When I next move, it may be to THIS town...

[Richter]

I'm still trying to put my finger on it, but I'm bothered by the fact that the authorities had to cheapen the execution of their jobs to deal with people who make cheap use of their rights and privileges.

It's a doey-eyed idealist sort of thing to hope that we'd have the people and the guidelines to deal with this in a totally moral way, but like LMNO said, it's a ticklish thing trying to decide when it's OK to go outside morality to do so.  Reality wise though, you can't always make a clean, guitless solution.  Based on what I know, and how I read the article, they made a good call this time.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

As much as I loathe Phelps and his family, I am utterly in agreement with LMNO on this one.

[Luna]

Yes, agreed... 

However, I'll submit, we do not know what went on behind closed doors.  One would hope that this was all (other than the beating and the locals stonewalling the investigation, which the cops had no control over) done in the name of maintaining the peace and keeping the REST of the WBC from receiving beat-downs (I suspect there was at least one former or current military member attending the funeral who would take offense at their presence, and administer some sort of disapproval upon the persons offending).

Seems a backward way of doing their jobs... but effective, in this case.

[Elder Iptuous]

I just lost a friend in Afghanistan. (SSgt Jeremy Daniel Smith)  The funeral was quite an ordeal.  (those Marines don't fuck around...)
WBC applied for a permit, but our police department denied them.  i don't know the details of it.
they must have showed up anyways, because during the memorial service, the patriot gaurds all fired up their bikes.  (there was probably 150 of them there)  It shook the ground.  We, the attending never saw them.

For the life of me, i can't figure out what the problem is with this issue.  When the purpose of the protest is to cause undue psychological duress to the bereaved, it seems like the exercise of their 'rights' are infringing upon those of others, and need not be tolerated.  Have they ever given a reason that they need to protest at funerals, other than to cause distress?

[LMNO]

The problem, simply put, is the use of the official police force to prohibit a lawful act.

If it was purely citizens, no problem.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I just lost a friend in Afghanistan. (SSgt Jeremy Daniel Smith)  The funeral was quite an ordeal.  (those Marines don't fuck around...)
WBC applied for a permit, but our police department denied them.  i don't know the details of it.
they must have showed up anyways, because during the memorial service, the patriot gaurds all fired up their bikes.  (there was probably 150 of them there)  It shook the ground.  We, the attending never saw them.

For the life of me, i can't figure out what the problem is with this issue.  When the purpose of the protest is to cause undue psychological duress to the bereaved, it seems like the exercise of their 'rights' are infringing upon those of others, and need not be tolerated.  Have they ever given a reason that they need to protest at funerals, other than to cause distress?

There is no right to not be offended.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

The problem, simply put, is the use of the official police force to prohibit a lawful act.

If it was purely citizens, no problem.

This is exactly it.  If you start fucking with rights for a good reason, pretty soon you'll be doing it for a bad reason.

And - as recent American history has demonstrated - "the slippery slope" is not actually a fallacy.

[P3nT4gR4m]

How about the triage angle? If enough people felt strongly enough that they went to the lengths they did just what might have happened if the protest had proceeded? Personally I've been in family bereavement situations and I'm almost sure that if I was on the way to a funeral and encountered Wesboro taunts I might just have said "what the fuck" and charged in.

So one pillock gets his shit handed to him cos he's talking shite. Maybe not very civilised but this is the real world, people, you're free to speak your mind but if you don't have the sense to keep it to yourself when you fucking well ought to or learn to duck then you're going to get stomped from time to time. Tough shit. Tight community back their own and keep schtum when the cops arrive it's not going to go any further. They got important shit to deal with and someone throwing a punch prolly aint the top of the list, even in a sleepy little town where nothing much happens (dunno if it was or not)

Bottom line is, whether it's intentional or not, these twats are constantly pushing buttons which get a rise out of people and, as far as I can tell, they're not making a whole hell of a lot of friends. There's a term I grew up with - "Asking for it" - think - dude full of drink, grabbing you by the scruff of the neck, right down to the poor bastard who innocently spilled your pint and figure out for yourself what constitutes. So it's not admissible in your defense, in a court of law but, anywhere there aint a judge and a bunch of cops in attendance, it's the way shit actually works.

Cops know this too. Lending a little red-tape assistance but, basically just standing back, they might well have stopped something really ugly (admittedly something I'd have gotten a kick out of hearing about - lets face it you'd smile a bit, wouldn't you?) from going down. People, driven through grief and rage, would have had to have been sent down for kicking the living shit out of people who, let's face it, are fucking begging for it. So the law acted the way it did and the whole thing went off relatively peacefully. IMO they did their job.

[Elder Iptuous]

I just lost a friend in Afghanistan. (SSgt Jeremy Daniel Smith)  The funeral was quite an ordeal.  (those Marines don't fuck around...)
WBC applied for a permit, but our police department denied them.  i don't know the details of it.
they must have showed up anyways, because during the memorial service, the patriot gaurds all fired up their bikes.  (there was probably 150 of them there)  It shook the ground.  We, the attending never saw them.

For the life of me, i can't figure out what the problem is with this issue.  When the purpose of the protest is to cause undue psychological duress to the bereaved, it seems like the exercise of their 'rights' are infringing upon those of others, and need not be tolerated.  Have they ever given a reason that they need to protest at funerals, other than to cause distress?

There is no right to not be offended.

at what point does offensive speech because psychological assault?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I just lost a friend in Afghanistan. (SSgt Jeremy Daniel Smith)  The funeral was quite an ordeal.  (those Marines don't fuck around...)
WBC applied for a permit, but our police department denied them.  i don't know the details of it.
they must have showed up anyways, because during the memorial service, the patriot gaurds all fired up their bikes.  (there was probably 150 of them there)  It shook the ground.  We, the attending never saw them.

For the life of me, i can't figure out what the problem is with this issue.  When the purpose of the protest is to cause undue psychological duress to the bereaved, it seems like the exercise of their 'rights' are infringing upon those of others, and need not be tolerated.  Have they ever given a reason that they need to protest at funerals, other than to cause distress?

There is no right to not be offended.

at what point does offensive speech because psychological assault?

At the point where you make fun of teabaggers, eventually.  Or someone criticizes Sarah Palin.

See where I'm going, here?

[Adios]

I just lost a friend in Afghanistan. (SSgt Jeremy Daniel Smith)  The funeral was quite an ordeal.  (those Marines don't fuck around...)
WBC applied for a permit, but our police department denied them.  i don't know the details of it.
they must have showed up anyways, because during the memorial service, the patriot gaurds all fired up their bikes.  (there was probably 150 of them there)  It shook the ground.  We, the attending never saw them.

For the life of me, i can't figure out what the problem is with this issue.  When the purpose of the protest is to cause undue psychological duress to the bereaved, it seems like the exercise of their 'rights' are infringing upon those of others, and need not be tolerated.  Have they ever given a reason that they need to protest at funerals, other than to cause distress?

There is no right to not be offended.

at what point does offensive speech because psychological assault?

It doesn't. You always have the right to not listen or to move on.

[Elder Iptuous]

Yeah, i guess we could have packed it up, told everybody to go home and we'd hold our funeral again at some other time.
or maybe we could have held in secret.
because harassment is protected.


y'know... i know what you're saying, in truth.  furthermore, i agree with you, (to an extent) rationally.
but, it's difficult to maintain that when you are the target of their vitriol.
i'm suprised someone hasn't offed phelps yet. (not that martyring him would make anything better

[Disco Pickle]

In The Supreme Court ruling, Alito was the only dissent, likening their words to "fighting words" while the rest said that it was public, not private speech.

The first time one of their protests becomes a brawl between them and the people attending the funeral, a savvy constitutional lawyer could likely get them under the fighting words doctrine and force the Court to revisit the case, taking the violence that occured as a direct result of their speech in to consideration.  It's not incitement, but if it could be shown that what they're saying is intended to cause someone to react to them, you should be able to get them shut down, at least at funerals.  

IMO, what they're doing is as aggressive as walking up to a stranger and getting in their face and repeating the word "blood" over and over again.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Yeah, i guess we could have packed it up, told everybody to go home and we'd hold our funeral again at some other time.
or maybe we could have held in secret.
because harassment is protected.


y'know... i know what you're saying, in truth.  furthermore, i agree with you, (to an extent) rationally.
but, it's difficult to maintain that when you are the target of their vitriol.
i'm suprised someone hasn't offed phelps yet. (not that martyring him would make anything better

Rationally is the ONLY way to deal with these things.

The cure is worse than the disease.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

In The Supreme Court ruling, Alito was the only dissent, likening their words to "fighting words" while the rest said that it was public, not private speech.

The first time one of their protests becomes a brawl between them and the people attending the funeral, a savvy constitutional lawyer could likely get them under the fighting words doctrine and force the Court to revisit the case, taking the violence that occured as a direct result of their speech in to consideration.  It's not incitement, but if it could be shown that what they're saying is intended to cause someone to react to them, you should be able to get them shut down, at least at funerals.  

IMO, what they're doing is as aggressive as walking up to a stranger and getting in their face and repeating the word "blood" over and over again.

Okay, fuck it.  We'll just outlaw speech that offends anyone.