Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Another insult to the First Amendment
If this isn't the crushing of dissent, I don't know what is:
A man who wrote a vulgar message on the memo line of a check he used to pay a $5 parking ticket has apologized in writing, leading police to drop a disorderly conduct charge against him.
Clerks were offended by the message, and the disorderly conduct charge was filed because the comment was obscene, police Chief James Donnelly said....
"The F-word isn't what it used to be," attorney Keith Williams said. It doesn't have a sexual connotation anymore and so can't be considered obscene, he said.
Now, $5 is 1/7 the going rate for a parking ticket in Princeton, so I'm not sure what this guy is complaining about. That said, if our supposedly unlimited right to "petition government for redress of grievances" does not extend to writing the "F-word" on the checks we pay for parking
CWCID: Tongue Tied.
9 Comments:
By 
, at
Tue Jan 15, 05:34:00 PM:
I don't use the word "outrage" often, but this, TigerHawk, is the greatest outrage in American history
By 
TigerHawk, at
Tue Jan 15, 05:52:00 PM:
Agreed. Blood as been spilled for less.
By BrendaK, at
Tue Jan 15, 06:07:00 PM:
So what if it did have a sexual meaning? Determining an excessive degree of offensiveness is still not an adequate excuse for suppressing free speech.
By , at
Tue Jan 15, 11:01:00 PM:
You might have been able to claim "disorderly conduct" if he was there in person screaming it at the clerks, but if it was only written and he wasn't present, how can you even come close?
My copy of the Constitution doesn't have the clause, "unless you offend someone".
Must be kinda old.
By , at
Wed Jan 16, 12:16:00 AM:
I read a few years ago where a lawyer reresenting a convicted killer on death row to was appealing a capital punishment case becuase the judge who up-held the death sentence sign the paper with a smiley face I,LL BE GLAD WHEN YOUR DEAD YOU RASCAL YOU
By , at
Wed Jan 16, 09:01:00 AM:
I wanted to give this thread a day, just to see if anyone else would comment on a particular aspect of TH's commentary.
They didn't, but I'm not surprised.
Here's how it works, TH:
- The "NO PARKING" sign is big and prominently displayed in bold red lettering.
- The parking meter very plainly says you have "20 minutes left".
Then someone comes along who either can't read, or doesn't know what "20 minutes" means, gets a ticket and calls it an "outrage" and "extortion".
What's wrong with this picture?
By , at
Wed Jan 16, 09:44:00 AM:
dr.mercury.....that the petitioner may have less sense than a chunk of rock, and that he did exceed the time limit on the occupied parking space, thus triggering the penalty; does not preclude his expression of opinion of the government agency in question. Yes he's at fault for exceeding his parking time limit, but, that does not abbrogate his freedom of speech ,nor his freedom to petition the government without government retribution.
By Georg Felis, at
Wed Jan 16, 10:13:00 AM:
As libertarian as I am in my opinions, I will side with the city here. The Ticket-ee has every right to complain, protest, file a lawsuit, picket the courthouse, get interviewed on the local radio station, and write a weighty full report on his innocence, complete with 42 8x10 black and white photos with circles and arrows and a full paragraph on the back explaining the details. But when he scrawls some obscenity-ridden bleat on his check, he has crossed the line of civility. And civility is the core of civilization.
There are many rights that I believe are the core of our civilization. The right to scribble obscenities on checks going to the city is…not one.
In this event, all turned out well as all of the participants turned out to be adults. The Ticket-ee apologized in writing, and the City withdrew the charge. Good.
By , at
Wed Jan 16, 06:52:00 PM:
I had no idea that 'civility' was enforceable by law. Someone should let these folks know...
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php/showthread.php?t=141878.html
