America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 19 years ago by Thom. 15 replies replies.
Anti-Bush sign spells trouble for Wisconsin man
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Thom Offline
#1 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 1:38 PM EST
Joined: 12-08-2003
Posts: 6,117
By The Associated Press
05.15.04

A southwestern Wisconsin man is fighting a civil citation for bringing a sign that read "F U G W" with him as he watched President Bush pass through Platteville last week.

Andrea Baker, an attorney for Frank Van den Bosch of Montfort, argued in a motion filed May 10 in Grant County Circuit Court that Van den Bosch's sign was clearly protected under the First Amendment right to free speech.

"It's just a creeping theocratic fascism that's moving into the land here, where dissent is unpatriotic," said Van den Bosch, 53, a member of the Southwest Peace Fellowship, a social issues group.

According to the motion, which asks that the citation be dismissed, Van den Bosch was standing along a street in Platteville May 7 with his sign waiting for Bush's motorcade to pass. Bush made campaign stops in La Crosse and Prairie du Chien that day.

Police told him he couldn't display the sign. Van den Bosch then changed the sign to say "Free Us G W" and added "End the Occupation" on the back, referring to the war in Iraq.

A few minutes later, another police officer came over and ordered Van den Bosch to surrender the sign. Van den Bosch rolled up his sign and moved to the back of the crowd. He held it up as Bush went by.

Police then handcuffed him and took him to the police station, where he was photographed, fingerprinted, cited $243 for disorderly conduct and released. He hasn't paid the fine, Van den Bosch said.

Platteville Police Lt. Tom Schmid said a business owner along the street had complained about the sign, and officers thought children might see it. Van den Bosch wrote the letters "R E E" and "S" in tiny print, Schmid said.

"We had to take some action," Schmid said. "If we were wrong, then the citation will be voided and taken care of that way. That's the way the system is supposed to work."

Van den Bosch is scheduled to appear in court on May 17.
drnos Offline
#2 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 1:42 PM EST
Joined: 10-29-2003
Posts: 2,787
This case s/b thrown out so fast it makes Farve's passes seem like cupcakes. Free speech doesn't mean anything if it doesn't protect political commentary.
Thom Offline
#3 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 1:44 PM EST
Joined: 12-08-2003
Posts: 6,117
..not to mention false arrest.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#4 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 2:08 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,498
http://www.catholicsagainstkerry.com/rip%20up.html
Thom Offline
#5 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 2:18 PM EST
Joined: 12-08-2003
Posts: 6,117
What does your internet link have to do with the POLICE taking down a person's sign? This is about your and my rights, not about some political thing you want it to be. Sheesh.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#6 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 2:34 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,498
"Then it happened," Porter explains. "He reached up to shake a hand in the back and his eyes went up to my sign. He read it and then he looked into the crowd to see who was holding it -- and he looked me directly in the eyes."

"I hope he saw my pain. I was not angry, just pleading with him to understand. You could see the shock and surprise on his face," Porter said.

But within seconds, a Kerry campaign staff member approached Porter and grabbed her sign.

"You can't have that sign here," the Kerry staffer said.

The sign tore and Porter let go. After he had possession of it, the Kerry staffer "tore it to pieces" and walked away. "He wouldn't even let me have the pieces," Porter said.

Who said ANYTHING about the Police? The way I saw it...it's the same damn thing!
Robby Offline
#7 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 2:36 PM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
If this happened, it's BULL$HIT! Free speech should out. How can the local cops quell a legal public display of free speech? WTF!? Whether I agree or not is immaterial. The man should be allowed to voice his opinion. Those cops should be fired...
Robby Offline
#8 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 2:39 PM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
I agree! Porter's rights were violated too! It's bull$hit! Within reason people should be allowed to protest. To qualify that, I believe the Democrats should be allowed to hold a convention without 20 or 30 Republicans chanting slurs against him loudly in the background. It’s a democrat convention! Likewise with republicans. But if they’re in public driving down the street, it’s another story (IMHO).
JonR Offline
#9 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 4:38 PM EST
Joined: 02-19-2002
Posts: 9,740
You guys with your freedom of speech crap, oh here we go again. Suppose your son or daughter was graduating college and goes on the stage receives his or her diploma and a handshake and as he or she walks across the stage to exit one of his or her professors holds up a sign with S.S.O.B on it and your sons or daughters initals underneath. How hard would you fight for his freedom of speech? Inquiring minds want to know. JonR
Thom Offline
#10 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 6:27 PM EST
Joined: 12-08-2003
Posts: 6,117
DMV- I fail to see how a staffer equates to a police officer. That seems like a huge leap in logic to me.

JonR - I am of the opinion that you have the right to say whatever you want to say, with your voice, on a sign, on your shirt, etc. However, every freedom in America has certain restrictions. For example with freedom of speech you can't say something slanderous, or shout fire in a crowded theatre. As per your question, I can't answer it in regards to the situation you pose, but It's definitely everyone's right to voice their opinion even if I disagree.

Speaking of the Inquirer, did you know they have a team of lawyers (one of the largest law teams in media, I've been told) go over every story and check for accuracy of the reporting to avoid libelous or slanderous litigation.
Robby Offline
#11 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 6:37 PM EST
Joined: 10-30-2002
Posts: 5,067
Well you can't yell fire in the movie either, but I don't see how "F U G W" on a sign is offensive. Perhaps "in code", but there are no laws against that ;-)
JonR Offline
#12 Posted: Mon, May 17 2004, 9:32 PM EST
Joined: 02-19-2002
Posts: 9,740
Yo Thom: A while back a man was arrested for wearing a t-shirt with the word F**K across the front. The ACLU took the case to the Supreme Court, their ruling was it was a bad arrest because the obscenity (F**K) was not addressed to any individual. If the writing on the t-shirt said "F**K YOU" then the obscenity would have been addressed to anyone who read it, and it would have been a good arrest. For example if a cop writes you a speeding ticket and when you see the cost you say "Awww F**k" that's okay, however if you look the cop in the face an say " F**k You" that's a good arrest. The **** with the sign was saying F U ( F**k You ) to the President of the United States and anyone thinks differently is not playing with a full deck and that **** got exactly what he deserved. JonR
Homebrew Offline
#13 Posted: Tue, May 18 2004, 4:27 AM EST
Joined: 02-11-2003
Posts: 11,885
JonR,
If the sign, would have completely spelled it out, you would be correct. Since it was just FU, it is freedom of speech. As a matter of fact, I was gifted a t-shirt, that says GWB F%cked me once, but never again.
I wear it alot. LOL
Later
Dave (A.K.A. Homebrew)
penzt8 Offline
#14 Posted: Tue, May 18 2004, 4:30 AM EST
Joined: 06-05-2000
Posts: 1,771
I guess the FU could have stood for any number of things so it's left up to the interpretation of the reader. I strongly believe that any citizen should be able to stand along a motorcade route and hold a sign that makes a statement, or states a point of view or opinion about a political figure. As long as the individual is not being diruptive or impeding the motorcade.

Would it have been less offensive if the sign had said "You suck!" or "GW is an idiot" or some other phrase that captured his feelings? I think people get too wound up about the "F" word. And in this case just the letter "F".

I guess if I wore a tee shirt with the phrase FCVK YOV
printed on the front someone would bitch about it because they could interpret that it was saying something that it clearly is not..
dbguru Offline
#15 Posted: Tue, May 18 2004, 7:35 AM EST
Joined: 03-06-2002
Posts: 1,300
Well from threads like this you see there are some conservative types who have some integrity and respect for our constitution and others on the extreme radical lunatic right wing somewhere out there in KKK and neo-Nazi land who would rather trash the constitution of this country for their own Faschist objectives. Fundamentally, these radicals may profess a lot of pseudo positive crap to hide behind, but truly have no love for this country and serious hate directed in many directions.

How one could refer to freedom of speech in such a derogatory disrepectul fashion does nothing but identify those who truly hate America. When a cop feels compelled to jugde support for Bush more important than support for the Constitution you have to be concerned.
DB



Thom Offline
#16 Posted: Tue, May 18 2004, 7:37 AM EST
Joined: 12-08-2003
Posts: 6,117
JonR - "F**k you" is protected speech. There is no gray area. He had a right to display the sign, even if it specifically said f**k you and not FU. It's political speech entitled to the greatest degree of protection. The supreme court cast you site is just plane wrong and didn't happen.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top