Ever have one of these ***** experiences?

[Skwim]

"A Denham Springs woman got a visit from the cops after nearby residents were offended by her somewhat unorthodox Christmas lights display.

​

Homeowner Sarah Henderson intentionally fashioned the lights on her roof (photo, above) to look like a human hand "flipping the bird."
Neighbors called police to complain, and Denham Springs Police Corporal Shawn Perkins paid her a visit.

Corporal Perkins said the woman told him she put the display as a direct message to her neighbors.

Perkins says he informed Henderson that the display was in violation of obscenity laws and that it must come down, or else.

However, the ACLU of Louisiana soon waded into the fray.

"The First Amendment expressly, explicitly, makes clear that even things like the raised middle finger are protected speech," says Executive Director Marjorie Esman."

source
​

This abuse of power reminded me of a high school prom I went to.

At the door was a parent acting as gate keeper, making sure all who entered had an admission ticket. Well, this chap, taking it upon himself, refused to admit a girl because he decided the dress she was wearing was too revealing. The dress itself really wasn't the issue, but that her ample bosom couldn't be hidden to the extent he thought decent. In school she always dressed nicely and was a fairly quite and somewhat wholesome girl, but that night she was quite a knockout. Of course word of the the ongoing incident quickly spread---she and her date were trying to talk some sense into the guy---and a bunch of us gathered around the entryway to led her our support. But the guy was quite adamant in denying her entry to the dance unless she covered up or went home and changed her dress. Fortunately, the principal was quick to take charge, letting the girl enter and then taking the parent aside for a talk.

Ever since then I am immediately repulsed and angered by anyone who uses their position of power to enforce their opinions.


Anyone else have an experience with an arrogant *** ***** like this? Please share.

 

[oldbadger]

Ha Ha! Hi Skwim! I reckon you'll get a load of replies.

This sort of stupidity is legion, from idiot bus drivers refusing invalids because their folding wheelchairs are a bit big, to shop managers deciding a person looks 'rough' and ejecting them from the store, only to later discover (to his horror!) that the rough looking guy was a major shareholder of the store-group, etc etc

But the last idiot I met was on the very last occasion I ever had to give evidence of a crime at an English Crown Court. (I am retired now). At the entrance doors I walked through the metal detector, placed my bag on the detector conveyor, and handed my camera and mobile 'phone to the guard for (temporary) seizure. The guard went into a frenzied hysteria about the camera. Cameras are banned in Court! 'Yes', I said, 'But I need it later today and can't go home for it. PLease look after both my 'phone and camera 'till I leave here.' The guard calmed down and gave me back my 'phone. 'No!', I said ,'My 'phone has a video and camera facility built in!' 'Oh, that's alright', said the guard ,'We let those in. Everybody needs a 'phone!'. !!!!!!!
This was at the 2nd biggest criminal court in London! The world is full of daft stupidity. I just needed to spend my life adapting to it so I didn't go raging bonkers.

 

[dawny0826]

What is law enforcement supposed to do, when they receive multiple calls and complaints? Regarding as to the accuracy in the cop's statement, I don't think that it's unreasonable to request that the lights be removed - if it's ******* people off enough that they're calling the cops.

Her actions are resulting in waste of time and tax payer dollars. Law enforcement can't fully evaluate a situation until they check it out.

I respect and want freedom of speech protected. But, when expression of speech is designed to hurt or anger others and is made public display, I don't think local law enforcement is out of bound to request removal of such display.

 

[HonestJoe]

Ever since then I am immediately repulsed and angered by anyone who uses their position of power to enforce their opinions.

Do you mean power as in the power of free speech? Or the power the ACLU have as a high-profile organisation? I'm not sure how else your objection could apply.

 

[lunakilo]

What is law enforcement supposed to do, when they receive multiple calls and complaints? Regarding as to the accuracy in the cop's statement, I don't think that it's unreasonable to request that the lights be removed - if it's ******* people off enough that they're calling the cops.

Her actions are resulting in waste of time and tax payer dollars. Law enforcement can't fully evaluate a situation until they check it out.

I respect and want freedom of speech protected. But, when expression of speech is designed to hurt or anger others and is made public display, I don't think local law enforcement is out of bound to request removal of such display.

Or maybe people should just learn to try and work out their differences without calling the police. That would save taxpayers money.

 

[Revoltingest]

Or maybe people should just learn to try and work out their differences without calling the police. That would save taxpayers money.

That is not the American way. When a dispute arises, we call the cops, licensing agencies, building officials, etc....anyone
to bully the other guy so that we can personally avoid confrontation. And of course, public 'servants' love to wade in, abusing,
fining or even arresting someone. (Here, bullies don't get counseling....they get a badge.)

Do I sound cynical? Perhaps just a tad.

 

[BSM1]

Good thing the cops were called, I thought it was a cactus.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

That's a huge roof - and must have had the power bill go up light speed.

 

[Skwim]

What is law enforcement supposed to do, when they receive multiple calls and complaints? Regarding as to the accuracy in the cop's statement, I don't think that it's unreasonable to request that the lights be removed - if it's ******* people off enough that they're calling the cops.

You do live in the USA don't you?

Her actions are resulting in waste of time and tax payer dollars. Law enforcement can't fully evaluate a situation until they check it out.

Why not blame the neighbors' actions for wasting the time and tax payer dollars to have police check out a non-issue?

I respect and want freedom of speech protected.

How can you respect something you don't understand?

But, when expression of speech is designed to hurt or anger others and is made public display, I don't think local law enforcement is out of bound to request removal of such display.

Of course you don't, because you don't understand the concept of free speech.

Do you mean power as in the power of free speech? Or the power the ACLU have as a high-profile organisation? I'm not sure how else your objection could apply.

Please tell me you're not serious.

 

[Quagmire]

"Corporal Perkins said the woman told him she put the display as a direct message to her neighbors. "

Wonder if any of her neighbors were children, or the elderly.

 

[HonestJoe]

Please tell me you're not serious.

I was being sarcastic but there was a serious point behind it. I am honestly unclear who you believe abused their power.

 

[Skwim]

I was being sarcastic but there was a serious point behind it. I am honestly unclear who you believe abused their power.

In the linked example, Denham Springs Police Corporal Shawn Perkins.

In my example, the gatekeeper parent.

 

[dawny0826]

Or maybe people should just learn to try and work out their differences without calling the police. That would save taxpayers money.

I concur.

 

[dawny0826]

You do live in the USA don't you?

Why not blame the neighbors' actions for wasting the time and tax payer dollars to have police check out a non-issue?

How can you respect something you don't understand?

Of course you don't, because you don't understand the concept of free speech.

Please tell me you're not serious.

Actually, I do blame the neighbors for wasting time and tax payer dollars. I'm just not willing to come down hard on the cop, even if he was "off", as he was doing his job.

I understand free speech quite well. I'm also a fan of practicality and common sense. You express yourself in such a manner with the intent to **** your neighbors off, you're bound to get some crap from it. Do you have the freedom to do it? Abso-freakin-lutely.

 

[HonestJoe]

In the linked example, Denham Springs Police Corporal Shawn Perkins.

The police officer didn't apply any power. He stated his understanding of the law and the home-owner agreed to take the lights down. Even if the officer had proceeded formally, it would be legitimately within his power.

There is a legitimate question over whether he was correct in his interpretation but that would have been (and it seems still could be) addressed in court.

 

[Darkness]

You should not be able to arrange your Christmas lights in the shape of flipping the bird. I know liberals hate to hear this, but the community does have rights over and against the individual.

 

[Skwim]

Actually, I do blame the neighbors for wasting time and tax payer dollars. I'm just not willing to come down hard on the cop, even if he was "off", as he was doing his job.

While his job does included investigating complaints, it also includes knowing the law well enough to not misapply it.

I understand free speech quite well. I'm also a fan of practicality and common sense.

How could you when you say things such as

"when expression of speech is designed to . . . anger others and is made public display, I don't think local law enforcement is out of bound to request removal of such display."
​

Despite what you may think, and how big a fan you are of practicality and common sense, the law of the land says that law enforcement is out of bounds to require removal of such display.

You express yourself in such a manner with the intent to **** your neighbors off, you're bound to get some crap from it. Do you have the freedom to do it? Abso-freakin-lutely.

Assuming your "you" here refers to those "giving some crap," you're correct, but then nobody is disputing this.

 

[Skwim]

The police officer didn't apply any power.

He applied the power he was invested with when he took the police oath and told her "it must come down, or else." Do you think the home owner would have taken down her lights if some yahoo down the street had told her to? Of course not. It was the authority that goes with being a police officer that convinced her to do so. Understanding that police officers have a better knowledge of the law than do most people (he told her the display was in violation of obscenity laws) she thought he was right. He was wrong and so was she in believing him.

He stated his understanding of the law and the home-owner agreed to take the lights down.

Yup. He was wrong and so was she in believing him.

Even if the officer had proceeded formally, it would be legitimately within his power.

What is "proceeded formally"?

There is a legitimate question over whether he was correct in his interpretation but that would have been (and it seems still could be) addressed in court.

What question is that? As I posted in the OP.

"The First Amendment expressly, explicitly, makes clear that even things like the raised middle finger are protected speech," says Executive Director Marjorie Esman."
​

More in the linked article.

 

[Skwim]

You should not be able to arrange your Christmas lights in the shape of flipping the bird. I know liberals hate to hear this, but the community does have rights over and against the individual.

So, what are these rights? And where are they spelled out?

 

[HonestJoe]

It was the authority that goes with being a police officer that convinced her to do so.

Exactly, he legitimately has that authority. He may have been mistaken on a point of law but that doesn't make it an abuse of power. Police officers have the right, indeed the duty, to make an assessment of a situation based on their understanding of the law and respond appropriately.

What is "proceeded formally"?

Writing the actual ticket or formally reporting the alledged offence to the prosecuting authorities.

What question is that? As I posted in the OP.

That's one person's opinion based on case law that doesn't quite match this case. The question of whether this specific case falls within the legal exceptions to free speech within that juristiction and in the context of US federal law could only be confirmed by legal rulings on this specific case.