Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <atropos-E445E4.15194614052024@news.giganews.com>
Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<atropos-E445E4.15194614052024@news.giganews.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 22:10:51 +0000
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Man strikes back against Seaside California order with boat mural
References: <v1tucf$3m36h$1@dont-email.me> <20240513170449.000014ff@example.com> <v1u2m7$3n232$2@dont-email.me> <atropos-562CD9.15365413052024@news.giganews.com> <v1u6on$3o2h8$2@dont-email.me> <atropos-65E3B8.16294613052024@news.giganews.com> <v1ujru$3uc8o$2@dont-email.me> <atropos-515212.22412113052024@news.giganews.com> <v20m4l$dci5$2@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 15:19:46 -0700
Message-ID: <atropos-E445E4.15194614052024@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 68
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-FGUWOpks9RXuDSOx7VAqAFQzlAnG32Ee4rFEOaOtw8uY4qI8yWqgVeeREVW28xP1WwXEPVctI7De1Bv!Erjtej/e4vHXNoJ4tFRGbCNE0W5vy9G+JMf7mONBj5yPLXTHHfaqQmIzDALWB/s7bsI3M1uA8t0K!omY=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 4146

In article <v20m4l$dci5$2@dont-email.me>, moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> 
wrote:

> On 5/14/2024 1:41 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > In article <v1ujru$3uc8o$2@dont-email.me>,
> >   moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> On 5/13/2024 7:29 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>> In article <v1u6on$3o2h8$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>>    moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 5/13/2024 6:36 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>> In article <v1u2m7$3n232$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>>>>     moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 5/13/2024 5:04 PM, Rhino wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Mon, 13 May 2024 20:49:19 -0000 (UTC)
> >>>>>>> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I'm guessing that Seaside California is on the ocean and lots of
> >>>>>>>> residents own boats?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> A man had his boat on his property. He was told that municipal code
> >>>>>>>> required him to install a 6 foot tall fence around it to comply with
> >>>>>>>> code.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> He built the fence then painted a realistic mural of a boat on the
> >>>>>>>> fence.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Man strikes back against Seaside order with boat mural
> >>>>>>>> by Torstein Rehn
> >>>>>>>> KSBW-TV News Channel 8
> >>>>>>>> Updated: 1:22 PM PDT May 13, 2024
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I didn't see anything in the article explaining WHY he had to have a
> >>>>>>> fence around his boat. Is this a case of "Because we said so!" or is
> >>>>>>> there a sensible reason for the policy?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> As for the fence he built, it's brilliant! We should all do that when
> >>>>>>> faced with unjust laws and rules: either fight them (if we can) or 
> >>>>>>> mock them.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> A mural of a boat is likely less of an eyesore than an actual boat.  
> >>>>>> And if somehow it weren't, it probably runs afoul of other community 
> >>>>>> codes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But community codes are subordinate to the 1st Amendment. A boat isn't
> >>>>> speech but a mural of a boat *is* speech and community codes will have
> >>>>> to do a lot of heavy lifting to overcome the law's heavy presumption in
> >>>>> favor of protecting speech.
> >>>>
> >>>> In this instance, the mural would seem to be "speech" only to the extent
> >>>> that it argues against the ordinance it's responding to.
> >>>
> >>> Doesn't matter why it's speech or what it's trying to say. The
> >>> government isn't allowed to restrict speech based on content or the
> >>> speaker's message.
> >>
> >> Your 3-year-old's random finger-painting isn't "speech".
> > 
> > It is with regard to government censorship. Even 3-year-olds have rights.
> 
> Of course it isn't, assuming he used more than his middle finger.

Yes, it is.

You're doing that thing again where you confuse what you want the law to 
be with what the law actually is.