What ever happened to the old charge of “disturbing the peace” or “inciting violence or a riot”? This is absurd and obscene. - I thought people were counter-protesting and blocking these Clinton buddies with support signs and American flags. Someone or group has to be bankrolling these lounge lizards to give the Christian churches a trumped up bad name. They are damned ungodly reprobates!
posted on 03/02/2011 9:12:53 AM PST
As a poster astutely pointed out on another thread, there's no justification for an argument about "inciting violence or a riot" in a case where NO violence and NO riot took place. As ridiculous as it may seem, you have to react violently to a protest like this before you can later make a legal case that the protest incited violence.
The U.S. Supreme Court got this one right. In fact, I'm surprised it even made it this far in the U.S. legal system because the end result seemed very obvious to me.
posted on 03/02/2011 9:24:06 AM PST
by Alberta's Child
("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson