Gross violation of the first amendment by delaware dept of transportation

[Maxxron]

Ya killing a bunch of people you know nothing about, before ending your miserable life because it without meaning or purpose is totally the definition of "going out on a blaze of glory". School shootings is what cool kids do fo'sho brah.

We're sorry nobody loves you but if somebody did then maybe you'd realize the idiocy of your statements. Respecting those that came long before you is key to respecting to yourself.

Please, respect is earned, not given. Realize the idiocy of your own statements.

Just because you lived long enough to complain about it, doesn't mean I need to automatically respect you. I'm a huge history buff and appreciate the sacrifices generations past have done, but these are not those people. WWII vets, Vietnam vets, real 'for the people' politicians are those that I respect, but do you know what they have in common?

Most of them are dead or on the streets, homeless.

I'm talking about these self-righteous baby-boomer generation old timers that think they're entitled to this so called "respect". What have they done besides put the US where it is today?

And in this day and age with wars, uprisings and civil disputes, going out in a "blaze of glory" isn't that far fetched in our lifetimes. Well, mine anyways.

[Stuffs]

From what I'm seeing, its perfectly legal what they did
Was it a prick move? Yes, certainly. They didn't even have a talk about removing them, they just went in rough shot. However complain about the methods; not the legality.

[djdidi]

Originally Posted by Gothicshark
I will respond with the State law of Delaware:


http://delcode.delaware.gov/title17/c005/index.shtml



The law is clear on this.

there should be no reason for a debate on this matter, the State had the right to remove the Hoop.

Please Moderators close this thread. it is actually pointless.

And this is the reason why this country's liberties are going away one by one people like this don't want to debate. They just say thats the law and its closed. Well if the founders of this country didnt break the law and commit treason we would still be under british rule.

[Sorrior]

As much as I agree with you, I also have to agree with some of the liberties coming under review. In the past 10 years the way we communicate and do business has changed significantly, and much more so than over the previous 20, so laws and civil liberties had to be reviewed in order to address people abusing the internet and telecommunications. I will agree that censorship in media is complete bull the past 10 years and the the ESRB is starting to worry me about censoring quality out of entertainment. Next it will be censorship of the news (which is already being censored).

The problem is that some of the paranoia has lead to laws that could even make alot of anime illegal if viewed wrong. Look up a guy named chris handley and a thing called the protect act. While in prinicple a great idea to protect children it came out making even CARTOON depiction of minors illegal and the way they did it is with a thing called the Miller thats basically a if society doesn't like it it's illegal deal. Also look up funimation and Vampire Bund they nearly had to censor a REGULAR (as in non porn) series because of certain scenes that have political reasoning and are somewhat important to the plot and CERTAINLY important to the characters reasoning and life. They said they won;t cesnor them but only AFTER a MASSIVE fan backlash. The fact is that even drawing something yourself if it is deemed to fall under that law could possibly get you arrested. This right here is essentially thought policing.

Oh and some places the US included if i recall right have even said that it doesn't matter if the characters from fantasy are real or not still wrong to harm them. elcome to a WTF scenario if ever there was one.

Also YES things have changed but that shouldn't give the government the right to get into people business the way they do. I mean we're already at the point where alot of people don;t even seem to remember pre TSA days and say we NEED something like them. To me the internet and even RL should really not be ruled over the way they are. In my mind all we really need are laws covering not harming people on purpose and no theft unless for survival. Those tow laws would cover pretty much everything that REALLY matters.

---------- Post added 2011-03-28 at 07:00 PM ----------

According to the video, the DoT sent him a certified letter stating that he was in violation before they showed up to remove the pole. He had enough time to write his congressman about it, which is more than enough time to remove the pole.

I believe he DID say that he wrote the congressman and NEVER heard back while the complainer got near instant response and help. That is bias and unfair and just helps fuel my rage even more.

[Lothaeryn]

One thing I think many are failing to realize is that the women in the sweats who appears to be of some official position may very well just have been woken up. It appears that this video was being recorded after a first altercation with the couple who owns the house from which the basketball hoop being removed was in front of. It is possible that the woman was notified after the first altercation and sent out to deal with the "unruly" couple and talk some sense into them.

I am not saying this to condone the manner in which she conducted herself. She was very rude, unprofessional and dishonest or ill-informed (regarding the issue of leaving the pole on the couple's property after removing it). Before heading out, it would have been in her better interest to dress in more appropriate attire and shown more restraint in her actions. I am pointing this out because many things have been said regarding her that I feel are unfair not knowing the full situation.

I wish the unedited version of this video were made available because as-is it appears heavily biased. I am sure there is really more to the story and will be interested to find out more if it develops. I do think the woman in the sweats likely deserves some form of disciplinary action.

And I totally agree that it should never have been edited, for all we know that woman was trying to be reasonable, but it was edited to points where she was no longer trying to cooperate because the guy refused to cooperate respectfully.

what I am certainly annoyed by however, is the fact that they city coucil did not, from what the guy told us, respond to his requests from him and his representitive prior to this confrontation. If in fact he did respond to the letter issued stating the pole was going to be removed, then he had a right to complain, he was not given a response to his petition, and was put in a situation that he could not argue against because the pole was going to be removed by the time his complaint was even recognized. That is why this video pisses me off, because the guy wasnt even given a fair chance or the time to even react to this mandate.

[Gothicshark]

Why is it pointless? We can still discuss the content of the law and whether or not it should be law, despite you proving that the State had the right to remove it.

Because this thread is close to becoming a Flame war.

One side is making baseless Arguments, saying the Female Off duty Officer was some how unprofessional because she was wearing white jeans and a FBI sweatshirt to Imagining somehow the guy had his rights violated, when in fact they where not.

Sure it seems mean to enforce such a law but I posted the Law from Delaware and a link to the whole section where Delaware has the state laws.

This thread is becoming a Hate the government thread and that actually violates MMO Champs own Guidelines for Forum behavior.

That is why I think the thread should be closed.

And since no ones rights where messed with, and the State of Delaware was in the Right. the Thread is also Pointless.

Thread title "Thread: Gross violation of the first amendment by delaware dept of transportation"

[djdidi]

According to the video, the DoT sent him a certified letter stating that he was in violation before they showed up to remove the pole. He had enough time to write his congressman about it, which is more than enough time to remove the pole.

Thanks for the clarification i missed. That lady should still be fired though or her superior I was thinking about the cop telling them that he would arrest them if they didnt move the car it would of been more appropiate to tell them that if they did not move the car they would tow it. If the lady got on the pole again or got in the way of the tow truck then it would be right to arrest them. I just would of handled it totally diffrently even if he was in my face like he was. I guess im just compassionate to people.

[Fiddlesnarf]

Please Moderators close this thread. it is actually pointless.

Why?

There shouldn't be a debate wether the law is "right or wrong", a law is a law, but the fact that this is a brand new law that popped up apparently 60 years after that pole was planted, plus the act that officials are lying to people to make them comply is rediculous.

[djdidi]

Why?

There shouldn't be a debate wether the law is "right or wrong", a law is a law, but the fact that this is a brand new law that popped up apparently 60 years after that pole was planted, plus the act that officials are lying to people to make them comply is rediculous.

That isnt my thread acccutally someone else I copy and pasted because I was an idiot at first and didnt do the reply with quote just reply. No i want disussion on this.

[xile]

And this is the reason why this country's liberties are going away one by one people like this don't want to debate. They just say thats the law and its closed. Well if the founders of this country didnt break the law and commit treason we would still be under british rule.

Why do people always scream about how our liberties are being torn away. Why do people not realize that we live in a national community that abides by laws so that we can all live together as peacefully as possible. We give up things everyday, to make a compromise, you either realize that or live in a world without laws where people go and take stuff wherever they want. But apparently everyone just wants to get their way, and never wants to be offended, TOO BAD. You have 350 million people when was the last time anyone did anything ever in the entire existence of the universe that didn't piss off several hundred people.

[Gothicshark]

Originally Posted by Gothicshark

And this is the reason why this country's liberties are going away one by one people like this don't want to debate. They just say thats the law and its closed. Well if the founders of this country didnt break the law and commit treason we would still be under british rule.

No I am an Activist, I am out there Fighting to change laws daily. Read my bio if you doubt this. But on the Threads here Arguing points about who was wrong and who was right when the Law is Clear on this matter.

If the thread was titled : People of Delaware fight to have Illegal basketball left alone
I would be like no big deal, but the thread is titled: Gross violation of the first amendment by delaware dept of transportation
And that is not true. The State had the right and the civilians in the video did not have any rights violated. Ironically the Laborers did have there Rights Violated by the Family who lived there.

[DragonFireKai]

I believe he DID say that he wrote the congressman and NEVER heard back while the complainer got near instant response and help. That is bias and unfair and just helps fuel my rage even more.

You don't know how long complaints were coming in, could have been years. Furthermore, it might not have even been on the basis of a complaint, the DoT or public works dept might have a project coming up that required use of the easement, you know, the reason why that particular stretch of municipal code was written in the first place.

[Arganis]

Because this thread is close to becoming a Flame war.

One side is making baseless Arguments, saying the Female Off duty Officer was some how unprofessional because she was wearing white jeans and a FBI sweatshirt to Imagining somehow the guy had his rights violated, when in fact they where not.

Sure it seems mean to enforce such a law but I posted the Law from Delaware and a link to the whole section where Delaware has the state laws.

This thread is becoming a Hate the government thread and that actually violates MMO Champs own Guidelines for Forum behavior.

That is why I think the thread should be closed.

And since no ones rights where messed with, and the State of Delaware was in the Right. the Thread is also Pointless.

Thread title "Thread: Gross violation of the first amendment by delaware dept of transportation"

So basically you think your link is /thread and anybody that disagrees is flaming? Frustrated you can't just quote a law and end the discussion much? Sounds like you and Special Agent Nobody have something in common.

[Warwithin]

I'm not sure if we can do anything, but I really, REALLY would like to just punch that lady in the face.

Honestly, if I were him, I would've dropped her right there.

[Sorrior]

Because this thread is close to becoming a Flame war.

One side is making baseless Arguments, saying the Female Off duty Officer was some how unprofessional because she was wearing white jeans and a FBI sweatshirt to Imagining somehow the guy had his rights violated, when in fact they where not.

Sure it seems mean to enforce such a law but I posted the Law from Delaware and a link to the whole section where Delaware has the state laws.

This thread is becoming a Hate the government thread and that actually violates MMO Champs own Guidelines for Forum behavior.

That is why I think the thread should be closed.

And since no ones rights where messed with, and the State of Delaware was in the Right. the Thread is also Pointless.

Thread title "Thread: Gross violation of the first amendment by delaware dept of transportation"

She threatened them for trying to protest that IS a violation. It was not a mass protest and was the basic civil disobedience protest.

---------- Post added 2011-03-28 at 07:15 PM ----------

You don't know how long complaints were coming in, could have been years. Furthermore, it might not have even been on the basis of a complaint, the DoT or public works dept might have a project coming up that required use of the easement, you know, the reason why that particular stretch of municipal code was written in the first place.

Shouldn;t matter how long fact is that he should have had time to contact his congressman. Besides if they really WERE 600 years old or older than i'd say that they were historical if anything. Besides if they took em down for a project then why mention complaints and if they took em down cause of complaints then he really should have had the right to contest. And if it was the city/state laws then why even mention complaints not to mention if they're that old then they should have been left alone unless that restriction had a retroactive attribute to it.

---------- Post added 2011-03-28 at 07:17 PM ----------

I'm not sure if we can do anything, but I really, REALLY would like to just punch that lady in the face.

Honestly, if I were him, I would've dropped her right there.

I probably woulda gone into a full rage and tries to kill someone. People using their position like that get my bloodboiling like an orc hopped up on demon blood after seeing their comrades killed. In short i get REALLY REALLY ENRAGED.

[Wilderness]

Correct, and that law does not pre date the 60 year old basketball hoop in question. That hoop was grandfathered in and cannot be held accountable for current laws made after its creation. Laws go forward not backwards

That's not correct. Just because a law is passed doesn't mean that everything that happened before it is grandfathered in. Things CAN be grandfathered in, but they do not have to be, and the text of the law doesn't state anything about it.

I can't argue that this was in any way a violation of rights, per-se. The woman was, however, extremely unprofessional and had no right to talk down to this guy like he's a child. Had she acted differently, and not lied to his face, the removal could have gone down with much less stress. Being diplomatic and unemotional is part of her job requirement, and she failed miserably. Her job gives her no authority over people beyond enforcing the regulations in question. She way overstepped her bounds. The proper course of action once the pole was coming out would have been to ignore both of them standing on their lawn, but rather she continued to talk down to them and give them commands, exacerbating the situation further.

You could just as easily say that the couple exacerbated the whole situation further and in fact their initial reactions (the woman climbing the pole and refusing to come down) made this into an incident at all. They continued to harass the workers from their yard and she was perfectly right to tell them that they were out of line. They could have been arrested multiple times throughout this incident and were not, so they should be happy that they got away with acting like a couple of children.

[Faloestin]

I can't argue that this was in any way a violation of rights, per-se. The woman was, however, extremely unprofessional and had no right to talk down to this guy like he's a child. Had she acted differently, and not lied to his face, the removal could have gone down with much less stress. Being diplomatic and unemotional is part of her job requirement, and she failed miserably. Her job gives her no authority over people beyond enforcing the regulations in question. She way overstepped her bounds. The proper course of action once the pole was coming out would have been to ignore both of them standing on their lawn, but rather she continued to talk down to them and give them commands, exacerbating the situation further.

Please. "I get to be a punk" is not a constitutional right. I'm not sure what you mean by "talk down to this guy like he's a child" - the law seems pretty clear, the pole was in violation, and the DOT people were pulling it out. They're not required to humor the wacky homeowner; they're just there to pull the pole out of the ground. It really doesn't matter how strongly the homeowner feels about keeping the pole where it is. Telling the guy he's wrong and he needs to get out of the way isn't unreasonable when he is wrong and he does need to get out of the way. Anyway, what is she supposed to say? "I'm really sorry you're feeling oppressed this morning, but can we please proceed?"

You're absolutely right that the DOT woman has not authority over the homeowners beyond removing the pole. The nice state trooper's authority is quite a bit broader, however.

[Wilderness]

She threatened them for trying to protest that IS a violation. It was not a mass protest and was the basic civil disobedience protest.

No, she told them to stop taunting and harassing the workers. That is not a protest, its harassment and its against he law.

I probably woulda gone into a full rage and tries to kill someone. People using their position like that get my bloodboiling like an orc hopped up on demon blood after seeing their comrades killed. In short i get REALLY REALLY ENRAGED.

Yeah, sure you would have, tough guy.

[Gothicshark]

Sounds like you and Special Agent Nobody have something in common.

Since I think you are unclear as to what a Flame is I should point out it is a Direct Attack at another poster. I was pointing out this thread is becoming an Anti-Government Hate Thread with Troll tactics and Flames.

The people who lived there where in Violation of the Law and threatened to Brake the law, at the same time they where Harassing the Workers.


Honestly I wish the full unedited video was posted.

[DragonFireKai]

Shouldn;t matter how long fact is that he should have had time to contact his congressman. Besides if they really WERE 600 years old or older than i'd say that they were historical if anything. Besides if they took em down for a project then why mention complaints and if they took em down cause of complaints then he really should have had the right to contest. And if it was the city/state laws then why even mention complaints not to mention if they're that old then they should have been left alone unless that restriction had a retroactive attribute to it.

Municipal Code for easements supercedes any grandfathering, if DoT decides they need the space, they get the space that they are allotted. Also, a basketball hoop is too small to meet the requirements for the historical registry. The DoT doesn't go around tearing down legal structures based on complaints. If they get a complaint of an illegal structure, then they will take action. The fact of the matter was he built a permanent structure in the right of way of a road, which is required for sidewalk maintainance and maintainance of water and sewage lines. If he wanted to avoid the problem, then he should have gotten a mobile hoop that he could store on his own property.

It's like the time the US built a fort, only to find out that due to a drunk surveyer's errors, they actually built Canada a new fort. Expensive errors, embarassing errors, this guy should be glad it was just a basketball hoop, and not a garage.