Police Brutality at the Silent Flashmob at the Jefferson Memorial

[proud2BlibKansan]

Mods, Tried to post this in political videos forum, but it kept saying it was not a youtube video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2PDhjNF9eUQ

Folks dancing at the Jefferson Memorial were arrested. For dancing. This is a rather chilling video.

[MrScorpio]

1. That's the Jefferson Memorial

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. Oops. Thanks.

[MrScorpio]

3. Sawright

Got your back

[HipChick]

4. DC Park Police....

Not allowed to film inside the Memorial?...news to me

[sakabatou]

5. So... no dancing inside a memorial?

[Recovered Repug]

14. From what I saw of the video,

it looked like "crimes against rhythm".

[blaze]

6. Some comments from YouTube

"For those wanting more background, this event was a preplanned act of "civil danceobedience" in response to the arrest of a woman who was part of a silent commemorative dance party in 2008. Her arrest was upheld in court. So this event and the police response was not out of the blue. jeffersondanceparty.info has more info from their side."



"Both parties handled this extremely poorly.

Civilians acting like complete retards, thinking it's wise to disrespect an officer of the law. Next time be respectful and stay calm.

Police telling a civilian to "Shut up," which they obviously do not have the authority to demand or enforce. And then telling a civilian to stop recording under threat of being arrested, which is also something that can not be demanded or enforced.

Everyone involved here is an idiot, the cops no more than the civilians."



"Probably started a flash mob then police showed up to it as a "public disturbance" and tried to get them to stop. Seeing as how they weren't going to stop they started arresting people, people in the video were resisting arrest and force had to be used.

Pro tip: When a cop tells you to stop and put your hands behind your back you should listen."

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. Still confusing as to why folks can't dance there

:shrug:

[blaze]

10. But it wasn't just dancing, was it?

It was a planned act of civil disobedience. (Which I whole heartedly support, btw!!)

And what is the purpose of civil disobedience? To draw attention to some unjust thing? I *think* that's what these folks were doing. And they were successful.

I have a vision of sit-ins... and the cops came in and made their arrests.... and it made the news...

So here we have a dance-in... and the cops came in and made their arrests... and it made the news....

Why can't folks dance there? Well, I guess I just don't view it as people "just dancing" there. It was clear they were there to make a point and they made it.

I wish it had actually been one of those wonderfully orchestrated and choreographed flash mobs.

That would have been magnificent!!!

[Warren Stupidity]

54. so by your logic a respectful gazing in quiet flash mob

should also be arrested. It is not the act itself, but the intent that matters? Seriously?

[caraher]

66. thoughtcrime

[godai]

15. It's considered 'demonstrating'. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

46. The right of the people peaceably to assemble

"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, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Quaint, I know.

How far down the road to tyranny we have walked, without struggle, without protest, to the point where we openly support the suppression of our natural rights as a good thing.

[Vanje]

84. That! /\ nt

[Aerows]

85. It really bothers me

when actions like this are condoned by people in our society. If they were committing an actual crime, like destruction of property, or maybe even public nudity, that's one thing.

But dancing?

[Vattel]

89. What i find so damn frustrating

is how little even Democrats seem to care about our rights, let alone the rights of non-citizens.

[struggle4progress]

23. Dancing protestors arrested at the Jefferson Memorial

Saturday - 5/28/2011, 8:29pm ET

... In April 2008, a group of less than 20 young people came to the memorial as part of a flash mob where they would dance to music played through their headphones.

U.S. Park Police then told the dancers to leave, and eventually arrested one woman on misdemeanor charges, Mary Oberwetter.

Oberwetter fought the charges in court, arguing that dancing was protected free speech, and noting that groups of noisy school children are routine at the memorial.

She lost that case, with the courts agreeing that the U.S. Park service has a duty to maintain decorum at the nation's monuments, and no demonstrations are allowed inside the monuments ...

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=2401484

[alphafemale]

9. Arms straight out to the sides.

Repeat after me.

"I do not consent to this search. I do not consent to this search....repeat.

But you do Nothing...NOTHING!!! to impede those fuccks once their minds click into full COP M.O.D.E.!

They'll KILL you as soon as look at you.


And they'll not serve a day for it either.

[Historic NY]

16. Exactly they apparently had no respect for other visitors who weren't dancing .

[Bluenorthwest]

38. Calling people 'retards' is likle using the N word.

So I missed the point due to the nasty name calling. Anyone with that sort of lexicon in use for serious public discussion is a person who has nothing of value to add.

[idiotgardener]

8. Here's hoping for

an awful lot of lawsuits.

[aikoaiko]

11. Didn't really look like brutality to me.

The video doesn't show why people were getting arrested so I have no comment on that.

But once police start cuffing, it's never a good idea to resist at that point.

[Stevenmarc]

13. Didn't look like brutality to me either

Just 4 loudmouths that didn't appear to have a whole lot of dance skills and a dozen people filming them hoping for it to get worse than it actually did and when it didnt then they just stuck brutality in the YouTube title for the hell of it

[proud2BlibKansan]

20. Watch the long version

and tell us this isn't brutality.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jUU3yCy3uI&feature=player_embedded#at=631

[TorchTheWitch]

30. It isn't brutality

In fact, it shows that the police gave them fair warning beforehand and very politely. These were protesters two of whom lied claiming they didn't hear the warning (which they did) and they lied about it being a protest as well. That was Adam Kokesh who resisted arrest by not complying with with sitting/lying down to be cuffed when he tried to walk away and force ably placed on the ground. He intended to be arrested, knew exactly what he was doing and did it well.

This was a really bad idea to have this protest at a memorial, and the police actually handled it well. Sadly, this protest ruined the experience of visiting the memorial for all the other people that were there most of whom undoubtedly traveled long distances for a special trip to see this and other historical sites in the area.

Though most of the protesters declined to participate once they received the warning the ones who got arrested intended to be arrested and some intended to goad the officers into mistreating them which didn't happen.

Police brutality? A) Rubbish, B) It's what some of them were HOPING for and tried goading the officers into.

[aikoaiko]

31. Proud2BlibKansan, that wasn't police brutality.

I support them in their act of nonviolent civil disobedience to draw attention to their cause. And let's not be in denial about the fact that this was a planned demonstration.

I've done some nonviolence demonstration training and these folks apparently did not.

I also support the police in arresting demonstrators after giving warnings. When being disobedient while demonstrating that is the point where you stay TO GET arrested or leave. Choosing to force the police to arrest you is part of the civil disobedience. One is prepared or not for that choie.

Some of them resisted arrest. This was not wise or disciplined civil disobedience. Fortunately, they did not resist much. The use of force was commensurate with the resistance. The police use of force ceased when the resistance to arrest ceased.

I was taught not to shout into the faces of police but to speak in a normal tone while making the cause known. When faced with a shouter he was instructed to be quiet and when he wasn't he was isolated.

Police brutality is a real thing and it wasn't in this video. If you're going to demonstrate and force police interaction, then you have to be be trained and prepared.


I also have to question whether or not this was a PR stunt to promote this apparent online show called Adam versus The Man.

[proud2BlibKansan]

33. You must not know who these people are

Medea Benjamin wrote the book on nonviolent civil disobedience.

Sorry but I disagree.

[aikoaiko]

50. What do I need to know about these people?

It was an organized act of civil disobedience.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5RXqqf9ivc&feature=related

They protested, police warned, they protested more, police arrested, some protesters resisted arrest, and the police used some force to enact arrests.

What about them do I need to know.

edited to add: Oh, I see what you're saying. But please note that the police didn't use force with Medea because she didn't resist arrest. She was dancing with the guy, she was asked to stop, they played dumb, and got arrested. Also note that when the police finally hand cuff her she say, "ok we stopped" which is just further indication that she knew exactly what she was doing.

[jefferson_dem]

69. Medea Benjamin wrote the book on nonviolent civil disobedience."

Good Lord. Please tell me you're joking.

[Stevenmarc]

39. There's 11min of my life I'll never get back and yet still no brutality

There seems to be a whole generation that lacks perspective on reality, they equate a terse tweet to getting hit on the head with a bat. As someone who spent the Reagan years attending more than a few ActUp demonstrations let me tell you that wasn't even close to brutality it was a bunch of badly organized brats whos lack of message clearly made this I provocation not a demonstration.

And as much as I can use my personal experience as a barometer to brutality I know that my experience pales in comparison to the experiences of civil rights demonstrators in the 60's but then I really don't have a problem putting things in perspective.

[1monster]

45. THAT's dancing!?! I'm pretty sure that all the lawyers for defence have to do is

show the viedo and the charges will be thrown out. The charge of "dancing" in a memorial was definitely off.

Thomas Jefferson must be spinning like a whirling dirvish in his grave.

[Renew Deal]

94. That wasn't "brutality"

Especially compared to real acts of brutality. But it was non-sensical.

[Occulus]

12. Too many authoritarians on DU these days

I'm honestly considering leaving this site...

[RKP5637]

17. Same here, I've considered leaving. n/t

[happyslug]

19. We are just acknowledging reality, Police can us FORCE to keep the peace

You may dislike when and how the Police use force, but it is up to the Police to decide when such violence is required. Abuse is NOT when the Police use force, it is when the Police use force NOT to keep the peace but beat someone up. Compare this to the Rodney King Abuse, there the Police instead of hand cuffing Rodney King, kept on beating him. That was clearly abuse, this is NOT, here the police use only enough force to put people on the ground so they could be hand cuffed. That is clearly not abuse, as abuse is legally defined.

[idiotgardener]

21. Did you miss the cop picking the guy up and throwing him to the ground on his side?

Far more force than necessary.

It is also abuse (though not brutality) to threaten to arrest people for filming. And it's assault when you smack someone's camera out of their hands (also on the tape).

Police are not supposed to make up laws as they go.

[aikoaiko]

32. throwing him on his side after being repeatedly told to stop resisting arrest.

Did you not see that?

[proud2BlibKansan]

34. And smacking the camera

He told that camera to calm down. Stupid camera should have complied with the nice officer.

[aikoaiko]

58. Oh, the horror of smacking a camera away from someone who was told to stop filming and leave...,

just like everyone else.

I don't think the police should have touched the camera and that up to the camera person to press a complaint, but that was not police brutality either.

[Warren Stupidity]

60. yes indeed in a police state one is not permitted to observe the police

going about their business.

[aikoaiko]

62. he could still observe by standing in the doorway with everyone else.

Civil disobedience is not for the whiny.

[Warren Stupidity]

47. there was no disturbance of the peace other than the arrests themselves

[Skip Intro]

29. Come on. Don't leave. Stay. Speak. Something about standing your ground...

I don't know. Don't let anyone run you off. Speak your mind. Leave it at that. To hell with the would-be authoritarians. They have as much power as you give them. Screw 'em. Why abandon the site?

[Puregonzo1188]

64. Yes, I know. When DU is further to the right on the general reaction to something that I've observed

it's disturbing.

But's happening more and more.

Weird.

[Vanje]

93. Yes.

Fuck yes!

[csziggy]

18. Apparently this was in reponse to this case

Dance Off: Court rules against birthday dance at Jefferson Memorial

Tuesday - 5/17/2011, 4:57pm ET
jefferson_memorial.jpg
The panel ruled that the group's behavior is prohibited in part because it distracted from the memorial's solemn atmosphere. (WTOP)

Gary Emerling, wtop.com

WASHINGTON - You can't dance if you want to -- at least not at the Jefferson Memorial, according to a federal appellate panel.

In a decision released Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit says U.S. Park Police officers were right to bar Mary Brooke Oberwetter and a group of 17 friends from dancing at the memorial on the Tidal Basin.

On April 12, 2008, shortly before the 265th birthday of Thomas Jefferson on April 13, group members intended to "celebrate and honor the former President ... by ushering in his birthday with silent dance," the decision says. They were ordered to disperse by U.S. Park Police officers.

More with video: http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=2386097

Taking Judicial Notice Of The Jefferson Memorial
By Editor
Created 05/24/2011 - 2:39am
Tue, 05/24/2011

Affirming dismissal of First Amendment challenge to National Park Service Regulations limiting and restricting protests -- such as plaintiff dancing "in place" within the Jefferson Memorial "while listening to music on headphones"; D.C. Circuit takes judicial notice of “the salient features of the Memorial" under FRE 201(b) <2>, in order to find that the memorial is a non-public forum and that the challenged regulations did not unreasonably restrict First Amendment expression, in Oberwetter v. Hilliard <3>, _ F.3d _ (D.C. Cir. May 17, 2011) (No. 10-5078)

Judicial notice is codified in FRE 201. Designed to limit trial expenses and the time involved in producing proof of matters well within common knowledge or which can be readily obtained, both trial and appellate courts may take judicial notice. As noted by the Advisory Committee Note to FRE 201 <4>, judicial notice applies when "particular facts are outside of the area of reasonable controversy" so that not only is presentation of proof unnecessary, but there matter noticed is not a matter in which there is a high degree of dispute. Of course, all manner of adjudicative facts may be recognized by a count. In a recent case, the D.C. circuit noted, rather undramatically, that it was taking judicial notice of “the salient features of the Memorial" under FRE 201(b) <5> in order to resolve a case of dancing at the Memorial to Commemorate the nation's third president.

In the case, plaintiff Oberwetter alleged that the government violated her First Amendment rights by enforcing regulations that restricted expression at the Jefferson Memorial. In a complaint that was dismissed by the district court, the plaintiff alleged that "t quarter to midnight on April 12, 2008, Oberwetter and seventeen friends entered the Jefferson Memorial to 'celebrate and honor the former President ... by ushering in his birthday with silent dance.'” Park Police officers soon ordered the dancers out when they observed the plaintiff and her companions "dancing ... inside the Memorial, a circular structure with a domed roof and colonnaded perimeter. Suffice to note that at the early hour in question, besides the plaintiff and her dancing companions, "there were very few visitors to the Jefferson Memorial at the time of the dancing.” Oberwetter <3>, _ F.3d at __.

More: http://federalevidence.com/blog/2011/may/taking-judicial-notice-jefferson-memorial

The opinion can be viewed at http://www.scribd.com/doc/26822929/United-States-District-Court-for-the-District

Edited to add - I am not sure how I feel about this issue. I could not find much about how long the Park Service has had the policy of not allowing "demonstrations" at particular monuments or how those rules are posted. I could not find a site that lists the rules and at which monuments there are more restrictions. If the concept is to provide a peaceful atmosphere at particular places, that may not be bad, but in the video the park police were far more disruptive than the dancers. And if the rules are not clearly posted, how are people to know when they are violating them?

[The Backlash Cometh]

22. This is a bad PR move.

[NYC_SKP]

24. I watched the "long version" and a saw a bunch of immature brats wasting the officers' time and

being generally disruptive apparently for no good reason at all.

I go to a national monument, or a museum, or a library, for the quiet and respectful pleasure there is to be had, usually.

What the hell were these people trying to prove.

Brutality my aching ass.

I've seen brutality, when the demonstrators were demonstrating the Viet Nam war.

What the hell were these idiots trying to prove?

Assholes, if you ask me.

:patriot:

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

35. Cops should have shot em

[NYC_SKP]

37. No, they should have had some respect that others were there, maybe for the only visit they would...

...ever be able to make to the Capitol.

Petulant fucking brats is what these people were.

Period.

[Bluenorthwest]

41. Of course! The public square is no place for political actions!

They should have danced in their own backyards!
The petulant brats are the people who would turn our places of American culture into dead zones of affected decorum. Those who want to own a living place and make it as devoid of life as their own homes and churches.

[NYC_SKP]

52. That's not a public square. I'm in DC all the time, the Memorials are quiet contemplative places.

It's just rude and the height of selfishness over, what, the fact that earlier in the year someone's dance was stopped.

Puh-lease. The public square would be the middle of the mall, not inside a memorial. Bullshit.

:eyes:

[proud2BlibKansan]

55. Then let's keep groups of kids from visiting

Cause a group of children is lots louder and more disruptive than these dancers were.

[NYC_SKP]

70. It's not about volume, it's about the purpose of the place and about not being rude.

They were rude, kids are just kids.

Huge difference, acting naturally versus acting like rude selfish fools not caring a whit about other peoples' rights.

Foolishness, really, beyond belief.

[proud2BlibKansan]

74. Kids are loud and disruptive

and also perfectly capable of being rude.

[NYC_SKP]

80. And we hold adults to a higher standard. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

48. seriously?

the authoritarians are out in force in this thread.

[Vanje]

88. Seriously.

I can't believe what I'm reading here.

[bluestate10]

76. They are trying to prove that a person can dance where no sane person would try to dance. nt

[Rex]

26. I've finally seen a video of a flashmob and wonder

why the fuck don't they get a life?

[proud2BlibKansan]

36. I've done a couple flash mobs

They're fun. And we got applause.

[Vanje]

95. Yes, indeed

What a planned assembly in a public space really REALLY needs is for a bunch of uniformed hard-asses to stomp in and topple citizens.

[Skip Intro]

27. Please. They were just antagonizing the cops. That was their goal. Silly stuff. Much more important

things demand our attention.

[NYC_SKP]

40. Some families only make on trip in their entire lives. These people were utter selfish asses.

And when asked to leave they tried to create a scene, and did, and it's just embarrassing and stupid behavior.

More than likely these are privileged rich kids who never knew difficulties, fought in a war, witnessed or experienced real discrimination.

It's pathetic behavior.

x(

[Bluenorthwest]

42. I know! The horror of seeing free speech at the Jefferson

Memorial might be too much for some families. Some think dance itself is a sin, and we must therefore treat our public places as if they were temples to order and authority, even the Jefferson Memorial, which is a memorial to a revolutionary.
Tom Jefferson would have danced with them. Period.

[NYC_SKP]

51. Let them do their stupid shit 50 yards outside the damn memorial.

Thomas Jefferson would most certainly not have had them sully the experience of other uninvolved visitors to the Capitol City.

Period.

Propriety and courtesy are lost on these rich babies who are too selfish to care what effect their actions have on the peaceful enjoyment of a national treasure.

I call bullshit on their demonstration, they should have done it someplace else and the authorities were right to make them stop it.

x(

[Warren Stupidity]

57. yes I see that part of the 1st amendment now:

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, except within 50 feet of a national memorial, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

How could I have missed that?

[NYC_SKP]

68. Clearly, demonstrations are not allowed just anywhere, they never have been, never will be.

In libraries, in hospitals, plenty of places are not appropriate.

The argument that this is some sort of new infringement is empty of legitimate context and reason.

PS, it was within the memorial, right inside.

:shrug:

[Warren Stupidity]

79. Yes of course, I missed that part too!

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, except within 50 feet of a national memorial, and certainly not right inside a public memorial, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

How silly of me.

[Vanje]

91. If it is within right of free speech and assembly to disrupt soldiers funerals.....

....as the US Supreme Court has decided recently , siding for the loud, rude, intimidating, and bigoted Westboro Baptist Church ,


Then How in any steaming corn-studded hell can one justify silencing the expression of dancing , even stupid dancing, at a public park in Washington DC?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

53. I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of

"I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson Inscribed on the dome of the memorial.

[Warren Stupidity]

61. stupid words

meaningless shapes

[tranche]

90. Thomas Jefferson would have punched them in the face for being idiots.

This is a guy that started a revolution. Not a 12 person flashmob.

[proud2BlibKansan]

56. There are several veterans in that group

So yes, they HAVE fought in a war. :eyes:

[octothorpe]

73. Actually, had the cops (or those in charge of the cops) acted smartly, then they would

have let them dance silently. Had the demonstrators become loud and obnoxious to an extent of ruining the experience for others, then the police could have justifiably arrested them. The cops came off as overzealous power-tripping assholes in this case. Anyway, had they left them alone, there probably would have been far less of a commotion and the protester's point wouldn't have been made.

[Imagevision]

28. I'm amazed the cops didn't use tazers and kill more people for BS...!

[Brickbat]

43. If this is the best people can do for political action, we're in a load of trouble.

[Warren Stupidity]

59. we are in a load of trouble because peacefully dancing

is now a crime and being arrested for doing so is being vigorously defended on a purported liberal board.

This action clearly demonstrates how far we have fallen.

[aikoaiko]

63. What they were doing was a self-described act of civil disobedience. Look up the definition.

They can't have it both ways. Civil disobedience is defined by breaking official regulation or law.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

65. Civil disobedience at a monument to a revolutionary followed by arrests. The irony is delicious.

"I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson

[aikoaiko]

67. Well, that's what the protesters called it -- civil disobedience.

:shrug:

[jefferson_dem]

75. The tragic tyranny!!!1!1!

We can't dance at a monument!

[Taitertots]

44. Lol, the police came up and nicely and politely told them they were not allowed to dance there

This is the exact opposite of police brutality.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

49. Did they arrest the ringleader?

"If I can't dance, I don't want your revolution!" - Emma Goldman

[octothorpe]

71. What a stupid law... That being said, the protesters went there knowing this would happen

That was the whole idea of them going there. I wonder if any of those cops felt like assholes for doing what they did.

[jefferson_dem]

72. Immature, worthless tools.

Point #1: Time, place, and manner restrictions on speech are routine and totally appropriate. Look it up. These fools can dance all day at Lafayette Park.

Point #2: This was not police brutality. Actually, the officers were very patient and warned these "protesters" in advance. It's called resisting arrest. HINT: If the officer says "put your hands behind your back, it's probably best to do that."

Point #3: A central tenant of civil disobedience is that you are willing to accept the consequences for breaking what you see as an unjust law. Aye, then. These tools need to stop whining. They got exactly what they deserved, and asked for.

Point #4: Aside from apparently breaking the law, these "protesters" were being assholes. Their shallow efforts to cloak their assholery in Jefferson's legacy is no less a disgrace than when teabaggers who try to do the same.

[bluestate10]

77. The protest was foolish. There are more substantive matters facing this country. nt

[cleanhippie]

78. What were they protesting? What is their cause?

[1monster]

81. They were protesting the court upheld ban on dancing at the Jefferson Memorial.

Apparently, at a 2008 flash mob (of 17 people), one person was arrested for dancing at the Memorial. She was arrested and fought the charge. The ruling was that, yes, dancing in a form of expression and akin to picket signs. But the First Amendment doesn't apply to federal monuments. (Ergo, I guess the 1963 Martin Luther King, Jr. demonstration and many, many others since then would be illegal today since many of the demonstrators were on the ground of the Washington Memorial and the Mall where many other Memorials are situated nearby.

Ridiculous ruling. But then again, GWH and his ilk established "free speech zones" and apparently "no free speech zones."

The protesters were not very effective and they showed poor planning. The police officers were ridiculous and should be ashamed at so demeaning their job to serve and protect the people.

[Occulus]

82. Well, then.

What is needed is a flash mob of 1000.

What I'd like to see done here is one of those flash mobs where the people involved just freeze completely. I'd like to see these police try to justify arresting 1000 people for standing still and doing nothing.

[MadBadger]

83. What happened before all that "Brutality?"

[dems_rightnow]

86. Stern looks!

You should have seen it!!!!!

[tranche]

87. I remember when I was young enough to think something as stupid as a flashmob

was something of importance. This is insignificant kiddo.

Only in America can a bunch of white kids act like asshats and scream "police state" when a guy from the park police gives them a shove. Give me a break.

[Renew Deal]

92. People should be able to do headstands at the Jefferson Memorial if they'd like.

What kind of craziness is this? Why arrest these people? It's bizarre. One of the arrests was pretty aggressive, but it's probably not "brutality", especially compared to the guy that was thrown out of a wheelchair in DC.

[Vattel]

96. The problem here is that the first amendment has been gutted

by any number of qualifications that are contrary to its spirit. Recent cases have protected the second amendment from death by a thousand qualifications, but the fucking Courts won't give the same protection to our right to free speech and free assembly (except insofar as corporate speech is threatended).

[drpepper67]

97. I wonder if they had burned a flag instead of dancing would they still have been arrested?