Displayed 88 of 88 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report