He does present some good points in his argument, and NO that isnt me in the video.... Its what I hope to look like in another 20 years!
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fokp8hQ9uig [/media]&feature=player_embedded

 

LOL actually he looks like an older, real Cartman.

And I think the bird is considered assault, but I'm not sure.

 

Will be interesting to see how the case turns out in court, I can see this going higher up the court chain to rule how the bird will be taken.

Im alittle more well endowed than most cops because if someone shoots me the bird, I giggle and go on about my business.

 

What if a cop flipped you the bird.

 

Same response, id laugh at em and maybe even take a picture. You know that would be my next sig, picture this..

Picture of cop shooting me the bird and I caption it saying, this is what happens when you do not respect authoritah!!

 

"You will respect mah authori-tay!"

I think it's a debate over free-speech. I think the case will be decided by which side better argues that hand gestures are a protected form of speech or expression, not whether or not it is offensive.

 

Ya, I could see it going that way. I also read one scenario where the cops say its distracting and prevents them from doing their jobs effectively... if thats the case then every krispy kreme and dunkin doughnuts across the country is in danger!

 

I'd appeal to his employer or manager, just as I would if a McDonald's employee told me to F-off. I wouldn't be lauching a law suit, and I wouldn't notify the police as it's not a public safety issue or a criminal concern.

 

Yes, the best part of the complaint being filed is that they get to do extra paper work and I have heard the supervisors hate this. But expect retaliation...

 

He knows exactly how it will turn out because of David Hackbart. Google it. The city of Pittsburgh just paid him $50k for the same thing.

I am currently in a somewhat similar situation. I flipped off someone who tailgated me for several miles. The trooper showed up an hour later (he did not see the incident) and charged me with a crime for offending the tailgater. Of course he was not serious, just wanted to be a prick. And no, I was not a smartass with the trooper, very calm and told him exactly what happened but he was kind a of beligerant douche bag.

I filed a misconduct complaint against the trooper and filed a claim for damages (legal fees and time off work) with our state's quickie resolution process. If I don't get a check in the mail in the next couple weeks (I just submitted the claim) I am going to court too.


Without getting into too much detail human expression must fall into categories of unprotected speech or it can not be punished (or charged) without violating contitutional protection. All speech is protected until the courts created a category of speech that is unprotected. Some states have laws against "obscene" gestures and the courts allow punishment of something obscene, but the court made a legal definition of obscene in Miller v California (1975 I think). To be obscene you have to simulate a sex act with the purpose of sexually arousing the other person. So pulling up next to a woman and doing the tongue between two fingers might be considered obscene and punishable, the finger would not.

There is also a category for "fighting" words but has a very high burden of proof. The threshhold is that what you say has to be so offensive that it would make the average person resort to violence. Since the finger has become so common and you don't see fistfights by the side of the road all day long, the courts have generally ruled that this does not qualify. Think something really outrageous like walking into a mosque in Pakistan and yelling something nasty about Allah and Mohammed and that basically what they are talking about.


The courts have made the thresholds so high basically because they want to protect just about every form of speech unless it is just totally nutso. And I think thats as it should be. Otherwise the courts are taking up criminal cases and saying that a "victims" hurt feelings are grounds for criminal punishment and more important than free speech.