Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Adam H. Kerman" Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: [OT] Teens face 10 years in prison for riding over pride flag on bicycles Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 20:20:53 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 94 Message-ID: References: <20240623122747.000055ed@example.com> Injection-Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 22:20:54 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6f111525825f1062c01751d72f350047"; logging-data="535572"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19IRYpCM6y55cUbGPePi+0AgPQ511f9Pzg=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:VE7/k4E4AjX0QgvHKPQQSZU3vFI= X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010) Bytes: 5936 suzeeq wrote: >On 6/23/2024 11:27 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote: >> Robin Miller wrote: >>> Adam H. Kerman wrote: >>>> Rhino wrote: >> >>>>> Leo Kearse, the presenter of this video, is correct: the rules of the >>>>> Alphabet Mafia have taken on the feel of blasphemy laws in the Muslim >>>>> countries. This is particularly evident in the horrendous overcharging >>>>> of three Spokane teens for riding over a local pride flag on bicycles: >> >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtS-c4nPJtQ [`12 minutes] >> >>>> Overcharging? It wasn't even a crime to ride their bicyles in the first >>>> place! >> >>>> I love how the video clip of the interview of the lesbian witness shows >>>> an automobile driving over the very same painted pavement as we see over >>>> her right shoulder. I didn't see the felony arrest. >> >>>> It appears that what we have here is a case of bullying children because >>>> that's what we can get away with. >> >>> Every day this NG is filled with examples of why it's become such a >>> cesspool. >> >>> Here is a news story and the police statement: >> >>> >https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/teens-arrested-after-scooters-leave-marks-on-pride-crosswalk/ar-BB1nSroe >> >>> >https://my.spokanecity.org/police/news/2024/06/06/multiple-arrests-make-after-downtown-pride-mural-is-vandalized/ >> >>> This happened on June 5, 18 days ago, but is now being widely shared on >>> right-wing media. These kids were repeatedly riding over an area >>> described as a "street mural" in order to deface it. The area had >>> recently been repainted after someone else had intentionally damaged it >>> using a flammable liquid. The area, according to the police statement, >>> was "clearly marked to keep traffic away as it was just re-painted to >>> repair previous damage." >> >>> These kids should have been arrested if they were intentionally damaging >>> anything painted on the street as a street mural. And if it had been a >>> US flag I doubt anyone would be complaining. >> >>> While the kids were charged with 1st Degree Malicious Mischief, a class >>> B felony for which the maximum sentence is 10 years, of course they >>> would not receive anything like that even if they are convicted. They >>> would probably be put on probation. >> >> In advance of pride parades in Chicago and various suburbs, the parade >> routes are lined with decorations installed temporarily on municipal >> lightpoles. That can be done with permission in a way that enforcing >> laws against vandalism of the decorations as crimes doesn't violate equal >> protection of the right to free speech. >> >> I'm going to continue to disagree. This is a matter of government >> restrictions on free speech. The mural, an act of expression, is the free >> speech of the artists who painted it. They had permission. However, as it >> was painted on a driving surface of an open roadway in the public way, >> that permission cannot possibly prohibit someone else from driving over >> it, even if the way it was driven over defaced the mural. >> >> Free speech in the public way is a natural right, not a privilege that the >> city of Spokane may selectively grant to the artists precluding the free >> speech of those who disagree. It's also a civil right in the Constitution >> of the United States. Therefore, the criminal charges are a denial of >> equal protection of a civil right. >> >> As a secondary matter, a mural painted on a driving surface in the >> public way IS NOT a painted marking as a traffic control device based on >> the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, a standard published by >> FHwA as promulgated by AASHTO. Now, it doesn't have the force of law and >> I'm not sure of its status as a federal regulation (to the extent that >> the standard is adopted in a given state, it is a state regulation that >> local public works departments must implement), but it's always a >> defense to citation of a traffic violation that signs and markings were >> knocked over, misplaced, installed incorrectly, or worn out that the >> driver had no notice of the condition being enforced. >> >> Similarly, the boys should be able to use the fact of the nonstandard >> pavement marking as a defense against the felony charge. >> >> All I saw in the video were traffic violations that would have been >> proper charges, not crimes to be charged. >> >Wouldn't it be a deliberate act of vandalism, though? The artists don't have a property right in painting a driving surface of an open roadway in the public way. Without a property right, I don't see how it's vandalism. The guy who set fire to the mural certainly committed a criminal act, not vandalism of the mural but vandalism of the roadway surface.