More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece of paper

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece of paper

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece of paper

Page: [1]

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece of ... - 10/4/2006 4:08:31 PM

Noah

Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline

http://test.denverpost.com/news/ci_4436043

This article doesn't address what happened to the man's son when the man was arrested . According to coverage on CBC radio the man asked to but was not allowed to make any arrangements for his son as he himself was dragged off to jail. The Secret Service held the boy until a local Social Service agency was summoned to take him into custody.

Edited to add: I've been looking at some more articles on this matter. This one:

http://www.progressive.org/mag_mc100406

... reports that the Secret Service expressed the intention to hold the boy for Social Services but that the boy eluded them and ran away to find his mother.

How's that for a good news/bad news joke?

< Message edited by Noah -- 10/4/2006 4:22:04 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/4/2006 4:21:46 PM

Chaingang

Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline

Hmmm, that's one of those cases were the government agents acted like assholes but the case is actually moving along as it should.

One of the things that people don't understand is that the Constitution doesn't necessarily protect you from criminal agents of the government taking liberties with you, but it does provide a remedy. Now those agents of the government should know the law and respect your rights, but that's more of a training issue perhaps.

You must be prepared to fight for your rights all the way down the line, as a "belligerent claimant" in person.

If you really want to talk about offensively unconstitutional things we should talk about institutionalized processes like traffic courts. I can't see that there is even the slightest thing constitutional about the processes of such courts, they make certain efforts that are more a mockery of constitutional liberties than substantive protections. The expectation in the main is that you will just shut up and pay the fine rather than argue your case. And be careful about arguing the case too, do you suppose the case is being transcribed and recorded for appeal - hah! chances are it is not truly appeal-able from any such record.

< Message edited by Chaingang -- 10/4/2006 4:27:15 PM >

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to Noah)

Post #: 2

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/4/2006 5:52:22 PM

juliaoceania

Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline

I remember this story.. it reminded me of the one you just posted for some reason...

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jun2002/ohio-j19.shtml

The graduates and their guests, numbering about 60,000, were informed that anyone protesting or heckling the speakers could be subject to arrest and expulsion from the stadium. They were told that staff members, police and Secret Service officers would be watching the stands for any signs of protest.
As Bush walked to the podium, about 10 people, including four graduates, stood up and turned their backs to the president. An undetermined number of them were escorted out of the stadium by police officers. None currently face charges.

I remembered it because I belonged a message board that someone that had protested by turning around was escorted out not only by university police, but the secret service.

No one should be treated this way for turning their back on someone.

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to Noah)

Post #: 3

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/4/2006 5:55:40 PM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

I remember this story.. it reminded me of the one you just posted for some reason...

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jun2002/ohio-j19.shtml

The graduates and their guests, numbering about 60,000, were informed that anyone protesting or heckling the speakers could be subject to arrest and expulsion from the stadium. They were told that staff members, police and Secret Service officers would be watching the stands for any signs of protest.
As Bush walked to the podium, about 10 people, including four graduates, stood up and turned their backs to the president. An undetermined number of them were escorted out of the stadium by police officers. None currently face charges.

I remembered it because I belonged a message board that someone that had protested by turning around was escorted out not only by university police, but the secret service.

No one should be treated this way for turning their back on someone.

.I agree. I believe it falls under protected speech of the first amendment.

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Post #: 4

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/4/2006 6:00:47 PM

Chaingang

Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
No one should be treated this way for turning their back on someone.

A silent protest should have been allowed. Absolutely. The remedy is to sue, which is a total pain in the ass.

BTW, the secret service agents could be sued personally because they were not performing their duty per se - they went beyond the protection of the "colour of law." They have the duty to protect the person of the President of the USA, but not from silent protest or free speech.

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to juliaoceania)

Post #: 5

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/4/2006 6:05:57 PM

juliaoceania

Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline

The guy who posted about this had a friend that graduated... the friend and the rest of the graduates were told their degrees would be held if they held a massive turn their back protest. I do not know if this is true, but it sounds like something that a university would do to get a presidential keynote speaker. Students signed petitions to keep him out of their commencement...

The guy who posted about it had his three year old with him,... his wife was there... she did not turn around and held the daughter... they made the whole family leave.

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 6

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/6/2006 12:53:08 PM

Noah

Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang
...

One of the things that people don't understand is that the Constitution doesn't necessarily protect you from criminal agents of the government taking liberties with you, but it does provide a remedy. Now those agents of the government should know the law and respect your rights, but that's more of a training issue perhaps.
...

Thanks, Chain.

I guess I don't see the first point, though. In what way could any law protect a person from anything except by providing a remedy? The way you're using the word remedy would seem to be inclusive of all the sorts of possible legal fallout from official malfeasance whether the fallout be a possible suit in civil court, criminal prosecution of the offending official, or one from a number of other possibilities. Isn't this what protection under the law means, in terms of mechanism? The point of having such mechanisms of course is largely to "protect" a citizen (or even non-citizen, in most cases,) from law-breakers. I'm not at all sure how the "necessarily" was supposed to cut in your sentence but I'd welcome your further comments on any aspect of the thing.

As for a secret service agent advanced enough in his career to be detailed to protect the Vice President, and that agent being unaware of the citzen's right to free speech, and that being a "training" issue, well I think the charity you are showing to the Secret Service here is rather generous.

Unless your point was that such an agent may have been trained to follow orders which trample on the rights of citizens. In that case though I think the "training issue" would be more productively viewed as a symptom of a deeper problem than as "the problem" in itself, so to speak.

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 7

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/6/2006 1:42:36 PM

pinkee

Posts: 487
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Noah

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang
...

One of the things that people don't understand is that the Constitution doesn't necessarily protect you from criminal agents of the government taking liberties with you, but it does provide a remedy. Now those agents of the government should know the law and respect your rights, but that's more of a training issue perhaps.
...

Thanks, Chain.

I guess I don't see the first point, though. In what way could any law protect a person from anything except by providing a remedy? The way you're using the word remedy would seem to be inclusive of all the sorts of possible legal fallout from official malfeasance whether the fallout be a possible suit in civil court, criminal prosecution of the offending official, or one from a number of other possibilities. Isn't this what protection under the law means, in terms of mechanism? The point of having such mechanisms of course is largely to "protect" a citizen (or even non-citizen, in most cases,) from law-breakers. I'm not at all sure how the "necessarily" was supposed to cut in your sentence but I'd welcome your further comments on any aspect of the thing.

As for a secret service agent advanced enough in his career to be detailed to protect the Vice President, and that agent being unaware of the citzen's right to free speech, and that being a "training" issue, well I think the charity you are showing to the Secret Service here is rather generous.

Unless your point was that such an agent may have been trained to follow orders which trample on the rights of citizens. In that case though I think the "training issue" would be more productively viewed as a symptom of a deeper problem than as "the problem" in itself, so to speak.

There are abuses of power at every level of government. Sometimes citizens bring suit; sometimes a higher authority steps in and reverses the abuse; sometimes nothing is done.

IMHO, the U.S. Constitution is one of the grandest works of Mankind, ever.

pinkee

(in reply to Noah)

Post #: 8

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/6/2006 1:43:31 PM

Chaingang

Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline

I was just observing that the government can and will fuck with you whenever they see fit to do so. Your rights under the common law, the federal Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the amendments, your state Constitution, etc. are not grants of liberties - although I know that they teach that in school, as if your rights simply will not be violated in the first place - you have to fight for them every fucking step of the way. You must fight for your rights aggressively, belligerently - risking further government action against you. This is not an especially easy process and the results are mixed. That's how they keep people in line.

Just as an aside, in my state of California the actor Tommy Chong was arrested, convicted and did actual jail time for selling art glass water pipes (aka bongs) on the internet. Strangely enough, many people sell similar items and pay no such penalty. Basically, he was selectively prosecuted for having more fun than his fellow man. Isn't that grand? See:
http://www.glass-pipes-water-bongs.com/index.html

More anon elsewhere...

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to Noah)

Post #: 9

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/6/2006 2:40:59 PM

pinkee

Posts: 487
Status: offline

Ah..Cheech and Chong; i adored them. i am sad to hear Chong was imprisioned for such a senseless reason. Many states criminalise the "possession of drug paraphanlia", but too often, whether an object is or is not such paraphanlia is in the eyes of police or DA's who seem to act on whimsy -- or in Chong's case -- selective prosecution.

IMHO, all drugs should be legalised, regulated, taxed and used as citizens see fit. However, the most egregious of all drug laws are those criminalising marijuana, which has proven medical uses and no proven undesirable side effects.

pinkee

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 10

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/6/2006 2:49:21 PM

Chaingang

Posts: 1727
Joined: 10/24/2005
Status: offline

It's an imaginary crime because a water pipe is just that - available for use for anything one might care to smoke, including perfectly legal and perfectly deadly tobacco.

_____________________________

"Everything flows, nothing stands still." (Πάντα ῥεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν μένει) - Heraclitus

(in reply to pinkee)

Post #: 11

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/6/2006 4:52:51 PM

marieToo

Posts: 3595
Joined: 5/21/2006
From: Jersey
Status: offline

He may have had a civil right to say what he did, but it's on him for taking the risk of it being misinterpreted by the SS while having his 8 year old with him. If I were going out to make a public critical statment directly to the VP while I touch him, Id have the sense to leave my child safely at home, just in case those guys in the gray suits with the guns misinterpret my "remark" and "touch on the elbow". Exercising a civil right doesnt exonerate a parent from considering how that display might affect the child thats holding his/her hand. He took an unecessary risk and he did it with his child in tow. Thats on him. Whether or not the arrest was legit is secondary to that point.

Edited to add that this is a fast reply

< Message edited by marieToo -- 10/6/2006 5:14:50 PM >

_____________________________

marie.

I give good agita.

(in reply to Chaingang)

Post #: 12

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/6/2006 8:15:44 PM

jojoluvr

Posts: 441
Joined: 4/10/2006
Status: offline

um, the post article said he "might" have touched him on the elbow or shoulder -- like others in the crowd. he was singled-out because he criticized -- and politely. i can't quite see what danger he put his son in by speaking to the vice-president in a public place. accdg to the progressive article, seeing cheney was a chance encounter -- not one he planned...hence no reason to leave his children at home....

_____________________________

jojo

(in reply to marieToo)

Post #: 13

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/6/2006 10:34:02 PM

marieToo

Posts: 3595
Joined: 5/21/2006
From: Jersey
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jojoluvr

um, the post article said he "might" have touched him on the elbow or shoulder -- like others in the crowd. he was singled-out because he criticized -- and politely. i can't quite see what danger he put his son in by speaking to the vice-president in a public place. accdg to the progressive article, seeing cheney was a chance encounter -- not one he planned...hence no reason to leave his children at home....

Public political statements (negative ones especially) have been known to turn out bloody and or dangerous.

And no we dont know exactly if he touched the vp or not. In fact we dont know any of the other side of the story at all. We only know what the article said, which was his account. Maybe his behavior was worse. Maybe he was drunk, or loud, or maybe he wasnt. Its still irrelevant to the point that I chose to speak about. If you cant see where he may have at least been partially responsible for what his son witnessed, I most likely cant help you understand it.

_____________________________

marie.

I give good agita.

(in reply to jojoluvr)

Post #: 14

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/9/2006 11:32:41 PM

Noah

Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marieToo

He may have had a civil right to say what he did, but it's on him for taking the risk of it being misinterpreted by the SS while having his 8 year old with him. If I were going out to make a public critical statment directly to the VP while I touch him, Id have the sense to leave my child safely at home, just in case those guys in the gray suits with the guns misinterpret my "remark" and "touch on the elbow". Exercising a civil right doesnt exonerate a parent from considering how that display might affect the child thats holding his/her hand. He took an unecessary risk and he did it with his child in tow. Thats on him. Whether or not the arrest was legit is secondary to that point.

Edited to add that this is a fast reply

I see no reason to think that that the man did not consider how the event would affect his son. The reasonable conclusion in any free country would have been that his son would receive an object lesson in the exercise of free speech and the importance of speaking truth to power. The fact that his son was present made his civil act (not civil disobediance) all the more advisable. The pity is that the boy got a lesson instead in creeping fascism.

What article did you read, anyway? I checked several sources and all agreed that this man did not go out to make a public critical statement directly to the VP while touching him, and bring his son along. He was out with his family and happened quite by surprise to see the man to whom he he spoke legally.

What constitutes a necessary or uncessary risk? I imagine the man drove in a car with his son that day too. History shows us hundreds of thousands of cases of men driving in cars with their kids and getting into all sorts of problems. Is driving your kid to music lessons a necessary or an unecessary risk? Because it sure is a risk. Up till now it just has not been a reasonable expectation that if you speak politely to an elected official you will will dragged off to jail.

Isn't the law there to give us an idea of what we may and may not do without getting arrested? Isn't following the law and behaving calmly precisely what a parent should do while escorting his child in public? And that is exactly what this man did.

For you to forgive this official, months-long attack on a citizen's legal rights as a "misinterpretation" shows that you are filled with the spirit of charity, if somewhat selective when it comes to doling it out..

(in reply to marieToo)

Post #: 15

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/10/2006 10:40:18 AM

marieToo

Posts: 3595
Joined: 5/21/2006
From: Jersey
Status: offline

deleted ...because I can

< Message edited by marieToo -- 10/10/2006 11:37:59 AM >

_____________________________

marie.

I give good agita.

(in reply to Noah)

Post #: 16

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/13/2006 6:21:19 PM

marieToo

Posts: 3595
Joined: 5/21/2006
From: Jersey
Status: offline

In that case, maybe I should re-post it to erase that smile of yours...which Im guessing is something closer to a "shit-eating" grin.

:)

_____________________________

marie.

I give good agita.

(in reply to marieToo)

Post #: 17

RE: More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece... - 10/13/2006 6:39:15 PM

sissifytoserve

Posts: 1016
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline

(The Constitution) "It's just a goddamn piece of paper!!!"

George W.Bush --SE-=lected P-resident Of the United States

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2005/12/13/p5232

_____________________________

A great mind must be androgynous
Samuel Coleridge

The uniting of the feminine and the masculine is the highest form of human development Carl Jung

(in reply to marieToo)

Post #: 18

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> More evidence that the Constitution is just a piece of paper

Page: [1]

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.125