Comments by "rockethead7" (@rockethead7) on "Fox News"
channel.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
No. You are confusing the concept of public property like a sidewalk, with publicly owned facilities. And, I can make this point very easily by some analogies. Go try to enter Area 51 under the notion that it's a publicly owned facility, therefore you're allowed to be there. Go try to walk into the mayor's office, and refuse to leave when asked, because you think it's a public facility and you're allowed to be there. Count how many seconds it takes before you're locked in the city jail. Go try to walk into the White House, and tell them that you're a taxpayer, and therefore you have a right to be inside that building. See how that goes for you. Go try to walk into a judge's private chambers at a local courthouse. Tell the judge that you're a taxpayer, and you have every right to be in that facility because it's owned by the public. See how that works out.
(Note: I'm not actually suggesting you do those things. I'm just making a point in a graphic way.)
What the school board did was wrong. But, they DO have the authority to trespass someone. I hope the guy who was arrested gets a ton of money in a lawsuit. And, I hope that every board member is kicked out of office. But, like it or not, they had the authority to trespass the man.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Did your brains fall out of your head? WHAT? This isn't an issue of the US Constitution. The issue is that the proper authorities of the facility asked the guy to leave, and he refused to leave. Therefore, he was trespassing. The cops didn't arrest the guy for speaking. The cops arrested the guy for trespassing.
Now, of course, I hope the guy who was arrested sues the school/board, as well as every other parent of a child in that school should sue the school/board, and I hope they get a lot of money for their ridiculous actions. But, none of that is the issue when it comes to trespassing. The cops MUST trespass a person if the proper authorities of that building ask the person to leave, but the person won't leave.
What EXACTLY would you do if it was your home or something? If someone won't leave your home, and you call the cops to have the person removed, and the cops said, "well, we agree with what this guy is saying, so we're not going to remove him from your home." (?) I realize a school is not a home. But, when it comes to trespassing, it really makes no difference. The school board has the authority to trespass someone, and the cops must do it. The rest is up to the courts. And, like I said, I hope the guy who was arrested gets a huge amount of money out of the school/board. But, the cops themselves don't get to make that decision.
People like you are quite disgusting, you know. You encourage violence against police who are doing their jobs EXACTLY CORRECTLY.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nevsart5884
YOU SAID: "so how can the board hold a public meeting until 7.00pm then out of the blue declare the area private"
== They shouldn't do that. But, that's not the cops' choice, that was the board's choice.
YOU SAID: "an area that is PUBLIC property and the board and the police are there to serve the PUBLIC but instead arrest the PUBLIC for…………… attending a meeting"
== Wrong. He was arrested for trespassing. If the board ends the meeting early, and asks the cops to trespass someone, then the cops have to ask the person to leave. It the person doesn't leave, the cops must arrest the person.
YOU SAID: "invited by the board"
== Hence why I think the entire board must be booted from their positions, and I hope this school/board gets sued, and I hope the parents in that town get a nice 8-figure settlement (divided amongst them, of course).
YOU SAID: "or was it free speech they were arrested for?"
== What don't you understand here? He was arrested for trespassing.
YOU SAID: "A blind person can see there’s something very wrong here……….. If you can’t see it, I would question your sanity!"
== Good grief. YES!!!!!! YES!!!!!!! YES, dummy. There's a lot very wrong there. But, none of what was wrong was done by the cops. The cops are not judge and jury. They are to make one decision, and one decision only... is there enough cause for arrest? That's it. That's the only thing they can decide. If the elected board trespasses an individual, and the person won't leave, then the cops MUST arrest. That's their job. From there, it's handed over to the court system. And, I hope the parents sue the board/school, and that all of those people on this board are booted, and that they get so shamed that they must leave town, and never serve on another board again. And, the school/board should pay huge financial penalties for what they did. But, you're sitting there expecting cops to decide guilt/innocence. No. That's not how the legal system works. Cops do NOT decide guilt or innocence. Cops decide whether there's enough evidence for arrest, or not. And, yes, when the board asks someone to leave, and the man won't do it, and the board asks the cops to trespass the guy, yes, the cops must arrest. I'm sorry you don't understand how the law works, but you shouldn't use your ignorance as a method to promote your hatred of police. I mean, good grief, you don't even know what the charges were (despite that it was explained in the video).
1
-
1
-
To answer you directly, the board ended the meeting, and asked everyone to leave. When they refused, it became an unlawful assembly, and the board trespassed anybody who refused to leave. As for removing the board members from their positions, yup, I hope they get sued into oblivion, get kicked out of their board positions, and never serve on another board for as long as they live. But, like it or not, they do have the power to end a meeting, and to trespass people who refuse to leave.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@HeartlandFamilyDesigns
YOU SAID: " your assumptions are completely incorrect. I love the police."
== Yet, apparently not THESE police.
YOU SAID: "I think based solely on the tape and not being there in person, that the sheriff was incorrect in what he did."
== Wrong. The board trespassed the man. The police must ask the man to leave, and if he doesn't, they must uphold that trespass.
YOU SAID: "The gentleman said that they were allowed to be there until 7pm. He then said that he was arrested at 5:45."
== Fine. But, the board asked him to leave. If I throw a party at my house, and I say it'll last until 11pm, and I change my mind and end it early, you must leave my house, else you are trespassing.
YOU SAID: "They were suddenly trespassing on public grounds?"
== Irrelevant. You are confusing a public sidewalk with a building that happens to be owned by the public. Yes, trespassing applies to public buildings also. Officials in a publicly owned building can trespass people. It happens all the time.
YOU SAID: "It looks like the school board didn't like what they were being told and decided to close early and run away."
== YES!!!! YES!!!!! The pathetic cowardly board members, who should be booted out of office, CLOSED EARLY!!!! Hence, anybody who refuses to leave, is trespassing.
YOU SAID: "Personally if I were there gentleman I probably would've taken it outside if there school board left."
== There school board? There? What? Did you mean "their" school board? What?
YOU SAID: "I don't know the rules in the area"
== Obviously.
YOU SAID: "BUT there is a right to free speech."
== The man wasn't arrested for speech, he was arrested for TRESPASSING!!!! Good grief. Look, you obviously don't understand some very basic concepts here, so let me give you an analogy. If the man, hypothetically, was buck naked when he was speaking, and the cops arrest him, are you going to say he was arrested for speech? Or, are you going to say he was arrested for public nudity? Do you understand? My point is, speech has nothing to do with why he was arrested. He was arrested for TRESPASSING.
YOU SAID: "Is that the gentleman getting tackled? I don't see where that's called for (I'm guessing not all of the tape was shown). Crap like this shouldn't be settled like this. Humans needs to start acting like grown ups and not 3 year olds."
== Yes, and the man should have left when asked, and sued the school board, along with every other parent in that school who should join him in the lawsuit against the ridiculous school board. THAT is how to handle these things. Good grief.
1
-
1
-
@HeartlandFamilyDesigns
They didn't have a right to be there. The officials asked them to leave. Spare me your mocking tone. You don't know what you're talking about, and your ignorance bleeds through every word you write.
See, this is the thing about YouTube comments... people like you feel as though your ability to write a message... somehow makes you correct. Like, your ability to write it down, makes you an authority. You can sit there all day long and say the cops were "doing it wrong." But, notice anything?? Nobody, and I mean NOBODY in the media is even claiming that the arrest was wrongful. They don't say it in this media clip. They don't say it in other media clips. Nobody.
And, you got your facts wrong in the first posting. You thought they were arrested for something constitutional, remember? You didn't even realize they were arrested for trespassing (not a constitutional issue).
But, whatever, like most YouTube commenters, you're simply incapable of ever being wrong. Every opinion you ever express is correct.
1
-
@HeartlandFamilyDesigns
YOU SAID: "the guy said he had a right to be there exercising his right to free speech, that is what I'm basing my opinion on. That's it."
== Well, congratulations for admitting that you are so one-dimensional, so focused on ONE thing, that you fail to understand why he was trespassing. Dummy, he wasn't arrested for free speech!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How many times have you been told this??? What IS wrong with you? Did you not understand the public nudity analogy?? I don't think you did. If the man was naked in public, you'd be one of those idiots saying he was arrested for free speech, instead of realizing that he was arrested for public nudity.
YOU SAID: "I actually said more than once that my opinion is based on what I saw."
== And, you're wrong. You saw wrong. You interpreted wrong. He was arrested for trespassing, not for speech.
YOU SAID: "I never said that I was the end all be all in authority of the situation."
== Obviously.
YOU SAID: "I also said that I assumed this was the entire story."
== Did you fail to hear the part of the story where they clearly said he was being arrested for TRESPASSING??!? Not speech!!!!?!?!?
YOU SAID: "What is getting you so upset?"
== Because you're a brick wall. Nobody likes a brick wall.
YOU SAID: "An opinion can't be wrong, it's an opinion."
== An opinion can't be wrong?? With that, I will not bother with you again. This is one of the stupidest things I've ever read in my life. If your opinion was that 2+2=97, your opinion can't be wrong? What??
YOU SAID: "You on the other hand seen very triggered by something."
== Just illiterate brick walls who don't understand anything whatsoever.
YOU SAID: "It still makes me smile when I see that you are so all knowing that you know when someone else's opinion (you might need to Google that word) is wrong. That's not how life works."
== Oh, yes, I really need a lesson in how life works from a barely literate internet clod who thinks opinions can't be wrong, who doesn't understand what trespassing means, and who is only capable of focusing on one aspect of a story, ignoring all of the details. Yes, please teach me how life works.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Oh, you're a real genius.
YOU SAID: "So this shows that the police will do what they are ordered to do when the dictators say jump."
== Nonsense. The cops were enforcing the law correctly. If someone won't leave when asked, they are trespassing. That's how the law works, and rightfully so. Would YOU want to call the police for someone who refuses to leave your house, have the cops come and evaluate whether or not you should have asked that person to leave, and maybe say to you, "nope, we're not going to take the person away, because we don't agree with your politics, so you're stuck, deal with it by yourself"? No? You wouldn't appreciate it? You'd say something like, "hey, cops are not here to voice opinions on politics, cops are here to enforce trespass laws, now get this guy off of my property." Oh, but if you agree with the politics, oh, ok, now the cops are the problem, huh? Good grief. Get this through your head: whether you agree with the board members and administrators or not, if someone refuses to leave when asked, that person IS TRESPASSING. The cops are not the judge and jury. The cops make the arrest, and leave the rest to the courts. That's how our system works. Don't like it? Go move to some 3rd world country where cops express their opinions with a machete.
YOU SAID: "How do we back the blue"
== Maybe by first understanding the laws? How about starting there?
YOU SAID: "when their not on our side??????"
== Oh, I see the problem here. You're illiterate, therefore you don't understand the laws anyway. "Their not on our side"?? Was that your crippled attempt at saying "they're"? Or, did you think "not" was a noun? What? You know, maybe if you knew how to read and write in the first place, you might have understood the laws by now also, huh?
Dummy, the SCHOOL BOARD is the problem. The man was guilty of trespassing, whether it's a public facility or not. That's just reality. The correct course of action is for the man to sue the board/school for the garbage they pulled, and lobby to get the entire school board kicked out of office for failing to act in the best interest of the students. And, I hope he does that. And, I hope the rest of the parents do the same. But, don't blame the cops for properly executing their duties. Good grief. Such total ignorance.
1
-
So? Do you think a building owned by the public is the same as a sidewalk or something? OK, you go right ahead, and try to march onto an aircraft carrier or something, and say, "this is owned by we the people, let me onboard!!" Try it. See how that goes for you. Try to enter the White House too. Tell them that the building is owned by "we the people" and you have the right to be there. Good luck. Try going into a courthouse, and entering a judge's private chambers. Tell the judge that "we the people" own his office. Count how many seconds go by before you're in handcuffs. Try that at your local mayor's office too. And, this incident was at a school, right? Do you think you have the right to just go into a school whenever you want? Try it while school is in session, for example.
Sorry, you don't understand the difference between public property (like a sidewalk), vs. a building that happens to be owned by the public.
1
-
1
-
WRONG. Absolutely wrong. Cops are not to take sides. They are there to decide if a trespass occurred, and if so, to arrest. Do you REALLY want cops to make a choice between one side or another? You don't think that's what courts are for? You want individual cops deciding? How will that go, if it's your house, and someone refuses to leave? Do you want the cops to say, "sorry, we don't agree with your politics, so we're going to let the person stay in your house, and we refuse to trespass the guy"? That's how this goes? Or, are you going to try to say that because this was a school, not a home, the cops shouldn't arrest anybody? (You'd be wrong.)
1
-
1
-
@boofert.washington2499
YOU SAID: "Nobody was physically hurt. It's really not that big of a deal."
== Tell that to the students who DIDN'T get the college positions they wanted because the rich people bought their spots away from them.
YOU SAID: "College is overrated to begin with. I should know. I barely went to class and still graduated with a 3.7 GPA."
== Well, then you're not the one that's affected in the first place. But, others were. The ones most affected were the ones who didn't get in because they were borderline to begin with. Those are the types of people who really need the extra education, and it has been statistically proven that those types of people almost always benefit from getting the education that you didn't care about. This stuff isn't a victimless crime, you know. One of the main points of our country's university system is that it's supposed to be the great equalizer in our society. It's what helps to make the USA the "land of opportunity." As it is, it's already very true that children of rich parents have quite a head start in life, and will have a lot more privilege than children of poor parents, and I don't think there's anything we can realistically do about that, nor am I very sure that I'd want to do anything about that (people should be entitled to work hard to help their children in life, and why shouldn't that be the case?). But, a university education is supposed to help equalize the playing field a bit. Admission is supposed to be based on academic qualifications, not on the parents' financial status. What those parents did was pay money, not even to the university itself, but to crooked individuals, to cheat someone else out of their rightful admission to that university.
Furthermore, get real here, do you REALLY want to live in a system that bribing people to get what you want is legal, and the only criteria to define what's a crime, and what's not a crime, is whether someone was physically harmed? If I pulled some sort of financial crime, which devalued your 401K portfolio by $100,000, would you take the same stance as you're taking right now? Is it "no big deal" that I essentially stole $100,000 from you, merely because you weren't physically hurt in the process? Well, what these parents did was just about the equivalent of that. Someone else was unable to attend that university, and either couldn't go at all, or had to go to a lesser university instead. This very well may mean that, over the period of his/her lifetime, he/she will earn $100,000 less than if he/she went to the more prestigious university. What these parents did was NOT a victimless crime, and they should pay a price for it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Violet_Lotus_
YOU SAID: "it was in a public building at a public hearing. Explain how that constitutes trespassing."
== You are confusing the concept of things like a public sidewalk, vs. public buildings. I mean, it helps if you stop and think for a minute about this concept. Like, if your idea is that it's owned by the public, you're allowed to be there, immediately you must know that this concept is wrong. You cannot just enter the White House. You cannot be in the judge's private chambers in a courthouse. You cannot go inside the mayor's office. You cannot even go inside the school while kids are in class. I mean, even for some public parks, you're not allowed to go at night. Anyway, back to your question about how it's trespassing: well, the way public buildings work, officials of that building have the authority to decide whether you're welcome there, or not. If the officials close the meeting early (which they did), and ask everyone to leave (which they did), then anybody who refuses to leave is trespassing. You may not like it, I may not like it, but, yes, that's 100% correct. The board has the purview to trespass people who refuse to leave when asked.
YOU SAID: "They were clearly trying to shut him up."
== Yup, and I hope that every member of that school board is booted off of the board, and sued to oblivion, and never holds any kind of public board/office again. Those people shouldn't be inflicting their "woke" politics upon the educational system. They're there to educate children, not to foster their silly racial viewpoints upon the world. I'd love to see the man who was arrested win $200,000, and every other parent of a child in that school system win $40,000. And, I'd love for this case to go to trial and become the next generation version analogous to the Dover trial on intelligent design (which destroyed the ridiculous intelligent design movement, and left it in the dust where it belongs, all because a stupid school board overstepped its bounds). I'd like to see this incident turn into the same thing for their racial theories, and that this board becomes the poster child that destroys their ridiculous viewpoint permanently, just like the Dover trial did to the school board's position, rendering it basically impossible for any school board anywhere in the country to ever pull that garbage again.
That being said, like it or not, the school board CAN close a meeting, and CAN trespass people. If you are asked to leave, and refuse, you ARE trespassing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1