Gross violation of the first amendment by delaware dept of transportation

[Kronoz]

i got to laugh at all you that acts like "HE BROKE THE RULES HE SHOULD SHUT UP SHE WAS RIGHT" blablabla you are pathetic. if we go to a contry where its legal to stone ppl to death or melt your womans face away with acid does that make it right just because the law says its okay? in my opinion the police should have bigger fish to fry then some crap like this. waste of tax money, they should lock her up for wasting valuable resources.

[Andunae]

Disgusting mis-use of taxes.
Grrrrr

[Wilderness]

I think the actual "violation of first amendment rights" was when she told him to stfu, go inside or be arrested. In the end, i believe states have their right to enforce zoning laws, and if you don't like them you may not want to sign the purchasing contract for the property at all. However the attitude of the woman was quite normal for government employees, cocky master of the universe who forgets who she works for.

She didn't tell them to stfu, she told them to stop taunting and harassing the workers, which is illegal. Freedom of speech does not give you the right to say anything to anyone.

i got to laugh at all you that acts like "HE BROKE THE RULES HE SHOULD SHUT UP SHE WAS RIGHT" blablabla you are pathetic. if we go to a contry where its legal to stone ppl to death or melt your womans face away with acid does that make it right just because the law says its okay? in my opinion the police should have bigger fish to fry then some crap like this. waste of tax money, they should lock her up for wasting valuable resources.

Yes, this is really the same as stoning someone to death or melting someone's face with acid. Excellent point there.

The people voted to bring this law into effect, so they chose to spend their tax dollars.

[gamz247]

She didn't tell them to stfu, she told them to stop taunting and harassing the workers, which is illegal. Freedom of speech does not give you the right to say anything to anyone.

Unless you're using your speech to slander someone, then yeah, it does kinda give you that right.

[Delicious]

Wow, that's pretty unreal. Would love to see what comes of this!

[Wilderness]

Unless you're using your speech to slander someone, then yeah, it does kinda give you that right.

No, it doesn't. According to Delaware state law

§ 1311. Harassment; class A misdemeanor.
(a) A person is guilty of harassment when, with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person:
(1) That person insults, taunts or challenges another person or engages in any other course of alarming or distressing conduct which serves no legitimate purpose and is in a manner which the person knows is likely to provoke a violent or disorderly response or cause a reasonable person to suffer fear, alarm, or distress.

[gamz247]

No, it doesn't. According to Delaware state law

There's a bit of a difference between the First Amendment and Delaware State Law.

This law here is really overreaching. A Class A Misdemeanor for insulting or taunting someone? Just PC run amok.

[Wilderness]

There's a bit of a difference between the First Amendment and Delaware State Law.

This law here is really overreaching. A Class A Misdemeanor for insulting or taunting someone? Just PC run amok.

That doesn't matter. It doesn't change the fact that you can't just say what you want. Sexual harassment is illegal and that's not slander. Its not legal to harass people in whatever way you want to go about it. And that's what the coupler in this case were doing, so the woman told them to stop taunting the workers. That's all she is telling them, she didn't say they couldn't talk or protest, but there is difference between doing that and harassment.

[styopa]

Let's see how insulting you are to this type of person who doesn't like the government imposing upon their free will when your city or state council decides to levy your property because it might be a good location for them to put a parking lot. It is already a code violation now since it's built on commercial property and out of height restrictions after all. They would be totally within their rights to do so and pay you what they think the property is worth, which I'm guessing with the fact that RE prices are in the toilet, and the government never pays full price when enforcing a levy, wouldn't be enough to buy an Orange Julius you apparently are so interested in. Thanks for your technical knowledge though.

1) you're young, and you clearly know nothing about property law
2) "grandfather clause" - might want to look that up.

I despise the government imposing their will. I find the USSC's decision on that property in (Rhode Island?) to be a clear 'taking' and brutally unconstitutional. I believe that MOST government agencies will in fact reflexively act unconstitutionally because most 'officials' are more interested in showing you their power than SERVING the public (which is in fact their job). Many times I've confronted city, state, and even once a Fed official with the unconstitutionality of their actions. Twice I've been cited and ended up in court defending my actions/comments - BOTH times I've won with the Judge's praise for a moderate, polite, but firm defense of public liberty in the face of egregious 'officials'.

However, idiots that don't understand the basics and then complain about things that are very simple and obvious, taint the whole SERIOUS discussion about the absurd expansion of Federal power in this country, not to mention empowering local officials to act like morons all the time because they know - at least in this case - that they were 100% right to act as they did.

[ranku]

I actually feel sorry for the deldot woman, she has to put up with people like him every day, yelling at her for doing her job.
also, if the hoop had been there for 60 years and no one was using it, then why would you care that much? Same basic thing goes for the guy who made the complaint.

what pisses me off is the people who make these things a really big deal like this.

[Gothicshark]

Regarding the video, as far as my understanding goes... the "violation" would be the fact that they actually took the pole (which..to an extent can be called stealing) even after they said they would not (which...to an extent can be called lying, coming from an official representative too). In other words, it was the way the law was enforced which was the "violation", not the enforcing in itself. Being blatantly rude is, in most cases, uncalled for.

Just giving my last 2 cents.

From Delaware State law, the one being enforced on the video:

The owner of any obstruction removed pursuant to this section shall be liable for a civil fine of $25 for each item so removed, payable to the Department. Justices of the Peace shall have original jurisdiction for any court proceedings relating to this fine. No owner of any such obstruction shall be entitled to the return of any removed obstruction without proof of payment of all outstanding fines.

They where trying to be nice at first but with the camera and his attitude they had to take the Hoop because if they didn't they would be guilty of braking the law and could be sued by that guy for letting him keep the pole. I know its bad to think that but its the truth, if the State has to impound your car and they don't take it, you can sue them, its happened.

[Kalyyn]

Delaware Dept. of Transportation: first against the wall when the revolution comes.

[Metallikiddd]

That doesn't matter. It doesn't change the fact that you can't just say what you want. Sexual harassment is illegal and that's not slander. Its not legal to harass people in whatever way you want to go about it. And that's what the coupler in this case were doing, so the woman told them to stop taunting the workers. That's all she is telling them, she didn't say they couldn't talk or protest, but there is difference between doing that and harassment.

Why the hell don't WoW have this law? Harassment should be a felony in the game.

[Deleted]

No, it doesn't. According to Delaware state law

That doesn't matter. It's still a gross violation of the first amendment, even though there are state laws that are in conflict with it (which makes her ass covered from a legal viewpoint). So my statement is not untrue.