Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, Frank Drebin said:

 

 

They are correct.

You know who said so?  The Legislature and the Governor.  We the Motherfucking People.  It is a public space, they are allowed - by both a statute and the First Amendment - to peacefully assemble and express their views there, subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions like a curfew (no overnight camping).  That's the whole fucking point.  It IS "our lawn."  All of us. Which includes them.

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It's not a slippery slope.  If the reasonable rule is "no overnight camping, including structures like tents," and overnight starts at 10:00 pm., then you tell the folks there that they're free to conduct their activities till 10, then they'll need to clear out.  And we're asking them to do it nicely.  Y'all can come back and do it all over again starting at 8:00 am tomorrow.

If it hits 10, and they aren't clearing out, then tell them one final time, then clear them out.

This shit isn't hard.  It's only hard if you want to go full-on fascist because you don't like their viewpoint.

I agree - in this case the “reasonable rule” was no tents ever right? I mean i guess it can be debated if it was reasonable but everyone knew what the “red line” was going to be. 

I think it’s dumb and you should just let students protest, i would be curious if the people they are pulling out so far at the ones that were criminally trespassed (the non-students from last week). 

Edited by hornbri
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

They are correct.

You know who said so?  The Legislature and the Governor.  We the Motherfucking People.  It is a public space, they are allowed - by both a statute and the First Amendment - to peacefully assemble and express their views there, subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions like a curfew (no overnight camping).  That's the whole fucking point.  It IS "our lawn."  All of us. Which includes them.

The University of Texas has articulated a list of other rules besides no overnight camping.  Including no tents.  And no masks.  Whether those are reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions will likely determine, in a court, the lawfulness of removing/arresting any of these individuals who are violating these rules.

Edited by Frank Drebin
Posted
1 minute ago, Frank Drebin said:

There are other rules besides no overnight camping.  Including no tents.  And no masks.  Whether those are reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions will likely determine, in a court, whether removing/arresting these individuals is lawful.

So now there is a rule that they "can't" wear masks?  Is that for identification purposes?  Not surgical masks, right?

Posted
3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It's not a slippery slope.  If the reasonable rule is "no overnight camping, including structures like tents," and overnight starts at 10:00 pm., then you tell the folks there that they're free to conduct their activities till 10, then they'll need to clear out.  And we're asking them to do it nicely.  Y'all can come back and do it all over again starting at 8:00 am tomorrow.

If it hits 10, and they aren't clearing out, then tell them one final time, then clear them out.

This shit isn't hard.  It's only hard if you want to go full-on fascist because you don't like their viewpoint.

The tents are against the rule at all time unless pre-approved: https://secure4.compliancebridge.com/utexas/public/getdoc.php?file=8-1050

In this case the tents are obviously being used to escalate the situation into more than a peaceful protest knowing they will get the police to show up to remove them.

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
Just now, hornbri said:

I agree - in this case the “reasonable rule” was no tents ever right? I mean i guess it can be debated if it was reasonable but everyone knew what the “red line” was goin got be. 

Right and let's not pretend if the rule was Brisket's "reasonable rule" of 10PM cut-off, then this same thing wouldn't be happening at 10PM.   They got what they wanted. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

It's the tents/encampment that's the issue right? I could see a slippery slope if tents are allowed to stay up where it got out of control quick.

What is it with the sudden fear of tents? 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

What is it with the sudden fear of tents? 

Well, from what I have learned from my reading of Surly, people will have sex in them.  Sex tents are the scourge of our time.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 6
Posted
2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

So now there is a rule that they "can't" wear masks?  Is that for identification purposes?  Not surgical masks, right?

Plenty of courts have upheld a state actors right to prohibit masks or disguises in public spaces.  Some of the earliest cases were to prevent KKK members from wearing hoods to shield their identity and to make it difficult to identify lawbreakers among those lawfully protesting.

The University of Texas has said wearing masks in protests violates University policy.

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/24/ut-austin-israel-hamas-war-palestine-student-arrests/

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Frank Drebin said:

Plenty of courts have upheld a state actors right to prohibit masks or disguises in public spaces.  Some of the earliest cases were to prevent KKK members from wearing hoods to shield their identity and to make it difficult to identify lawbreakers among those lawfully protesting.

The University of Texas has said wearing masks in protests violates University policy.

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/24/ut-austin-israel-hamas-war-palestine-student-arrests/

I wear a daily mask of decency and intelligence, but this boards knows otherwise.....

Posted
8 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

The University of Texas has articulated a list of other rules besides no overnight camping.  Including no tents.  And no masks.  Whether those are reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions will likely determine, in a court, the lawfulness of removing/arresting any of these individuals who are violating these rules.

Got it -- had not seen the strict "no tents, no masks" rules.  And yes, the challenge would have to be to those rules in particular.

The no masks/no concealing your identity is an interesting discussion.  I am surprised that our current leadership would put that in place, being that it would put some of their preferred groups at risk.  But then, I strongly suspect the policy will only be enforced when the State doesn't like the content of the speech.  That is, the rules are pretextual, and not applied in a content-neutral fashion.  We shall see.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, from what I have learned from my reading of Surly, people will have sex in them.  Sex tents are the scourge of our time.

Guys, guys, guys, if I stay here it's totally going to finally happen....

image.png.a075e8897ba81159e2edc96db4db1ae5.png

  • Haha 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Right and let's not pretend if the rule was Brisket's "reasonable rule" of 10PM cut-off, then this same thing wouldn't be happening at 10PM.   They got what they wanted. 

And the point has been that you can't arrest someone for a violation that hasn't actually occurred yet. Destroying a protest on the grounds that someone might violate a rule is fundamentally immoral and unconstitutional. 

Posted
Just now, Brisketexan said:

Got it -- had not seen the strict "no tents, no masks" rules.  And yes, the challenge would have to be to those rules in particular.

The no masks/no concealing your identity is an interesting discussion.  I am surprised that our current leadership would put that in place, being that it would put some of their preferred groups at risk.  But then, I strongly suspect the policy will only be enforced when the State doesn't like the content of the speech.  That is, the rules are pretextual, and not applied in a content-neutral fashion.  We shall see.

If they can prove the regulations are not content neutral, then a court will strike them down.

Posted
Just now, crash_davis said:

Fuck Abbott. Fuck DPS. Fuck these protesters. Fuck Israel. Fuck Hamas. Fuck everyone who's an asshole. So tired of everyone looking for reasons to be assholes.

If these fucking protests even hint at shutting down graduation, I'm going dress up in DPS gear and beat some motherfuckers.

That's the spirit!

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
9 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

In this case the tents are obviously being used to escalate the situation into more than a peaceful protest knowing they will get the police to show up to remove them.

Wow. Today I learned that tents = escalatory. Gee, I would have thought the riot police and arrests last week were the escalating factor. But no, turns out, it is Coleman.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Dahobbs said:

And the point has been that you can't arrest someone for a violation that hasn't actually occurred yet. Destroying a protest on the grounds that someone might violate a rule is fundamentally immoral and unconstitutional. 

Well that wasn't actually the rule.  That was Brisket's interpretation of what a reasonable rule would be.  The actual rule (dating back to at least 2012 apparently) is no tents.  So the rule WAS violated.  Intentionally of course.  So they could escalate this shit for media attention.  

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Well that wasn't actually the rule.  That was Brisket's interpretation of what a reasonable rule would be.  The actual rule (dating back to at least 2012 apparently) is no tents.  So the rule WAS violated.  Intentionally of course.  So they could escalate this shit for media attention.  

It is pretty questionable whether "no tents" ever on a public forum is a reasonable restriction. More to the point, I've seen a photo of maybe 1 tent from last week. Enforcing the rule is removing the tent and maybe the person who put it up. Not kicking out everyone. I get that you don't like their speech. I get that you don't like these students. I don't get how you don't give a fuck about a pretty blatant and violent violation of civil rights. 

Edited by Dahobbs
  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

They should have all first gone to Academy or REI, gotten a bunch of these mini-tents used to show what the full size looks like, and set them all up for the police to see.  Checkmate fuckers

image.png.c8c2a093d90fc3dc9d40acbb31a480df.png

  • Like 2
  • Haha 7
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

It is pretty questionable whether "no tents" ever on a public forum is a reasonable restriction. More to the point, I've seen a photo of maybe 1 tent from last week. Enforcing the rule is removing the tent and maybe the person who put it up. Not kicking out everyone. I get that you don't like their speech. I get that you don't like these students. I don't get how you don't give a fuck about a pretty blatant and violent violation of civil rights. 

But we are talking about that happened today right? There were clear tents on campus today and it is clear they did that today to escalate the situation. Maybe now that tent question will get answered in court. 

Edited by hornbri
Posted
8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Wow. Today I learned that tents = escalatory. Gee, I would have thought the riot police and arrests last week were the escalating factor. But no, turns out, it is Coleman.

 

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

It is pretty questionable whether "no tents" ever on a public forum is a reasonable restriction. More to the point, I've seen a photo of maybe 1 tent from last week. Enforcing the rule is removing the tent and maybe the person who put it up. Not kicking out everyone. I get that you don't like their speech. I get that you don't like these students. I don't get how you don't give a fuck about a pretty blatant and violent violation of civil rights. 

The protesters encircled the tents and chained tables together to protect the encampment. They knew exactly what they were doing. Credit to them as it worked exactly as they hoped it would.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

 

The protesters encircled the tents and chained tables together to protect the encampment. They knew exactly what they were doing. Credit to them as it worked exactly as they hoped it would.

so...assholes. Fuck them.

I hope Abott and DPS unleash hell. And fuck them too.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

 More to the point, I've seen a photo of maybe 1 tent from last week. Enforcing the rule is removing the tent and maybe the person who put it up. Not kicking out everyone. I get that you don't like their speech. I get that you don't like these students. I don't get how you don't give a fuck about a pretty blatant and violent violation of civil rights. 

Look at the picture from today dude.  They made a lame little tent city and encircled it locking arms.   They could have easily protested within the stated parameters and chose not to.  It was a fucking strategy.  At least see it for what it is.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, hornbri said:

But we are talking about that happened today right? There were clear tents on campus today and it is clear they did that today to escalate the situation. Maybe now that tent question will get answered in court. 

fine, we'll get opaque tents

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Got it -- had not seen the strict "no tents, no masks" rules.  And yes, the challenge would have to be to those rules in particular.

The no masks/no concealing your identity is an interesting discussion.  I am surprised that our current leadership would put that in place, being that it would put some of their preferred groups at risk.  But then, I strongly suspect the policy will only be enforced when the State doesn't like the content of the speech.  That is, the rules are pretextual, and not applied in a content-neutral fashion.  We shall see.

 

Rules attached for you to look over 

 

Guess it's the capitalist in me but the university should go ahead and "grid off " spaces on the lawn like they do for tailgaters during football season and charge like $100 or whatever for a day pass. Whoever applies and gets the pass, make them sign a form acknowledging the rules and leave them be unless they start to break said rules

GMCCo_mXwAARWQt.jpg

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, royiv said:

You’re making a very good argument for just ignoring them.

If I were personally in charge, I probably would have done what Brisket suggested which is let them fucking cook in the sun all day in their masks then clear them out after sundown.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
19 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

They should have all first gone to Academy or REI, gotten a bunch of these mini-tents used to show what the full size looks like, and set them all up for the police to see.  Checkmate fuckers

image.png.c8c2a093d90fc3dc9d40acbb31a480df.png

I don't think the cops have enough riot gear on to safely take down even those mini tents.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Look at the picture from today dude.  They made a lame little tent city and encircled it locking arms.   They could have easily protested within the stated parameters and chose not to.  It was a fucking strategy.  At least see it for what it is.

Obviously, they could not have. They tried that last week. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
25 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

They should have all first gone to Academy or REI, gotten a bunch of these mini-tents used to show what the full size looks like, and set them all up for the police to see.  Checkmate fuckers

image.png.c8c2a093d90fc3dc9d40acbb31a480df.png

I've always wanted to get one of these for my Dachshunds to hang out in. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 3
Posted
35 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

Fuck Abbott. Fuck DPS. Fuck these protesters. Fuck Israel. Fuck Hamas. Fuck everyone who's an asshole. So tired of everyone looking for reasons to be assholes.

If these fucking protests even hint at shutting down graduation, I'm going dress up in DPS gear and beat some motherfuckers.

Channeling your inner pirate like Mike, RIP gone too soon:
 


I feel like this rather often these days...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

There sure are a lot of dumb fucking fascists posting on this web forum. 

Dude all the protesters are in the South lawn. No one here is going to be impressed and want to fuck you.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 5
Posted
25 minutes ago, hornbri said:

But we are talking about that happened today right? There were clear tents on campus today and it is clear they did that today to escalate the situation. Maybe now that tent question will get answered in court. 

We can't talk about today without including the greater context of last week. Given the significant trampling of civil rights, yeah, I think some civil disobedience is in order and justified. Again, I don't think no tents ever is a particularly reasonable restriction. But had this been a first interaction, I would not have had any issue with having the police come and kick out the protesters. In the context of last week, I find attitudes like @Skipper's that shows disdain for those who dare invoke their civil rights greatly disturbing. 

24 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

The protesters encircled the tents and chained tables together to protect the encampment. They knew exactly what they were doing. Credit to them as it worked exactly as they hoped it would.

My issue is the use of the term escalatory. Typically that has a violent connotation to it. And I find that usage ironic when talking about tents, particularly given the events of last week. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

They mostly got the response they wanted. It'll be in the news which is what they want. That's all they care about. 

If/when DPS starts beating them, then they'll really get what they want. 

All I see in the video is a gaggle full of assholes.

 

And with that I've given this bullshit too much attention. I'll resume to turning off or skipping any protest shit I see on media.

Edited by crash_davis
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

Dude all the protesters are in the South lawn. No one here is going to be impressed and want to fuck you.

Oh cool. You're like Beetlejuice, except I only had to type “dumb fucking fascist” once for you to suddenly appear. 

Posted

If they really wanted to be asses they could have taking over the building housing Middle East Studies. They are in a grassy area. Shit, I still could have gotten to class on the 6 pack.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Oh cool. You're like Beetlejuice, except I only had to type “dumb fucking fascist” once for you to suddenly appear. 

Hurry up, they are all about to be arrested. You can vulture, show empathy, bail one or two out, and maybe get laid. Go forth young man. We're rooting for you.

 

And oh yea, post pictures!!!

Edited by crash_davis
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...