Also here

By your own admission, even when you do get permits, they fuck with you and shut you down…

How would you even fill out a form begging for permission to ‘meet at midnight at the Jefferson memorial to silently dance to our ipods and we have no idea how many people will show up’?

IF another group reserved the spot for an event and the dancers were disturbing them, I can see a grievance.

The surly bastards need to understand that it’s OUR monument and they need to treat us with respect. The dancers weren’t rude and confrontational, the dickhead cops were.

“But to have a group of people in the middle of the night converge on a national monument without permits, then act disrespectful to the police for not following the rules everyone has had to follow for years, I don’t have much sympathy.”

Your attitude seems to be that of “well if I follow the rules and get my permits, then damnit they should have to as well!” At some point you should stop and question the validity of the permit laws. I have, and my conclusion was that the laws are arbitrary and authoritarian in nature. This is because I reject the idea that the freedoms outlined in the first amendment were born out of the creation of the amendment itself.

– Chris M

What if the floor were scuffed by shoes? Really? I wish I had such little to worry about in life.

Its a public place. Do we really need the police to keep people out because they might scuff the floors, but a permit would make it all better? You deserve the police force you excuse.

I might come across a condescending in my original posting, but its because I’ve had to go through the process of getting permits for events at national monuments many times, dealt with numerous rude police officers, but I respect the laws when it comes to these types of gatherings in order to allow others to express themselves at the same location in the future.

And believe me, I hate having to get permits, but I know that it allows me to have vigils/dances/rallies/demonstrations/concerts/protests at important locations without police arresting people or without another group taking over the location for their unrelated event.

Since I wrote about this last year, I’ve had the National Park Police unlawfully shut down a permitted rally outside of the White House because teenagers were reciting poetry that contained fowl language (albeit constitutionally protected language) and I contacted the ACLU about the matter. But to have a group of people in the middle of the night converge on a national monument without permits, then act disrespectful to the police for not following the rules everyone has had to follow for years, I don’t have much sympathy.

#22-
you seem to be cheering for the cops… your article admires how ‘mean’ they are and how we need to be nice to them, etc. You even point out how ‘…I’ve learned is that all you need are permits’ as you chastise the libertarians in your condescending tone for the flash mob. You also point out that the cops will be dicks if you don’t thoroughly document exactly what equipment you’ll be using and what you’ll be doing.

A flash mob shouldn’t need ‘permits’. It’s an exercise in freedom and fun. Just because the park cops have a shitty job doesn’t mean they get to fuck with people. They need to disarm the pricks and teach them a sense of proportion.

‘I’m looking forward to seeing how this case is progresses.’ I’m sure you are.

“Rude to police” = questioning their authoritay

To encourage civilian oversight? I’d be in favor of that if the tax burden could be restricted to the civilians who voted in favor of the offending officials/regulations. But if you’re going to hit me with a tax penalty even though I voted against the guy who caused the problem, that strikes me as an injustice.

“Democracy is that system in which everybody gets what the majority deserves”, and that means that trying to apply your incentive to the electorate is never going to be as successful as applying it directly to the offenders.

I completely understand the right of freedom of assembly and have legally exercised it in Washington, but when it comes to federal property, aka the American People’s property, permits are needed, even to have a silent dance party with 18 people.

A large group of people showing up on federal property late at night with an unknown motive will draw the police. Moreover, there were no safeguards in place by the organizers to prevent the 25th person from showing up.

What if the monument was damaged? Or the floor scuffed by shoes? Their peaceful demonstration would have cost taxpayers money. However, if they would have obtained permits, the responsibility would fall on to the organizers shoulders. Yet the organizers failed to go through the proper channels to legally hold their demonstration on federal property and when asked to leave they were rude to the police and provoked the arrest.

I’m looking forward to seeing how this case is progresses.

Great to see she’s suing both official and INDIVIDUAL capacities…and has a pitbull lawyer. Go for the berries!

Gabriel, I can think of at least one good reason why taxpayers should bear part of the cost for bad cops.

I agree. Which is why I think that the various governmental immunity doctrines ought to be scrapped forthwith. If we want our civil servants to behave responsibly, we have to be prepared to hold them responsible. Police would be much more hesitant to perform or authorize questionable procedures if they knew their own individual wellbeing was on the line.

To the argument that this would make people less likely to pursue civil service, I respond that 1) people somehow motivate themselves to engage in private industry without immunity, and 2) the people who would be put off are probably the last ones we want as civil servants. There’s no reason in the world why the punishment for being a bad cop should be borne by the taxpayers rather than, say, the bad cop.

Go eat a chocolate sunday.

“I understand some cops can be trusted to stop peaceful dancing responsibly — but that doesn’t mean we should give every cop in the world a badge to stop dancing.

Q–Why do Southern Baptist girls refrain from premarital sex?

A–Because it might lead to dancing!

In all seriousness…best of luck, Ms. Oberwetter.