Watch RNC Security Literally Quash Free Speech With Actual Symbol of Free Speech

[Mr Person]

When she disrupts a private event she becomes an unwelcome guest and they can throw her out.

Never said they couldn't.

I asked:

Was it a ticket-only event and she snuck in without a ticket?

I asked it because you asserted that she committed trespass, which is a crime:

No, she's trespassing on a private event and they don't have to let her stay.

If she was lawfully there, their dislike of her protesting doesn't mean she was "trespassing". All it means is that security can remove her.

(other attendees do not have that right)

 

[Vox]

Never said they couldn't.

I asked:



I asked it because you asserted that she committed trespass, which is a crime:




If she was lawfully there, their dislike of her protesting doesn't mean she was "trespassing". All it means is that security can remove her.

(other attendees do not have that right)

She can be forcibly removed as soon as she disrupts a private event.

 

[chuckiechan]

Watch RNC Security Literally Quash Free Speech With Actual Symbol of Free Speech | Mediaite



I dont know this website (seems like a biased fluff and hype site) nor do I think Im familiar with "code pink" but that aside it looks like the circus of politics continues!!!!

What do you think of this video? The even people have every right to remover her but what about the actions of others here?

Do you think its assault?
Do you think they are infringing on her free speech?
Do you think its attempted theft?

I read A LOT of fluff and hype on this and I want to know what you think.

after you have your own personal answers now ask yourself if they change if that was your friend, sister, mom, daughter, wife or girlfriend etc?

For my take I think its crazy that a sign that says no racism no hate bothers people, I think what they did to here is horrible and if that was my mom, sister, daughter, wife girlfriend etc I don't know if I could control myself. I also think things turn out lucky, she could have been pulled to the ground or worse yet over a rail or over seats.

Again SECURITY or STAFF removing her I have zero issues with, but the pulling at her and covering her head with the flag and surrounding her is something I would never tolerate as a person or by stander in that situation whether i agree with her or not.

Like I said The circus show made up of fluff and hype continues . . . .so said.

Somewhere, like on the back of a ticket to any venue, is some boiler plate. Without that, there is no way to know what rights she does not have.

 

[Mr Person]

She can be forcibly removed as soon as she disrupts a private event.

Are you trying to generate an argument for argument's sake?

I know, agree with, and have in fact already said that security has the right to remove protesters.



I'm challenging your claim that she was "tresspassing". Trespass is a crime with specific definitions.

 

[Risky Thicket]

When she disrupts a private event she becomes an unwelcome guest and they can throw her out.

Excellent point! With the exception of the Code Pink lady the RNC was in no way disruptive or raucous. :lamo

 

[Deuce]

Covering her with an American flag was indeed a poor decision.

But she's Code Pink so booting her out is both welcome and expected. I was hoping for the "assault" to be just a tad more assault-y though. Just a wee bit, nothing serious. I'm not a monster.

 

[Risky Thicket]

Well i partially agree, i dont think this changes anybody's mind but it is weird that the sign bothered anybody . . .
to be fair Its possible something happened before hand we missed or she was chanting something people didnt like too . . that doesnt justify anybody not staff touching her or blocking her im just saying there are thigns we dont know.

Let's be honest about this. We know that if national political conventions aren't about truth and honesty they are about nothing. People at the RNC were obviously upset by the Code Pink lady's banner. It was out of place. It was insulting to GOP principles. "No racism, No hate" has no place at an Republican National Convention.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)Actually, it might be assault and battery. Battery is just an unlawful intentional touching, to simplify it. Doesn't require a punch or actual injuries. Hard to see it clearly here though. If he's using a flag held taut to actually push her away using that flag, then I suppose it's technically an A&B, but given how inconsequential the touching was, I doubt anyone actually facing trial over it. But it isn't clear that the guy actually made contact - looks more like he was trying to block her from view or...something.
2.) Could be an assault (attempted battery version), but again, not the kind of thing I would expect anyone to get prosecuted over.
3.) It's definitely not an infringement of her right to free speech because the Trump supporters are not state actors.
4.) Attempted theft would be trickier. Can you really infer intent to permanently deprive her of the sign? Seems at least equally inferable that they wanted to pull it down until security removed her.

1.) I agree nobody will probably face trial but its actually very clear that at least three guys mad contact if you watch the video and look at the stills. Im just curious what people think though and I find it interesting that under different circumstances people would totally degrad this activity instead of make excuses (not saying you btw just in general)
2.) me neither in "this situation"
3.) I know what you are trying to say here but there are plenty examples of infringement of free speech who are not state actors . . .again im not talking charges just in general
4.) I agree it would be tricky but why would that be needed? ive never heard of that requirement. They tried to take it by force, plans to return it or not dont matter. In my opinion that by itself is arguable for battery.

Thank you for your honest answers and opinion though, I dont think theres any really right and wrong answers to my questions besides everybody should agree the treatment was wrong.

 

[AGENT J]

Somewhere, like on the back of a ticket to any venue, is some boiler plate. Without that, there is no way to know what rights she does not have.

NOTHING written on the ticket would take away her rights that i mentioned here or justify the acts of non security/staff.
If you missed it i said twice that security/staff had every right to remove her but the video shows other attendees assaulting her in my opinion.

 

[AGENT J]

Let's be honest about this. We know that if national political conventions aren't about truth and honesty they are about nothing. People at the RNC were obviously upset by the Code Pink lady's banner. It was out of place. It was insulting to GOP principles. "No racism, No hate" has no place at an Republican National Convention.

LMAO!!! nice risky I get the joke but I cant agree!

 

[Vox]

Excellent point! With the exception of the Code Pink lady the RNC was in no way disruptive or raucous. :lamo

Her sign was all that was needed to eject her.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

So let's see if I can help you with this since you are struggling with it. The sign reads "no racism, no hate."

Who do you think the message was directed at? Hillary Clinton?

Here's a clue for you.



CODEPINK Activists Disrupt Donald Trump Rally in Las Vegas | CODEPINK

"No racism, no hate" is obviously a liberal attack on conservative values?

Noted.

 

[Deuce]

"No racism, no hate" is obviously a liberal attack on conservative values?

Noted.

It's an attack along the lines of "do you still beat your wife?"

 

[chuckiechan]

NOTHING written on the ticket would take away her rights that i mentioned here or justify the acts of non security/staff.
If you missed it i said twice that security/staff had every right to remove her but the video shows other attendees assaulting her in my opinion.

The could be sworn police officers, and if they are they have greater power over troublemakers.

And many things on the ticket all her to be removed, and how she is removed is predicated on how hard she resists. She wasn't there to make friends, she was there to disrupt.

It's not like they tossed her in a dumpster. Hmmm....

 

[AGENT J]

1.)The could be sworn police officers, and if they are they have greater power over troublemakers.
2.)And many things on the ticket all her to be removed and how she is removed is predicated on how hard she resists.
3.) She wasn't there to make friends, she was there to disrupt.
4.) It's not like they tossed her in a dumpster. Hmmm....

1.) no they were not LMAO
2.) try reading again, i said twice in staff removing her is fine and thats their right and then many times in the thread and in the post your quote.
3.) meaningless to anything i said
4.) also a meaningless strawman that nobody claimed

Fact remains, NOTHING written on the ticket would take away her rights that i mentioned here or justify the acts of non security/staff.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

"No racism, no hate" is obviously a liberal attack on conservative values?

Noted.

Obvious Alinsky tactic is obvious.

 

[chuckiechan]

1.) no they were not LMAO
2.) try reading again, i said twice in staff removing her is fine and thats their right and then many times in the thread and in the post your quote.
3.) meaningless to anything i said
4.) also a meaningless strawman that nobody claimed

Fact remains, NOTHING written on the ticket would take away her rights that i mentioned here or justify the acts of non security/staff.

Well, lets see how things are handled at the DNC convention.

BTW: 1 - how do you know they weren't
2 - you missed the part "predicated on how hard she resists"
3 & 4 - we are talking past each other, and getting nowhere.

You have your views, and are expecting the person to attract more and more attention, and more and more television time, and Trump security to sit there reading their pocket book Constitutions.

Read 3 & 4 again.

 

[cpwill]

The sign accused no one. But certain individuals apparently had reason to feel insecure about what it said. Gee, wonder why?

For the same reason that they get angry at people who tell them to vote their conscience.

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)_Well, lets see how things are handled at the DNC convention.

BTW: 2 - how do you know they weren't
3 - you missed the part "predicated on how hard she resists"
4- we are talking past each other, and getting nowhere.
5.)You have your views, and are expecting the person to attract more and more attention, and more and more television time, and Trump security to sit there reading their pocket book Constitutions.
6.)Read 3 & 4 again.

1.) i expect that to be a nutter circus show too :shrug: another MEANINGLESS starwman. You seem to like strawman quite a bit don't you?
2. read the many articles on this, they were not and ven if they were they cant act on their own for a sign
3.) didnt miss it at all if factually doesnt matter in this case because we can see it
4.) yes you are making up meaningless strawmen and failing I know
5.) and yet ANOTHER made up and retarded strawman that nobody ever said LMAO
6.) no need i already know your strawmen are fialling

 

[Glen Contrarian]

It's an attack along the lines of "do you still beat your wife?"

Wrong. Did the sign say, "Are you still racist? Do you still hate?" No. It said, "No racism, no hate". The wise reaction by the RNC would have been to strongly agree, and to say that such is in strict accordance with conservative values.

But seeing as how the Republicans have just nominated Trump, such was simply not possible, it appears.

 

[Common Sense 1]

She was there for one reason and that was to disrupt the event.

If she wants to exercise her "free" speech there are many area's set-up
out side where the different group can peacefully protest, yell, wave signs around.
But you can not do that inside and disrupt the actual convention.

 

[chuckiechan]

Wrong. Did the sign say, "Are you still racist? Do you still hate?" No. It said, "No racism, no hate". The wise reaction by the RNC would have been to strongly agree, and to say that such is in strict accordance with conservative values.

But seeing as how the Republicans have just nominated Trump, such was simply not possible, it appears.

For someone to say "No racism, no Hate" it means it's there because all racists can see is "racism and hate".

 

[Fenton]

How, exactly, is a sign that says, "No Racism, No Hate" in any way a 'big lie' or 'insulting'?

It isn't...except for in the eyes of those who have reason to feel insecure about what the sign says.

For one its being displayed at the wrong convention

 

[Glen Contrarian]

For one its being displayed at the wrong convention

Ah. Let me get this straight - the convention that is majority white, but is still VERY multiracial, multicultural, and multiethnic...that's the racist convention.

And the convention that is almost completely lily-white, where minorities are scarce as hen's teeth, that's the NOT-RACIST convention, huh?

What gets me is that the above somehow makes sense to you.

 

[Deuce]

Wrong. Did the sign say, "Are you still racist? Do you still hate?" No. It said, "No racism, no hate". The wise reaction by the RNC would have been to strongly agree, and to say that such is in strict accordance with conservative values.

But seeing as how the Republicans have just nominated Trump, such was simply not possible, it appears.

Are you under the impression this woman doesn't already think the GOP is full of racism and hate?