Billy the Kid
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2012
- Messages
- 2,449
- Reaction score
- 563
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Initially the charges were levied against two men, Meyer being one of them for misdemeanor"conducting a demonstration on state grounds without a permit". That was dropped, per the OP article to simple trespassing... trespassing on public property, allegedly 50 feet from the DMV door.
And I would agree with you if they were on public property. But from the link I provided to you in a different response, they still seemed to be on DMV property. But if they were, and it seems they were still on DMV property, you cannot disregard a request to leave by the security officer because of your first amandment rights.
I don't think they would win. If people testify they felt threatened, they could have a case. I've seen cases with less win.
Either way, I agree the cop was an idiot for the reason he gave about doing it on your own property as the sole reason.
Okay. What is the "threat"?
That is not quite true, because the DMV is state property, not public.
Threatening they will go to hell if they don't repent.
Did the police just happen up him reading? If not, then it sounds like someone had an axe to grind. This is just stupid, IMO.
Threatening they will go to hell if they don't repent.
Threatening they will go to hell if they don't repent.
I've read that this is not the first time this has happened with these individuals. Police apparently have warned these guys multiple times, which leads me to believe those who have said this guy wanted to get arrested are probably correct. To me, the arrest sounds like a protest in and of itself to bring to light the issue of reading the bible publicly. Regardless of the motivation and intent, the issue at hand is, did the police have a right to arrest the guy? I agree with soccerboy that if the parking lot is technically owned by the DMV, they can have him arrested for trespass - it's their land. A harder argument is if the DMV parking lot is owned by someone else or is considered public land. Even harder still would be to press the illegal protest charge, which I think wouldn't work which maybe why the charges were changed to trespassing.
Ill use what the anti OWS crowd used: He was on private property he had it coming.... :roll:
What if he had said "unless you believe on the Grand Fallopian, you are all going to melt and go down the bathtub drain."
Would that be a "threat"?
Hmmm ...... this was what a year ago? Has this been settled yet. I mean the trespassing charge?
How is that a threat. If you don't believe, you wouldn't care less what the guy is saying. If you are a believer/church goer, then you've heard it from you priest/pastor before.
As far as I know it's still going on... I haven't found anything real recent on it yet.
Yes, that could be. Like I said, I've seen less used before.
Actually there have been some nutball Christians that have killed their kids before to save them from going to hell.
So the threat is there because you don't know if he is the one that is going to do it.
Just saying.
Actually there have been some nutball Christians that have killed their kids before to save them from going to hell.
So the threat is there because you don't know if he is the one that is going to do it.
Just saying.
Did you feel threatened when you read it? I sure wasn't meaning to scare you. Are you still shaking all over.
Can you post the link that shows the parking lot is conclusively on DMV owned land?
Cmon Conservatives and the right! The OWS croud was marching on public property, roads, and the sidewalk and they got beaten and arrested for it! This guy was on the DMV! He deserves to be arrested to right!? Didnt have a "permit!" Arrest him! Silence him!
I don't feel threatened no, but thank you for sharing your snarky response to me like most idiotic conservatives do.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?