Dead Marine's father ordered to pay protesters' legal costs

[Blake]

3. Prohibit protests within x feet of any cemetery (restriction)

The last solution is the best. It does not deny the right to assemble (issue a permit somewhere else) and the actual act being considered offensive is universal.

how far away were these picketers from the entrance of this cemetery?

[spursncowboys]

you also disagree with the law enforcement officials that were there on the scene.

You are assuming that you are smarter than the "judge" and the law enforcement officials. What is your background or field of expertise that makes you smarter than them?

I have as degree in criminal science. although it doesnt make me an expert, we did deal with that situation.

[LnGrrrR]

how far away were these picketers from the entrance of this cemetery?

Obviously, far enough away for it to be considered legal.

I'm just saying, say the protest was held within 300 feet and 60 minutes of a funeral at a military cemetery, then their actions would automatically be considered to be "fighting words".

The government applied the law to all cemeteries in their control. Whether or not they should expand the law to private cemeteries is debatable.

[Blake]

I have as degree in criminal science. although it doesnt make me an expert, we did deal with that situation.

what exactly is it about this ruling that you disagree with?

[Blake]

Obviously, far enough away for it to be considered legal.

I'm just saying, say the protest was held within 300 feet and 60 minutes of a funeral at a military cemetery, then their actions would automatically be considered to be "fighting words".

The government applied the law to all cemeteries in their control. Whether or not they should expand the law to private cemeteries is debatable.

yeah, well, had the protest occurred within the 300 feet and had there been no law enforcement officials around, I'm guessing they would have had a better shot at winning the $5 million lawsuit.

[Winehole23]

I suspect SnC argues backward from the result. He doesn't like the result, therefore the ruling was bad.

[Blake]

I suspect SnC argues backward from the result. He doesn't like the result, therefore the ruling was bad.

I suspect so too.

It's fun to watch.

[spursncowboys]

I suspect SnC argues backward from the result. He doesn't like the result, therefore the ruling was bad.

I thought we had moved into the hypothetical dream world by this point. I had moved past the actual ruling.

I disagree with protesters being able to follow people around and harrass them and hide behind the 1st amendment. I don't believe the first amendment was about speech other than political. I think states and municipalities have a state right and interest to make this a law if they see fit.

About the 2nd amendment, i don't think it protects an individual to get a rocket launcher or surface to air missile.

I do disagree with the ruling though.

[spursncowboys]

knew this couldn't last with respect and class.
Well done kids.
WH: your assumptions are wrong.

[Winehole23]

Well then, prove me wrong.

What's wrong with the ruling?

[Blake]

I thought we had moved into the hypothetical dream world by this point. I had moved past the actual ruling.

I disagree with protesters being able to follow people around and harrass them and hide behind the 1st amendment. I don't believe the first amendment was about speech other than political. I think states and municipalities have a state right and interest to make this a law if they see fit.

According to your professor, how exactly was the family harassed in this case?

I do disagree with the ruling though.

You think the family deserved to get $5 million?

[Blake]

knew this couldn't last with respect and class.
Well done kids.
WH: your assumptions are wrong.

I knew you couldn't last long in this thread without getting butthurt.

How exactly was this family harassed?

[spursncowboys]

"where the speech is directed at private ppl, and matters of private concern, the SC has held that the 1st Amendment interest in protecting particular types of speech must be balanced against a state's interest in protecting it's residence from wrongful injury."
p.11 http://www.matthewsnyder.org/Snyder%...4_09%20(4).PDF

[Winehole23]

What was the wrongful injury here?

[spursncowboys]

being a captive audience and having to deal emotional distress .

[spursncowboys]

pe ion for the writ of cert(something or other) to the sc.http://www.matthewsnyder.org/Snyder%...3_09%20(3).PDF

[Winehole23]

being a captive audience and having to deal emotional distress .

There's no such thing as a captive audience at a funeral. Funeral attendance isn't mandatory. And I doubt every opinion that causes someone else emotional distress rises to the level of a tort. The court seems to have found it didn't in this case.

Try again.

[Winehole23]

pe ion for the writ of cert(something or other) to the sc.http://www.matthewsnyder.org/Snyder%20v.%20WBC%20-%20Pe ion%20for%20Writ%20of%20Certiorari,%2012_2 3_09%20(3).PDF

Care to point out any relevant language?

[spursncowboys]

There's no such thing as a captive audience at a funeral. Funeral attendance isn't mandatory. And I doubt every opinion that causes someone else emotional distress rises to the level of a tort. The court seems to have found it didn't in this case.

Try again.

One of their reasons for the pe ion is that exact reason. captive audience has to be interpreted. It is wrong for you to think you hold the only definition of when and how it can be used.

[spursncowboys]

Maybe you should try again.

[Winehole23]

One of their reasons for the pe ion is that exact reason. captive audience has to be interpreted. It is wrong for you to think you hold the only definition of when and how it can be used.

If the statutory language is undefined or insufficiently defined, that actually reinforces the propriety of the ruling.

If the court had filled in the meaning of "captive audience" where it is presently not well-defined, that would be judicial activism, would it not?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Gotta love how the Church works.

[Blake]

being a captive audience and having to deal emotional distress .

"The protest was confined to a public area under supervision and regulation of local law enforcement and did not disrupt the church service," the circuit court opinion said. "Although reasonable people may disagree about the appropriateness of the Phelps' protest, this conduct simply does not satisfy the heavy burden required for the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress under Maryland law."

Thank you for reposting it over and over assuming I cannot comprehend this sentence

you're welcome

[Blake]

One of their reasons for the pe ion is that exact reason. captive audience has to be interpreted. It is wrong for you to think you hold the only definition of when and how it can be used.

What is your interpretation of captive audience?

[spursncowboys]

If the statutory language is undefined or insufficiently defined, that actually reinforces the propriety of the ruling.

If the court had filled in the meaning of "captive audience" where it is presently not well-defined, that would be judicial activism, would it not?

A captive audience is a person or a group of people who have gathered in a certain place for a purpose and are provided or exposed to information that are unrelated to their actual purpose of being there.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_captive_audience

No it would not be judicial activism because they are deciding the cons utionality of something and not trying to create laws, protruding into the legislative branch.