Political Discussions
Police officer pulls man over for anti-Obama sign
Posted by TheBigRuski • 2/19/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: first amendment, free speech, law, obama, secret service
Oklahoma City police officer pulls man over for anti-Obama sign on vehicle
The sign read "Abort Obama Not the Unborn."
Change we can believe in?
Now that is just plain dumb!
www.newsok.com/okc-officer-pulls-man-over-for-anti-obama-sign-on-vehicle/ar...
User Comments
-
Someone please ask O'Riley to send some of his "Don't be a Pin-head" bumper stickers to the Oklahoma PD.-
LOL!
Remember when you could call a president any name you wanted and go dancing naked in the park with glee?
Those 8 years with Bush were so much fun!
-
-
Well hell, now they are tripping all over themselves to make anything negative about the democrats something against Obama personally, and preferably something racist.
Like the Chimp Cartoon today... Too much.-
yeppers...crazy world we live in!
-
-
CHARLESTON, W.Va. — A couple arrested for wearing anti-Bush T-shirts to the president's July 4 appearance at the West Virginia Capitol filed a federal lawsuit yesterday alleging their First Amendment rights were violated.
Nicole and Jeff Rank were removed from the event in handcuffs after revealing T-shirts with President Bush's name crossed out on the front. Nicole Rank's shirt had the words "Love America, Hate Bush" on the back and Jeff Rank's had "Regime change starts at home" on the back.
www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=14041
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Peace activist Cindy Sheehan was arrested Tuesday in the House gallery after refusing to cover up a T-shirt bearing an anti-war slogan before President Bush's State of the Union address.
www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/
A nurse in Georgia got a ticket from a police officer for having an anti Bush bumper sticker on her car. Denise Grier was driving home from work when the uniformed agent of thought control pulled her over. Grier says that he approached her car with his hand already on his gun. He told her he was ticketing her for an "obscene decal" on her car. The bumper sticker said "BUSHIT".
freestudents.blogspot.com/2006/03/ticketed-for-anti-bush-bumper-sticker.htm...
Howards was walking through an outdoor public mall in Beaver Creek, Colo., on that date with his children, who were going to a camp for piano lessons. Much to his surprise, he saw Vice President Dick Cheney, who was shaking hands with people in the mall.
Howards had a moment of hesitation, but then he approached Cheney, who had several Secret Service agents nearby, and calmly told him: "Your policies in Iraq are reprehensible." This was soon after the media had reported the 2,500th U.S. troop death in the war in Iraq.
Howards and his children then continued on their way. About 10 minutes later he returned through the same public mall with his 8-year-old son.
A Secret Service agent approached him and asked, "Did you assault the vice president?" Howards replied that he had not assaulted Cheney but had criticized him, further commenting that if freedom of speech was illegal the agent should arrest him.
At that point the agent, Virgil D. Reichle, Jr., gave him a lesson in just how far civil liberties have eroded in this country. Reichle grabbed Howards and cuffed his hands behind his back in front of his son and onlookers. When Howards said he couldn’t leave his son alone the agent retorted that "Social Services" would be contacted to take the son. The traumatized child saw his mother as his father was being carted away and ran to her to evade government custody.
According to Howards, Reichle said he would be charged with assaulting the vice president. Howards was formally charged with "harassment," a misdemeanor that carries up to a one-year jail sentence. He was held in jail for three hours and released after posting a $500 bond. The charges were eventually dropped. Howards is now suing the arresting agent.
www.pslweb.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr007=flkcb04kp1.app1b&page=NewsArti...
... and many more-
Good catch! I see a few of them happened at actual Bush appearances...a little different, but nevertheless...thanks for your digging!
I guess the Democrats don't have the market on paranoia! -
How do you get from one "Oklahoma police officer" to "the Democrats"?
-
-
Putting that one example together with the Bush examples Sati provides (and which I remember all too well from the Bush years), it seems that some people in this country think we have lèse–majesté laws prohibiting the insulting of our president. Of course we don't, for our presidents are not kings.
To engage in some possibly unfair stereotyping, I'm less surprised to hear that this kind of thing allegedly happened in Oklahoma than, say, one of those parts of America that the GOP's former VP candidate considered fake. -
If it just said "I hate obama" I would agree, but it was referring to killing (as in abort).-
You would agree to pull him over and have the secret service check on him?
-
whether I agree or disagree isn't the point, the police officer may be obliged to report threats directed towards the president as per US CODE: Title 18871.
-
OK...so you see this bumper sticker as a threat...or you sympathize with the police officer, recognizing that it could be perceived as a threat.
-
I see that the police officer is obliged according to code Titled 18871 to address it.
-
OK...so, you chose not to answer my question.
-
-
Did anyone else find something a little hum..."off" about this statement?:
Harrison told the officers that in his opinion the words "Abort Obama" meant to impeach him. He told the officers he does not believe in abortion because he is a Christian.
So, according to this guy, abort means impeach, except when applied to fetuses and embryos. Then it's murder. Erm...-
Reading "abort" in code this way leaves a pretty grim message. It makes sense, though. No way would an anti-choice person misconstrue the word "abort" as "impeach"---unless they were mentally challenged or decided not to take the word literally, which would be a departure of kinds . . .
Anyway, it's an ugly bumper sticker, though I don't see it being illegal, just in really bad taste. Read your way, the Secret Service might see it differently.
-
-
I think the police have messed this up by approaching this as a threat to Obama rather than as a road safety issue.
Regardless of what you think of the message, frankly it is insane to carry messages like this on a car, because one thing is for sure it is going to distract and possibly antagonise other drivers.
There is enough anger, death and destruction on the roads without people deliberately setting out to antagonise other drivers.-
What an utterly unAmerican sentiment!
-
Why thank you.
-
-
Isn't a police officer obligated to respond to threats (verbal or otherwise) against a president? Was the officer supposed to ignore it?
www.lectlaw.com/def2/t028.htm-
If that's what it was, I should think so. And you and Anok make a reasonable case for it being at least a verbal threat.
-
There's no other way than to interpret it than as an anti-abortion statement. To interpret in any other way is kind of uninformed...to put it politely.
-
Yes, TBR, it is an antiabortion statement. But it is also directed against Obama. And it's not like some fringe elements of the anti-choice crowd haven't used violence before.
-
If it's an anti-abortion statement only, why say "abort Obama"? That doesn't even make sense.
Aborting Obama has nothing to do with aborting (or not) fetuses.
Now, if it said "abort Roe v Wade, not pregnancies" or something like that - you'd have a point. -
It's pretty obvious the guy meant terminate, which is a call to kill the president. People may not like Obama's policies, but there's no way anyone could make the case he's committed some impeachable offense.
-
This comes off to me as a satirical play on words and policy. I don't see that this is outright literal. I guess it could be, but I don't initially receive it in that manner. But it's dumb none the less.
-
-
No according to the explination of the guy who displayed the sticker, the sticker actually means.
"Impeach Obama not the unborn." Weird.-
Disingenuous is more like it.
-
-
Isn't "F" Bush a harsher criticism and display of hatred than this anti-abortion sticker? I mean there were millions of "F" Bush stickers displayed on bumpers. Perfectly acceptable for millions and millions of people.
-
Last I heard, F*** anybody doesn't imply violence of any kind. Note too how you have slipped from the actual content of the bumper sticker to your interpretation of only one piece of it in order to make this comparison. Furthermore, how harsh a critique is is irrelevant. We have free speech, but limits are placed on it for verbal threats of violence.
-
Yeah, f*ck and abort are two different things
Particularly when Bush actually did things to deserve being told to go and you-know-what-himself, while Obama is still in his first 100 days. -
...and my interpretation is that it was not a verbal threat of violence.
-
So... abortion's okay now? Great! Glad we cleared that up. -
Oh, so abortions aren't threats of violence then?
Great! -
I knew a girl who had a back-alley impeachment once.
-
LMAO Renal
-
Did you miss these, Ruski?
elektric-kat.blogspot.com/2005/01/cop-threatens-to-arrest-woman-for-fuck.ht...
stpeteforpeace.org/palmharbor.html
www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/personal/topic.aspx?topic=bumper_sticke...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x7...
I'm sure there are more--these came from the first 15 or so google results.
-
-
Threats against the President are illegal - even if their not meant with mallice. Secret service confiscated the sign...
Now if he wanted to say F*ck Obama... I'd have less of a problem. But "abort" Obama is tantanmount to saying "Kill". "Kill Obama not Babies" would clearly be unlawful... therefore, its synonyms would to me also seem to be unlawful.
I don't see the big deal here. I mean I am no fan of the President, but the whole bumper sticker seems stupid and incites violence. Given the sensitivities of the Secret Service - the guy should be happy his little free speech episode didn't end with a prison term.
Let him sue in Court and let the Courts sort it out. This case to me would seem to be an extention of Cohen v. California... but that's just me.-
Yes, regardless of who the president is it is illegal and any officer who ignored it would not be doing his duty. Shouting fire in a crowded theatre and threats against the president don't fit with free speech. But yes he is free to make such a comment and then face the consequences.
-
@jafbrit...
Here's your contradiction:
"it is illegal"
then, in the same comment...
"he is free to make such a comment"
Which one is it? He is free to put the bumper sticker on his car or it's illegal to do so? -
Actually she said:
he is free to make such a comment and then face the consequences. -
Abort could have other meanings as well. It could mean "don't reelect" or "Impeach." I don't think the secret service has the jurisdiction to censor. If the sign was made out of counterfeit currency, then they have cause. -
It could...but when you have someone who is trying to make an anti-abortion statement with regards to actual abortions in tandem with "aborting" the president...well...
Like I said above I fit said "Abort Roe v Wade not pregnancies" it would have been a much more poignant (logical) statement.
And not interpreted as a threat -
I'll be waiting for the campaign ad that says: "If you want real change this election year, abort my opponent and make me your new congressman."
They almost aborted Nixon back in the 70's, but he resigned first.
-
-
It's getting stupid. Many of the derogatory things i've said about Bush, would likely be interpreted as rascist if applied to Obama. A good example being my assertion (during the recent bailout scam) that Bush was our employee and that I didn't "appreciate lip from the help!" Can you imagine?
-
One should never expect to say the same thing in two different contexts and have it automatically mean the same thing. Language and its meanings will---or should---always be interpreted in context.
-
-
The problem is appearently activism on the part of the secret service. If these things are occuring they need to be taken to court. There are legal services available (the ACLU for instance) who can take legal action on behalf of individuals who have clearly not posed a "clear and present danger" to public officials. I'm not sure however what can be done to punish the traitorous actions of these renegade agents themselves, and to make sure they have no possibility of employment in any public service capacity (save perhaps picking up litter in an orange jumpsuit). If anyone has a suggestion, I'd like to hear it.
-
"Traitorous"? Are you serious? It's one thing to disagree about the state of the law and to litigate it in court. It's quite another thing to call law enforcement officers traitors and talk about blacklisting them, because you disagree with their actions.
-
-
From the sound of the mall incident, the officer was opperating in some Rogue capacity. If he was under orders from the VP that is one thing. If he took this initiative because he is some sort of statist Nazi that is TREASON. The execution of ARBITRARY power over the individual is the most unamerican of all activities. To be undertaken by an agent of government because of that agent's PERSONAL beliefs (that are greatly in variance with our founding principles) is to commit a crime against the country itself. If anyone has forgotten the Sedition Act was overturned!
-
Confiscating a sign is hardly a treasonous action. The officer made a judgment call that the sign was a threat, which was a reasonable judgment. The officer chose to err on the side of caution. Once the secret service determined it was not a threat, the sign was returned.
-
There's no other conclusion than to believe this officer used PERSONAL beliefs...what other reason would there be for such stupidity?
And the same thing for F Bush stickers...who in their right mind would pull over someone having such a sticker?
BTW...the only reason this is a story is for its:
1. stupidity
2. big brother implications
3. secret service involvment
Certainly, not for its display of a fine officer with great judgment. -
Well according to the secret service in regards to Harrison, "He was a little agitated that the Oklahoma City Police Department took his sign," Andrews said. "But he understood we have an obligation to check these things out."
So he got his sign back, he was not deemed a threat, and everyone did their job as they were obligated to in regards to the code. -
Right-wingers are making a big deal about this because they're not happy unless they're feigning outrage over some perceived oppressive democratic activity. Karl Rove had Don Siegelman put in prison for something that wasn't even a crime, but that's okay since Siegelman's a democrat.
-
Nobody was obligated to do their job. The sticker did not violate any code nor did it prompt anyone to "investigate."
Why are the few of you "sticker profiling?" -
All I can say is if you are comfortable with Police Officers choosing not to fulfill what they feel is their obligation so be it, that is your prerogative. the man in question wasn't fined, or charged and in fact had his sign returned, and was deemed NOT a threat (apparently he understood the obligation to check it out), so it seems it was all resolved satisfactorily.
-
...and if you are comfortable living in a police state where on a whim, because someone doesn't like the bumper sticker you have on your car they interrogate you, so be it.
-
I guess if the guy didn't mind (since he send he understood their obligation to follow through) then why should I.
-
-
Well said Ruski!
-
Thanks!
-
-
Does anybody know the race of the officers that confiscated the sign?
-
Who cares.
-
Oh, you don't think race, and race relations has any relevance in policework. Especially police decision making?
-
-
Ah, so being unduly inconvenienced is a "get a life" concept.
Kinda like DWB pull-overs then?-
Sorry, libs OWN name-calling and cutting discussion/thought short.
-
Oh yeah I forgot...
-
I don't think its a conservative vs. liberal or black vs. white issue. It's about free expression. The perpetrating officer censoring the anti-Bush sticker is just as guilty. Seriously! Police academies need to include lessons on complying with the Bill of Rights, and the meaning of CLEAR and PRESENT danger with the Supreme Courts qualification on the First Amendment. Its not rocket science! It's probably within the mental grasp of social misfits who are hopped up on steroids and donut jelly!
-
from what I read isonomist, as soon as he got the cardboard sign back he put it back on display on his truck, so nobody has stopped his right to free expression, he wasn't charged, fined or warned not to display it.
-
The difference between this and some of the censoring about Bush is that protesters at an anti-Bush rally, wearing anti-Bush T-shirts weren't just removed, but actually arrested and had to post bail.
And all they had was a No-Bush T shirt on.
That's a serious restriction of free speech - not because they were asked to leave their tee's behind, but because of actual arrests and removal from a legal protest - that was anti-Bush.
I see a diffrence. I mean, getting hassled over a bumper sticker is stupid - and out of line, but it's different. -
Yes it's different.
If you are protesting at an actual Bush apperance. There is more of a reason to suspect that there is a threat. As opposed to have a cardboard with some writing several thousand miles away from the president.
But that isn't the problem here. The concept that Sati brought up. "This was happening with Bush too"... Is what is truly dangerous.
It was wrong then. To condone it now because the tables have turned means that you actually condone it in general.
A THREAT, should be taken seriously. No doubt, Some word-play on policy stances like abortion isn't a threat to the president.
I'll support it when someone posts a picture where they are holding a gun and signing it
"I am going to Abort X - since he aborts babies".
Until you reach those levels, there are simply better things for both the police and the secret service to be spending out tax money on. -
Well I said it was stupid
But no, removing protesters from a legal protest is a more serious offense. Police protection is already provided, and unless the protesters actually get out of line, then they are peaceably assembled. They are there with permits, often searched for weapons, and wrangled into "free speech zones".
To make an arrest at an anti-whoever protest because they're wearing an anti-whoever t-shirt isn't just stupid, it's a restriction of free speech, and a form of intimidation. If we can't legally and peacefully protest because we might get arrested for simply being there you have a serious problem.
Taking a sign away from someone temporarily until the "threat" is verified as a non threat, and returning said property without fine or arrest is stupid, but not intimidating, or a suppression of free speech.
-
-
Unfortunately law enforcement offers the opportunity for employment for those without the rational sense or social skills to make it in the real world. Thus you get crap like this going on.
-
Ya, but they know all the good places to eat....and eat donuts!
Seriously, can't blanket the whole group, but many are great people! -
@isonomist: How you could say that about *any* occupational group is beyond me. On average, the men and women in my city's metropolitan police department are a hard-working, self-sacrificing bunch, and most residents seem to know it. I'm sure Oklahoma City isn't much different in that respect.
-
-
I'm generalizing, because i'm a a-hole. I have met some good cops, and have worked around cops in a civillian capacity. I'd say its about 70/30% bad to good. Most of the good ones have some sort of rank and often work a desk job or similar. Also when i worked at the county jail the staff there seemed to be closer to 50/50. That all being said, as long as squad car driver refuse to follow ANY traffic laws, you can expect people to not respect them.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
