Unedited Full Version Bridge Video Ron Paul Banner Part 3

[0rganDon0r]

You were in a right of way, you were wrong.

[ovidio114]

Did the officer give permission to upload this video?

[bleedingcry]

It doensn't matter he is a public official of the U.S Gov representing himself in public

[kinney2040]

@ovidio114 In wisconsin, it is one person consent, plus he is also in public and can not have any expectation of privacy.

[cougarfan1341]

hmmm, well i saw my comment was deleted, again though, your a fucking idiot, rollings was in the right here, i was driving under the bridge when you had your idiot sign up, i wish an accident would have happened so you fucks would have been made accountable.

[bleedingcry]

No problem

[unconstslave]

As I said in part 1. This cop was very nice. I have a feeling that if it were not for that officer coming to the scene. The kid may not have been so free that evening.

[RationalLiberty]

This is a case of freedom vs order, and order won. However, they said they were taking it to court so it will be challenged.  The system will work.

[bleedingcry]

It's in the process of getting to court and very possible that it will happen- Especially if they do not change their unconstitutional ordinace-We will see what happens

[RationalLiberty]

Always leave your other options open. Writing the Rep. or getting a petition are ones I can think of off the top of my head. Good luck in your fight.

[TS175]

I am glad you all stood your ground for as long as you did and I wish you best of luck, but you have no legal argument. Reason being, despite a crime not being committed, you still complied with the cops' suggestion, which nullified any possible damage that would have occurred from a false arrest.

[housebrand]

Speak to the Chief, or more importantly city attorney and see what kind of ticket you might draw. Or you could do like others and rent an old semi-trailer and park it on someones highway -fronting private property

[housebrand]

Take what to court? They didn't get tickets, they weren't arrested, they stayed inside the fence protecting the highway. How is this more distracting than a billboard for Hooters?

[bleedingcry]

well since this ordinace is unconstitutional I believe we do have a chance to change this possibly in court...If not then the constitution isn't really worthy of existance and Ordinaces have become more powerful then the people who founded this country with independence to individuals with resposible rights...Other signs are just as disctracting if not more being there off to the far left or right also they have lights- So now we need permits/Permission to have rights?

[housebrand]

By the time you get a court date, we'll all be wearing shorts again, the primaries will be history, and the whole thing will be one of many great "whatevers". If you actually were "walking" on a public sidewalk with your sign, and not blocking the path of others, it creates a whole new set of legal challenges.

[housebrand]

You guys sat around talking to the police for like half an hour about what your rights should be, and the taxable income the cops would retain if the IRS goes away. The competitive passive aggression was a hoot! -Name any three things that cops would be supportive of you doing. (rhetorical)

[bleedingcry]

they would support being brainwashed citizens who sat around a T.V and talked about our opinions....Calling them and asking permission to stand on a street corner if no one complains? Obeying their unconstitutional ordiances Which prohibite politic signs until 30 days to an election or something-Talking to people unless they complain lol...

[sharedvoice]

HuckChuckFacts: Director's Cut (Behind the Scenes w/ Chuck) - LOL!!

youtube com/watch?v=ZxCdWlCskJA

[gold95]

Freedom doesn't mean you can do whatever you want. If that was the case we could all just wander about on the highways. Let's be realistic about freedom. It doesn't help arguing with the cops, period. This cop was more than reasonable. You want to fight this, you go to court.

RON PAUL 2008

[j3x11]

This cop needs to read the constitution and learn about what freedom means...

[wearenotfree]

Does he actually say 'good luck to your rights' ~ 3:25?

[TS175]

This is obviously abuse of power! How could these individuals have legally and effectively dealt with this situation and maintained their civil liberties, specifically their right privacy?

[gold95]

I support Ron Paul as much as the next guy and I want freedom too, but that doesn't mean unlimited. The cop was more than nice. Most would have cuffed him already or even tazed him. If it is PUBLIC prperty it belongs to the public and ONE person can't decide what to do with it, the same way you could not spray tag a wall.

[TS175]

This is not about Ron Paul. It's about Freedom! You are saying they should be grateful that they didn't get tased? What kind of argument is that! Since they didn't commit a crime, what else should they have been grateful for; not getting a nightstick shoved up their asses; not being shot for civil disobedience; not being thrown off that bridge? If you listen to what that cop was saying, he admitted they did to commit a crime. The cops were quashing political dissent plain and simple.

[gold95]

DOn't put words in my mouth. Cops are NOT required to spend lengthy time debating or explaining themselves. They rarely do that. That doesn't mean that they should be grateful. Second, they are not allowed to go on bridge and post signs. This has nothing to do to with freedom or oppression. Would you argue that the KKK could post racist signs on public property too?

[TS175]

Whatever, according to you, they should have bent over, kissed that cops shoe for being so merciful and thank their lucky star they wasn't tased.

Cops only debate when they are playing gotcha-games and don't have anything on you!

They were not posting the sign on the bridge; they were waving the sign.

Despite laws against it, a sign - by the KKK or otherwise - hasn't ever physically harm me and that's all that's matters!

[gold95]

Its hard to see what they were doing. If there was a sidewalk which it doesn't look like there was they had every right to be there, but if they were standing on a bridge with no signs and waiving signs I can see why the cops wanted them to go.

[TS175]

The fact is that Cop was blowing smoke out of his ass and, unfortunately, you are as well.

Regarding your statement about PUBLIC property, they were not defacing or damaging any property and they were waving signs! Signs can waves on public property - especially a sidewalk - as long as it does not contain profanity.

[gold95]

A number of things. One is Ron Paul is for Local laws etc, so this would be part of local law, which is enforced by the police. NOW, if these people were just waiving signs that is one thing. If they are PUTTING up signs its another. If the latter, they have to do it as long as it is safe.

[TS175]

I believe Ron Paul is in favor of peaceful civil disobedience.

How do you know what the local laws are there? That cop sounded like he didn't know what the law was. The only thing he saw was a Ron Paul sign and that infuriated him. The nonsensical rationales that cop was spewing made me sick and it should have any freedom loving American.

[gold95]

No one is giving me any facts. I am making a general statement about freedom.

[whydoesmycelltorment]

Great Video, I don't agree with the policeman's concept of the constitution but it was good that he tried to explain his position without tasering you.