Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Camping out is not free speech.

Yeah, and if camping there is already illegal, then arrest people who are camping. It's pretty easy.

But that doesn't make speech happening at the same place also illegal. Arrest the campers.

Can we taser them too? I'm starting to get giddy.

If they employ passive or active resistance below the threshold of active aggression, yes!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Camping out is not free speech.

Yeah, and if camping there is already illegal, then arrest people who are camping. It's pretty easy.

But that doesn't make speech happening at the same place also illegal. Arrest the campers.

Can we taser them too? I'm starting to get giddy.

If they resist, totally!

Frazzled wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Camping out is not free speech.

Yeah, and if camping there is already illegal, then arrest people who are camping. It's pretty easy.

But that doesn't make speech happening at the same place also illegal. Arrest the campers.

Can we taser them too? I'm starting to get giddy.

If they employ active, but not necessarily aggressive resistance, yes!

Rented Tritium wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Camping out is not free speech.

Yeah, and if camping there is already illegal, then arrest people who are camping. It's pretty easy.

But that doesn't make speech happening at the same place also illegal. Arrest the campers.

Can we taser them too? I'm starting to get giddy.

If they resist using passive or active force, yes!

Since there are supposedly sympathizers all abut (that whole 99% thing) can I taser them too? There's usually a pretty big line at the bus stop. This would improve that considerably. I'm just putting that out there.

Frazzled wrote:Sorry show me the economist that has stated federal budget cuts have hurt consumer confidence.

While not specifically on the subject I mentioned, this echoes a similar line:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/02/gop_budget_cuts

This one mentions it:
http://www.topforexnews.com/2010/05/13/sterling-drops-on-consumer-confidence-and-budget-cuts/

It's not exactly some hidden, indiscernable fact that consumer concerns about budget cuts translate into reduced consumer confidence.

These budget cuts may not be actual cuts, as you argue, but consumer confidence is still hurt by them.

Someone who can should delete those extra posts. They were right when the server was going down/up and my posts were "failing" repeatedly then actually posting later.

Melissia wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Sorry show me the economist that has stated federal budget cuts have hurt consumer confidence.

While not specifically on the subject I mentioned, this echoes a similar line:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/02/gop_budget_cuts

This one mentions it:
http://www.topforexnews.com/2010/05/13/sterling-drops-on-consumer-confidence-and-budget-cuts/

It's not exactly some hidden, indiscernable fact that consumer concerns about budget cuts translate into reduced consumer confidence.

These budget cuts may not be actual cuts, as you argue, but consumer confidence is still hurt by them.

"Consumers are concerned about the effect of comets dropping and killing everyone. "
"No comets have hit the planet in at least 80MM years."
"yea, well they're concerned!"

I live in a state capitol and I can absolutely tell you that people are nervous about cuts here. The local businesses can't survive without state employees shopping there. The restaurants near state offices are doing much worse than usual and people know it.

Certainly we've had problems here in Texas, what with our government cutting funding to emergency services in times of emergencies.

Melissia wrote:Certainly we've had problems here in Texas, what with our government cutting funding to emergency services in times of emergencies.

And none of that is related to a federal budget cut.

Frazzled wrote:

Melissia wrote:Certainly we've had problems here in Texas, what with our government cutting funding to emergency services in times of emergencies.

And none of that is related to a federal budget cut.

But if a Federal Emergency had to be declared, what little funding FEMA has to contribute would strain the system's already wan budget.

Frazzled wrote:

Melissia wrote:Certainly we've had problems here in Texas, what with our government cutting funding to emergency services in times of emergencies.

And none of that is related to a federal budget cut.

Considering many of the same proponents of massive state budget cuts are pushing for similar federal budget cuts... yeah, it kinda is, actually.

WarOne wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Melissia wrote:Certainly we've had problems here in Texas, what with our government cutting funding to emergency services in times of emergencies.

And none of that is related to a federal budget cut.

But if a Federal Emergency had to be declared, what little funding FEMA has to contribute would strain the system's already wan budget.

wan-worn?

As the Federal govenrment is not operating under a budget, its a moot point.

as a resident of Portland Oregon, I would ask the people of Washington to stay there. When we have rush hour 70% of the cars on our highways are from Washington. We all know OR > WA, so if you want to be > than, move you worthless highway loaders


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DIDM wrote:as a resident of Portland Oregon, I would ask the people of Washington to stay there. When we have rush hour 70% of the cars on our highways are from Washington. We all know OR > WA, so if you want to be > than, move you worthless highway loaders

edit


yea, in all honesty that is the only WA I care about, the other one is beyond my control, and I could honestly care less, each party is the same anyways

Rented Tritium wrote:
Protesters already pay for services they draw from the city. They're called taxes.

Taxes don't cover all services drawn from a city, just try going through re-zoning, or getting a building permit, or a health inspection, or putting out more than the allotted number of garbage cans, or any number of other services that cities charge additional fees for.

Rented Tritium wrote:
If it's too expensive to let people exercise their rights, then you're doing the whole "government" thing wrong.

No, not really, there's a much easier way around that issue. We simply inform you, via judicial process, which rights we are going to protect, and what we consider those rights to be. You're free to disagree of course, but since we have more power (physical, fiscal, and legal) than you, you're probably out of luck.

Frazzled wrote:wan-worn?

As the Federal govenrment is not operating under a budget, its a moot point.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wan

Rented Tritium wrote:

dogma wrote:
That's pretty much how it works.

Except that they are allowed to deny the permit.

That's the problem.

The correct way for government to deal with protests is to have cops stand around and make sure other laws don't get broken. If you are denying protests because doing so would be too hard, then cry more.

Yeah they can deny a permit, but they can only deny it if there is a neutral reason for doing so. If the KKK or Neo Nazis want to march through a predominantly Jewish neighborhood they need to get a permit, the permit can't be denied based on the message of the march, but only if it would cause a major functional disruption. In fact I recall a story where a group of Neo-Nazis did indeed manage to get a permit to march through the neighborhood, despite the fact that the local government of Skokie, Illinois tried to use permits to deny the Nazis from marching, citing things like they couldn't march in military uniform and then making rules such as a $350,000 insurance down payment, before the Supreme Court said that the reasons for the criteria on the permit were only made to deny the Nazis a permit.

Seriously, if the Nazis are willing to get a permit and fight to get a permit in order to protest and actually get a permit, I think that some people protesting banks can get a permit.

halonachos wrote:
Seriously, if the Nazis are willing to get a permit and fight to get a permit in order to protest and actually get a permit, I think that some people protesting banks can get a permit.

If the cause is actually legitimate, it shouldn't be too great an annoyance either. I mean, its better than being hit with a fire hose.

Somewhere, James Meredith is rolling in his grave.

dogma wrote:

halonachos wrote:
Seriously, if the Nazis are willing to get a permit and fight to get a permit in order to protest and actually get a permit, I think that some people protesting banks can get a permit.

If the cause is actually legitimate, it shouldn't be too great an annoyance either. I mean, its better than being hit with a fire hose.

Somewhere, James Meredith is rolling in his grave.

That would be awfully hard for him Dogma, James Meredith is still alive.

But yeah, the Nazis wanted to march, but it was through a community with a large Jewish population. The local government tried to do all sorts of things after they started applying, even saying that they couldn't hand out pamphlets as well as the previously mentioned criteria. Seriously, if the Supreme Court said the Nazis could get a permit to march through a Jewish neighborhood I'm sure these rowdy youths can get a permit to protest a bank.

halonachos wrote:
That would be awfully hard for him Dogma, James Meredith is still alive.

No, he died in 2008.

dogma wrote:No, he died in 2008.

No he didn't.

You may be thinking of Abraham Woods who was one of the organizers of the D.C. March, who died in 2008.

biccat wrote:
No he didn't.

You may be thinking of Abraham Woods who was one of the organizers of the D.C. March, who died in 2008.

I was thinking of his son, Joe, but you are correct.