Quote:
Originally posted by djtestudo
Yes, let's take the word of two people who were ARRESTED for something without hearing what they did. THAT's a great way to get a quality discussion going.
|
As I noted in my post, it's possible that my post speaks not to a civil rights violation, but to a journalistic failure. Simply, the article is either true or not true. I would hope that had they committed a crime (I noted disorderly conduct, or something of the like), that the reporter would have noted that as well. All we have to go on is the report.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Seaver No, it's presenting your opinion in a manner and time that will not cause problems.
|
So we only have freedom of speech at certain times, namely when other people are willing to listen? I know what you're trying to say, but it is in no way a justification for the police action that took place.
If I were at a Kerry rally, and saw two guys wearing anti-Kerry shirts, I might assume they were there to start some kind of trouble, but until they did, they have a right to be there, wearing whatever kind of shirt they want.
As kind of a side note, there's a difference between speech on a shirt, and actually yelling something, or heckling, or using speech in a way that is actively disruptive. If they had damaged the group's right to have a peaceful gathering, then they should have been removed; I assume that wasn't the case.