Archive for Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Occupy Lawrence protesters ask city for help finding new campsite

October 25, 2011, 12:09 p.m. Updated October 26, 2011, 12:34 a.m.

Advertisement

Members of the Occupy Lawrence group packed up their camp in South Park early Tuesday morning after being given an ultimatum by Lawrence police officers, but by Tuesday evening the group was asking City Hall leaders for a new city-owned spot for its around-the-clock protests.

The protesters were given the option by Lawrence police officers early Tuesday to remove their belongings and leave, or be arrested and have their gear confiscated, said Dory Mills, a member of the group.

“They were very respectful,” Mills said. “At first they gave us five minutes, but they let us have more time. It took about an hour.”

Sgt. Matt Sarna, a Lawrence police spokesman, said in a statement that officers arrived at the park about 3:55 a.m. and that protesters complied with the request. He said the move by police was not related to several reports of assault in the park last weekend.

Instead, officers were enforcing a city ordinance that bars use of the park from 11:30 p.m. to 6 a.m. Early Saturday, eight members of the group were ticketed for breaking the ordinance.

After packing up early Tuesday morning, they returned to the park when it reopened at 6 a.m.

By 6:30 p.m., several members of the Occupy Lawrence group came to City Hall for the commission’s weekly meeting. Jennifer Christensen, a spokeswoman for the group, asked commissioners to help the group find a place — preferably near downtown — that could accommodate their camp. After the meeting, Mayor Aron Cromwell said he did not think such assistance would be likely. He said there are safety reasons why the group should not be camping in city parks. He also told group members that he thought the entire camping issue had taken away from the group’s main message.

“I think this discussion of Occupy Lawrence has turned into a conversation of whether I can camp in a park overnight,” Cromwell said. “It really has taken over the movement. I think some of the effort you’re spending on this issue should be focused on accomplishing some of the goals that you have.”

Tuesday’s City Commission meeting also included several spirited comments from members of the group. One man, John R. Tuttle III, was briefly asked to leave the commission chambers by police officers after he interrupted the meeting several times with verbal outbursts. Cromwell asked Tuttle to speak only when he was at the public comment lectern and to follow the protocol of limiting his comments to five minutes or less. Tuttle then responded with an obscenity, and then was asked by police officers at the meeting to step into the lobby of City Hall. After about a half-hour, he returned to the commission chambers without incident.

Following these events, members of the group voted to “continue doing whatever we can for the movement,” member Jason Phoenix said, but to no longer camp or spend extended time in South Park. Phoenix said that they tentatively plan on holding their general assemblies at 6 p.m. every evening in the park but that they were also looking at other locations.

— Reporter Alex Garrison contributed to this report.

Comments

LHS56 3 years, 5 months ago

Thanks to all. Sounds like good judgment by both parties.

matthew2600 3 years, 5 months ago

Good riddance, don't have to keep seeing their messy "protest" when I'm trying to get Fuzzy's taco's. Call me sold out, I'm not sleeping in a park.

deec 3 years, 5 months ago

First amendment rights are often "messy".

somedude20 3 years, 5 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

oldvet 3 years, 5 months ago

Thank goodness we have the Second Amendment to guarantee those First Amendment rights...

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

What are these fuzzy tacos people keep talking about?

pace 3 years, 5 months ago

Good, I support Occupy. We need protest, not violence.

yourworstnightmare 3 years, 5 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

yourworstnightmare 3 years, 5 months ago

Really? Using the word "teabagger" gets you removed now?

Where is the sense of humor?

gudpoynt 3 years, 5 months ago

being a conservative has nothing to do with it. It's being an idiot that gets your posts removed.

The fact that idiot density is much higher among conservatives that post here is just a coincidence.

beatrice 3 years, 5 months ago

Funny how those who are quick to yell "foul" when somebody uses a derogatory term to describe a member of the Tea Party are then just as quick to start calling people derogatory names who hold a different point of view. Or is it just sad?

appleaday 3 years, 5 months ago

Fuzzy's tacos look a little bit messy.

KCHunter 3 years, 5 months ago

Not a bad decision from the protesters. Camping is not the purpose of the rally.

Gareth Skarka 3 years, 5 months ago

If they're serious, they'll travel to Wall Street, instead of doing a pathetic "me too!" gathering far from the actual problem.

pace 3 years, 5 months ago

I think we have plenty of economic injustice in Kansas. We don't have to travel to stand up. For the suggestions we should be in DC, I think Wall street is better, why talk to the help when you can talk to the boss.

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

You guys should occupy the the steps of the capital in Topeka.

pace 3 years, 5 months ago

You should get up and occupy. You should stand. Are you satisfied the Bush tax cuts created jobs? Or did they just create wealthier tax dodging billionaires. Do you think housing stock and home values are served by rampant bankruptcies?

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

"occupying" is a waste of time.

I think all tax cuts are good.

As long as the dodging is legal, I i have no problem with tax-dodging billionaires.

Granted, I'd like to see another housing bubble so I can sell my quarter-acre of Lawrence and leave, but I want to see the stock market in the toilet so my 401k has more shares in 25 years.

As for the effect of bankruptcies, I don't see what exact effect they have on stock value outside of the corporation that actually files. I suppose it could help or hinder the stock price depending on the circumstance. I imagine bankruptcy has a slightly beneficial effect on mortgages as you can keep your house and fold the late payments into the settlement, allowing you to keep your house under chapter 13.

Go after the politicians, or go home. They are the enemy.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 5 months ago

Unfortunately, in 25 years or so the economy will be in the toilet yet again so your "more shares" will be worth far less......just when you need your 401K to be doing well. Then you'll be singing a different tune, while younger people like you are now will be applauding your misfortune and telling you "you should have been better prepared".

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

Nah, we have a wide window for liquidating. If I catch it in time, I'll cash out. If not, I'll live poor until the next opportunity arises. I've done it before, I can do it again.

gudpoynt 3 years, 5 months ago

your distinction between politicians and tax dodging billionaires is cute.

Naive... but cute.

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

Probably less naive than you believe. I expect every CEO will do his best to make a company profitable. I also expect a few of them will try to buy a politician.

Finally, I expect all politicians to decline any such proposal and alert the FBI. Another meeting with a wire and we can put the crooks in jail.

Unfortunately, I don't see enough politicians doing what I expect them to.

As for Billionaires, it's none of my business what other people own.

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

The actual problem exists everywhere, so the protest should exist everywhere. Charles Koch is just a drive down a four lane highway from here. Think he's not part of the problem?

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

The actual problem exists everywhere, so the protest should exist everywhere. Charles Koch is just a drive down a four lane highway from here. Think he's not part of the problem?

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

Electric cars run on coal. I'm sure the Koch brothers can get into the coal business at will.

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

Or camp there. That uses no gas. I suppose you could also bike or take the bus.

chootspa 3 years, 5 months ago

Or camp there. That uses no gas. I suppose you could also bike or take the bus.

bearded_gnome 3 years, 5 months ago

problem's not i Wall Street.

try instead the Whitehouse, congress.

most of these, if they voted at all, voted for Obama, who took lots of $s from Wall Street and marinated his administration at the beginning with a lot of Goldman Sachs drones.

also, they're antiwealthy, but strangely don't care to protest George Soros, hmmm?

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 5 months ago

I have never understood this conservative obsession with George Soros.

Also, where does this "antiwealthy" idea come from? It's what some do with their wealth that frustrates people (obviously you're frustrated by what George Soros does with his wealth).

deec 3 years, 5 months ago

They are protesting against George Soros, since he is part of the 1%.

bearded_gnome 3 years, 5 months ago

no acorn, I'm identifying the rampant hypocrisy of the occuhippies RE George Soros.
and yes many of those at Wall Street express hatred for wealthy, calling them all criminals. the former national security advisor to jimmy carter, while associating himself with the occuhippies, said that the wealthy should be forced to have themselves tatooed. others associated with the Wall Street mob want all the wealthy to have their names published.

deec 3 years, 5 months ago

They also have homes, jobs and/or school in Lawrence. And as has been pointed out, the corruption is global, so it makes sense to occupy globally.

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

I can not confirm this at this time but......from my sources this was a strategy dicided upon after the first citations were issued. They have already been cited and will have their day in court to challenge the citations.They did not want to appear to be just a bunch of aggitators with multiple charges to defend and challenge. As it stands the issue is the Ordinace vs. The Bill of Rights. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. I do not see a jury or a judge for that matter, deciding to disregard the 1st Ammendment in favor of the city ordinance.

This is the right way to proceed, if they win in court it will be finally settled and future protestors will not be persecuted.

Armored_One 3 years, 5 months ago

The local ordinance will still have jurisdiction, given that they were 'occupying' an area that is not only vastly removed from anything even approaching the targets of these protests, but also the simple fact that that they also refused, after being given an open opportunity, to renew the permit that was issued.

If they were protesting the ordinance about being in the park after a set time, then they would have a much larger point, but given that they intentionally refused to abide by a simple law that even Fred Phelps obeys when he protests high school graduations, there is likely to be little sympathy. At least, I would hope there is little sympathy.

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

Where did you go to Law School? Federal law always trumps state and local

3 years, 5 months ago

The overwhelming factor remains that the protests are not against the ordinance they are fully in violation of. There are many laws that limit free speech and other parts of the Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court has decided cases similiar to this and precedence is on the side of the ordinance.

Just protest somewhere else. It's pretty simple.

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

Not always. Federal law defers to the states, laws it does not have. Rights under federal law do trump state and local law, but then you have to compare the "right" and "law" in question. The supreme court has ruled that speech can be limited regarding time and place. I posted the SCOTUS decisions for you alreay.

pylon25 3 years, 5 months ago

The First Amendment allows governments to impose reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on speech. It's quite likely that imposing and enforcing operating hours for a park fall well within those limits.

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

Harassment law is state action -- a restriction imposed by the government, acting as sovereign.Time, place, and manner regulations are permissible only if they are content-neutral. The purpose of imposing the ordinance goes to intent. If the government is found to have decided to use the ordinance to get rid of the protesters they have violated the rights under the first ammendment. There is no question in my mind why the citations were relied on to Harrass the demonstrators. The result is proof of that.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

Closing a public park at night is "content-neutral".

The only argument you might have is if you could show that the city doesn't generally enforce the ordinance, and only chose to do so in this case.

pylon25 3 years, 5 months ago

If the ordinance was enacted with a content-neutral purpose, enforcing it is not going to be a violation of the first amendment. If the content-neutral ordinance says the park is closed between 11pm and 6am, and the cops ticket people who are in the park between 11pm and 6am, it really makes little difference why the cops ticketed them. They were in violation of a constitutional ordinance; motive to ticket is really irrelevant. The only motive that matters is that of the Legislature (or city council) when the ordinance was enacted.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

What if the city generally doesn't enforce the ordinance, but then chooses to do so in this case?

pylon25 3 years, 5 months ago

That's a tougher question. IIRC, cities have a right, to some extent, to selectively enforce statutes. One of the problems the OWL protesters have is that they were also basically camping in the park (on top of "protesting"). In that instance, the city can easily say they don't enforce the ordinance when people walk through the park at night, as doing so would be kind of silly, but chose to enforce it when people literally took up camp after closing hours. So, I guess my response is, it depends, but the city probably has a pretty good counter-argument to a charge of truly discriminatory selective enforcement.

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

Goes to what was their intent you are correct and finally seeing the wisdom of the First Ammendment.

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

OK. Here is your big chance to be famous. What other group has the city allowed to camp in south park without the proper permits?

Go for it. Be famous today!

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

The First Amendment, I have argued, cannot tolerate laws that ban the exposure of certain "unacceptable" viewpoints on certain political issues -- such as religion, affirmative action, the Equal Rights Amendment, or Occupy Lawrence.

Free speech often exacts a high price. It has forced us to tolerate speech that urges revolution, that undermines the nation's war effort, or that advocates what some see as immoral and dangerous personal behavior. Much of this speech, like much bigoted speech in the workplace, is material that many think valueless, and that many wish didn't exist. Still, even such speech must be protected because the price the alternative exacts -- the power of the government to impose an orthodoxy of speech and thought, or to cleanse public discourse of ideas it finds dangerous and threatening -- is even higher.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 5 months ago

pylon25: "cities have a right, to some extent, to selectively enforce statutes."

That is very true! In my home town one of the city's laws was, in the past at least, VERY clear in stating one of the sheriff's duties.

He was given the responsibility of informing any Black person who was found to be within the city limits that he must exit the town before sundown, or he would be arrested and kept in jail for at least overnight.

But as far as anyone knew, that had never been done.

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

"Government may not grant the use of a forum to people whose views it finds acceptable, but deny use to those wishing to express less favored or more controversial views."

Parks and Recreation first issued the permit and then denied them when they decided they didn't like the sounds of what was being said. It is clear that the future denials for permits were used to get rid of te demonstrators. They then take the ordinance and harrass the demonstrators.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 5 months ago

Again...that's your personal opinion and, as such, does not make it fact.

Issuing a permit once does not require automatic renewal of that permit ad infinitum. Nor does getting a time-limited permit mean that the permit holder can, once the permit expires, act as though the permit was permanent.

The protesters can still protest in the park from 6 AM to 11 PM. They simply can't stay there longer than that or camp there. That does not restrict their free speech. It simply says they can't do their "free speeching" IN the park between 11 PM and 6 AM. Heck...they could stand on the sidewalk right in front of their "park space" and protest all they want between 11 PM and 6 AM.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 5 months ago

But what you personally think is not "proof" of anything. It's just your personal opinion.

I know homeless people who have gotten citations for trying to sleep in the park overnight, so it's not like citations were never issued before the protests started. Plus the ordinance has existed for years, not passed in the last week in response to the protest.

This being the case, it's going to be hard to argue effectively that the ordinance was used to get rid of protesters rather than to remove people who were trying to spend the night in the park without a permit in violation of a long-standing, long-enforced ordinance.

My personal opinion? This simply is not an issue the protesters should be focusing on.

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

"The First Amendment allows governments to impose reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on speech."

I'd like to see the proof of that. The first amendment does not in any way define or specify the legality of time and place limitations. I think that time and place rules are in deference to state's right, privacy and equal protection.

Some chaser of ambulii here probably knows what makes the time and date restrictions legal. Listen to them if you want a better answer.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 5 months ago

Actually, the First Amendment only says the following about speech: "The amendment prohibits the making of any law...abridging the freedom of speech..."

Like it or not, a long-standing ordinance against camping in city parks or not being in the parks between 11:30 PM and 6 AM is NOT a law abridging the freedom of speech. Like it or not, if those restrictions are legal when there is no protest going on, they are legal when there is a protest going on.

(You don't really think the Founding Fathers intended people to be able to say anything they wanted anywhere and at any time they wanted, do you? Or perhaps you see no value to libel and slander laws? Private property? Inciting to violence? Minor stuff like that?)

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

I'm pretty clear that I believe the ordinance is legal. I posted Kansas Law, Lawrence ordinances and SCOTUS cases to back up my opinion (which is the same as yours... mostly).

I was only saying the actual first amendment doesn't address such limitations as "when or where" anywhere in the text.

Sunny Parker 3 years, 5 months ago

They don't even know what they were protesting! They broke the law and need to be prosecuted!

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

Before you usurp your privledges to be judge, jury, and executioner, you may want to wait and see how the court case is ended. No one has broken a law until they are convicted.

fu7il3 3 years, 5 months ago

You can certainly break the law without being convicted. If you sped today and didn't get caught, you still broke the law.

gl0ck0wn3r 3 years, 5 months ago

lulz on people using words that make no sense in the context of a sentence. So... where did you get your law degree?

unkld 3 years, 5 months ago

That says it all. I am so tired of people using "Free Speech" as a reason to break the law. I worry about the common sense of people today. You have every right to state your opinion and say how you feel, BUT, you do not have the right to break laws in doing so.

meggers 3 years, 5 months ago

It's called civil disobedience and it has been instrumental in gaining our society many of the freedoms we enjoy today. When was the last time you placed yourself at risk of arrest for standing up for something you believe in?

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

Are all of you bloggers at work doing this on company time?

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

No I took a vacation day today. Paid and earned from my JOB. I guess the argument that all supporters of the demonstrators are a bunch of lazy shiftless malcontent fleabaggers does not wash. Are you at work blogging instead of giving an honest days work to your employer? If you are then you are part of the problem.

gl0ck0wn3r 3 years, 5 months ago

Awesomely lame. It's rather amusing to see you ask this when you support a cause that (in theory) supports the worker and not management.

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

It is not okay to break the law anytime. These demonstrators I argue have broken no laws and are challenging one based on the fundamental rights that protects them to do so. Governmental interference of those rights are strictly prohibited by the 1st Amendment and applied to state and local government by the 14th Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The Due Process Clause prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without certain steps being taken to ensure fairness. This clause has been used to make most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states and local governments. Its Equal Protection Clause requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within its jurisdiction. This includes our friends in the park.

pylon25 3 years, 5 months ago

You have little/no idea what you are talking about.

CatnRat 3 years, 5 months ago

Thank you for that, Waynelsworld. Some of you other people need to open your minds. Inform yourselves as to what the corporate overlords are up to, as in their greed that is pulling us all down. Love to you all. Cat.

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

Would it also include the phelps clan standing at the graveside with their dumb signs?

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 5 months ago

"Dumb signs"? They are brilliant Day-Glo signs that get kids to ask meaningful questions like, "Mommy, what does (XXX) mean?"

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

Any examples where they have been cited for obscenity (if by XXX you mean some obscene word)?

Armored_One 3 years, 5 months ago

Free speech has been restricted in a number of different directions for many very logical and wise reasons.

At what point, if you are going to use the First Amendment as a shield and blanket to warm your toes, does filling a street that is in no legal way related to government with thousands of people petitioning the government for a redress of grievances?

You can't have it both ways, but it truthfully wouldn't suprise me if you are one of those people that elects to ignore a rule or law when it's not handy to your purposes, but the instant it becomes useful, you browbeat people with it.

The Constitution, as a whole, is not some mountain of granite, impervious to the elements that surround it. It's a living document, capable of filling multiple roles for multiple reasons, but at no time was it ever intended to be rolled up and used to scold those you don't like as if it was the Wall Street Journal. Yeah, I know, the pun is bad, but still a bit funny.

Stop abusing the Constitution and use it the way the Founding Fathers meant it to be used. As a lighthouse on a dark and rocky sea, not as a torch to chase The Monster back to the castle so you can burn it alive inside. You are a sad little man, with little to no power, but you have this kernel stuck in your teeth and instead of prying it out and moving on, you gnash your teeth in futility, trying desperately to dislodge it. Sadly, all you manage is biting your tongue.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

Freedom of speech was intended for more than the narrow ways that you present, in my view.

We don't have to specifically write to our congressman for our political speech to be protected, and valuable.

Kendall Simmons 3 years, 5 months ago

Do you truly not grasp that the First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech..."?????

Never mind that the City of Lawrence is not Congress. The fact is that the City of Lawrence did NOT pass an ordinance (years ago, by the way) to abridge the freedom of speech. (Nor does this ordinance actually abridge anyone's freedom of speech.)

Armored_One 3 years, 5 months ago

Then why is there an established ordinance requiring a permit to protest that Fred Phelps and company, many of which are well trained lawyers, doesn't contest?

You are a blasted fool if you think that the First Amendment is blanket permission to do whatever you want as long as you label it a 'protest'. Occupy the emergency room because you hate doctor bills. Occupy the fire department because you decry the cost of a new fire engine.

Next time you have a thought, do us all a favor and just let it go.

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

It seems to me that the only ones breaking the law are those that have abused their power and authority to order the police to take action when they knew darn good and well that they were doing so. They were just hoping it would all go away. Not on my watch. They will be called out in the forum of public opinion, the courts, and hopefully the ballot box.

Vaildini 3 years, 5 months ago

you teach them buddy. You are making a huge difference. we are behind you.

CatnRat 3 years, 5 months ago

We advocate for Occupy Lawrence and encourage the broader community to do the same. Start a conversation. Voice an opinion. Be heard. You are the 99%!!!

Vaildini 3 years, 5 months ago

we are the 99%. GET OUT YOUR SLEEPING BAGS lAWRENCE WE WILL SHOW THEM. wHEN WE ARE DONE SLEEPING IN THE PARK THEY WILL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

ElDavido 3 years, 5 months ago

99% of what? all the idiots? and WHAT will be done after you sleep? someone else to come pick up your trash?

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

At least one job saved by the Occupy Lawrence demonstrators. That is one more than the current government has produced or the corporate greed that has led to so many out of work and losing their American dream.

pace 3 years, 5 months ago

I don't consider the majority of Americans to be idiots, I agree that a large amount of the population are litter bugs. I am glad the OWS protesters, I have seen, in New York and here aren't litter bugs. I know it must comfort you to denigrate people you fear or don't identify with. I use to ignore nonsense from teas but they say it, then they believe it. A little reality check is good. Most of the accusations of dirty protesters are just lies. The teas hang on any incident that is the exception as proof their lies are true. Neither side of the issue addresses the economic issues.

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

I am 3.3333333333333333333333333333333e-7% drifting around the other 2999999.99999999666666666666667%. I refuse to be one of your sheep even if we think the same thing.

Boston_Corbett 3 years, 5 months ago

I knew we had one of them lurking somewhere.

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

Shouldn't your name be "blue73triumph" instead?

:-)

Haiku_Cuckoo 3 years, 5 months ago

Kudos to both the protesters and the police for showing how amicable these situations can be. While other cities contend with pepper spray and pooping on sidewalks, the Lawrence people demonstrate how to work together. You guys have my support.

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

The First Amendment, I have argued, cannot tolerate laws that ban the exposure of certain "unacceptable" viewpoints on certain political issues -- such as religion, affirmative action, the Equal Rights Amendment, or Occupy Lawrence.

Free speech often exacts a high price. It has forced us to tolerate speech that urges revolution, that undermines the nation's war effort, or that advocates what some see as immoral and dangerous personal behavior. Much of this speech, like much bigoted speech in the workplace, is material that many think valueless, and that many wish didn't exist. Still, even such speech must be protected because the price the alternative exacts -- the power of the government to impose an orthodoxy of speech and thought, or to cleanse public discourse of ideas it finds dangerous and threatening -- is even higher.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

There have been many assaults, DUI incidents, rapes, etc. due to the large numbers of drunk college students wandering around downtown in the early morning hours.

Do you support earlier closing times for bars/nightclubs in order to make downtown more safe?

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

"which is why the park is closed at night, it's not safe"

If the reason for closing the park is because it's not safe for it to be open, based on a few isolated incidents there, then there's even more reason for bars/nightclubs to have earlier closing times, based on the vastly greater number of incidents I mentioned.

It's not a matter of "blame".

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

But it's nice to know that you "could care less" about the people you claim the laws are there to protect.

bearded_gnome 3 years, 5 months ago

and, oddly reminds one of Merrill in repeating himself in his posting. cut-and-paste coming soon?

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

The right to freedoms under the 1st Amendment do not shut down from 11-6.

3 years, 5 months ago

The park is closed at that time, not your rights and freedom.

The law of when the park is closed was there first, was known to exist from the beginning, so just protest somewhere else. It's pretty simple.

William McCauley 3 years, 5 months ago

(quote)The law of when the park is closed was there first, was known to exist from the beginning (quote)

Really? You mean like in Aug. 21st 1863 when all those men were gunned down and killed in the park.... WHERE they were camped out to protect the citizens of this town and to defend the freedoms some poster are talking about. I don't recall this park closing law being voted on by the people, no it is some law made up by a handful of people and forced on us without any say in the matter.

Some say the park is not safe after dark, as a free American that is a risk I maybe willing to accept while using the public space between 11-6, I don't need a law to keep me safe, that is what firearms are for and why we have the right to carry firearms, stand up, be heard and stop letting civic leaders push you around and take their abuse of power in all things.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 5 months ago

Wow. As a free American carrying a gun, are you also willing to take the risk of driving the wrong way on the Interstate?

waynelsworld 3 years, 5 months ago

Then I guess they need to build a fence and put a lock on the gate.

gl0ck0wn3r 3 years, 5 months ago

Fascinating. So you are arguing that a space must have a fence and a lock to indicate it is closed? Would you similarly argue that someone who leaves their door unlocked should not complain if their belongings are appropriated because they inadequately protected their property? I assume with your law degree and vast legal information that you can give a reasoned argument to this question.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 5 months ago

"build a fence and put a lock on the gate."

They used to do that at Wells Overlook.

But it was very easy to crawl under the gate, and leaving a car at the entrance made it quite obvious that there was a trespasser inside.

Ron Holzwarth 3 years, 5 months ago

I remember! There was even a song and video about it! Here it is:

'The Streak' - performed by Ray Stevens

fancy80 3 years, 5 months ago

Anyone watching the city commissioner meeting? Should have let them stay in the park. What a goofball. Goofball II is speaking now. Quite comical.

bearded_gnome 3 years, 5 months ago

Some of you other people need to open your minds. Inform yourselves as to what the corporate overlords are up to, as in their greed that is pulling us all down. Love to you all. Cat.

---"love to you all" unless you happen to be wealthy, or one of the dreadfully eeeeevilll "corporate overlords!"

lol

these "corporate overlords" are the ones who actually employ people and they do pay a lot of taxes unless they're politically connected to Mr. Obama like the chairman of GE. or, they're connected and have Solyndra or Sunpower or build electric cars in Finland plus "bundled" a heckuva lotta money for Obama.

these Occuhippie hypocrites protest the Koch brothers for using their resources to express themselves politically, while the Occuhippies use their own resources to express themselves politically!"
go figger.

bearded_gnome 3 years, 5 months ago

I am glad this ended peacefully.

the Wall Street bunch declared their "solidarity" with the New York "day of rage against the cops" yet they claim to be in "solidarity" with the Policemen's union. again, go figger.


nobody's right to free speech was abridged by enforcement of the park's time restrictions. in fact, this had nothing to do with free speech at all. instead the Occuhippies in our South Park wanted to break the law and take this to court. they wanted to be arrested. too bad so sad, they didn't get arrested. will we see them hurling fake blood too?

hiphopsux 3 years, 5 months ago

All I hear here is hate and name calling. No wonder we can't get anything done in congress (from either side) when it is nothing but screw you/no screw you politics and no listening or compromising.

pepper_bar 3 years, 5 months ago

Do the Occupy Lawrence people actually do anything besides camp illegally? Is their entire skill set being used to just sit there and occupy?

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

They are just kids and a few others with nothing better to do. I'm sure they are somewhat smart. They are "occupying" in protest against corporations because they voted for the current Problem Of The United States (aka POTUS), so they can't hardly protest against him.

Besides all that, next time it might be you out there wasting your time, so you should observe their rights, lest your be taken away. You don't have to agree with them, but you should treat them the way you would want to be treated if you thought you had something important to say.

EastCoaster 3 years, 5 months ago

An Occupy group asking for permission to occupy? I think it is time for these guys to give up in Lawrence and head to NYC, LA, or Dallas, to learn from the actual Occupy people. Asking the city to help them find a place to occupy? I don't mean to break Godwin's Law but what if the German's had asked France's permission to occupy Paris in WWII? These guys need to learn how it's done. Occupy Lawrence? Let's change it's name to "Can we Stay Pretty Please?"

It is laughable that the Mayor seems to know more about this groups intended mission than they do. When he stated that their issue was becoming about the use of public parks after close rather than their stated goals it shows he at least has a better grip on the pulse of the actual movement.

In other cities they have the same issues about closing after hours. But in other cities they have NUMBERS and they don't care about being arrested and they show up the very next day in the same parks. In Dallas they are camping on the doorsteps of City Hall, they get removed but go right back! That's how it is done. Civil disobedience means just that. Imagine if Gandhi had asked the British for permission to do what he did?

Haiku_Cuckoo 3 years, 5 months ago

The Lawrence protesters are smart to work with the authorities and use it to their advantage. I guarantee they will get better results than the protesters in other cities. What have the OWS people in NYC accomplished so far? Have the Wall Street execs surrendered their bonuses yet? If the Occupy groups in other cities had half as much sense as the Lawrence group they would be making positive headlines rather than getting media attention for pooping on sidewalks (NYC) and exposing themselves to little kids (Seattle). Protesters in other cities are losing local support, meanwhile the Lawrence protesters are gaining it.

cozborn 3 years, 5 months ago

you were not the first not break that law!!!

Flap Doodle 3 years, 5 months ago

Isn't there a landfill out in the county that could be occupied?

gl0ck0wn3r 3 years, 5 months ago

How about Hilda's front yard. She is a supporter.

Amy Heeter 3 years, 5 months ago

If you want to defy "the man", I don't this you should ask permission.

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

LOL. So true. Ironically, in 30 years they will be "the man". Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Mixolydian 3 years, 5 months ago

Too funny. This is the story that just keeps on giving. #occupyreality

Fred Whitehead Jr. 3 years, 5 months ago

How much room is left in the county jail. I think this would be a great place for these law-breakers to set up their tents and sit on their butts in the middle of the commons area of the cell-blocks.

Fred Whitehead Jr. 3 years, 5 months ago

How much room is left in the county jail. I think this would be a great place for these law-breakers to set up their tents and sit on their butts in the middle of the commons area of the cell-blocks.

Vaildini 3 years, 5 months ago

We are the 99%. we will sleep while others work. We will camp while others go about there day and don't know how our camping helps. hahahahahaha this is awesome.

Boston_Corbett 3 years, 5 months ago

Last night's city commission meeting certainly turned bizarre with a couple of the protestors. That is not a protest group. It is more of a mental illness gathering. A more articulate member of their group insisted everyone had "hearts of gold" (as the others swore at and came close to threatening the commissioners.)

Last time I checked, Citibank management has little to do with Cromwell/Amyx/Carter/Schumm/Dever.

Which does seem to make the local issue appear more about camping overnight in a park than any other issue. And similar park ordinances have been found for years to not violate the first amendment. If they want to make a statement through overnight camping, approach one of the downtown churches. That is private property.

bearded_gnome 3 years, 5 months ago

lol (mental illness gathering).

Last time I checked, Citibank management has little to do with Cromwell/Amyx/Carter/Schumm/Dever.

---but BC, it has the word "city" in it after all.

oldbaldguy 3 years, 5 months ago

We are idiots. Read the book Boomerang. I just started it, very funny and very thought provoking about what caused all this mess.

pepper_bar 3 years, 5 months ago

Meanwhile, police shut down the Occupy Atlanta campsite last night. Occupy Oakland participants created riot conditions and threw paint at riot police. St Paul's Cathedral has grown tired of Occupy London and asked them to leave. Occupy Baltimore has been put on notice that the cops will close them down soon.

deec 3 years, 5 months ago

The riot conditions were created by the 500 police officers deployed to clear the camp, who used tear gas, bean bags and rubber bullets to disperse the occupiers.

Armored_One 3 years, 5 months ago

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess you have never been in a 2 or more on 1 fight. Don't have enough of a read on you to figure out if you have ever scuffed your knuckles at all, but nothing's perfect.

Having been in fights where the average was much worse than 2 on 1, I can't fault the police in the least little bit.

The police on duty during the Watts riots walked away from their duty posts at several locations, and look what the outcome of that little display of temper ended up causing. I say two thumbs up for the cops, plus a warm cup of coffee and a sandwich for doing their jobs perfectly.

Protect and serve. Sometimes it's not just the populace at large that deserves to be protected, but the protestors as well. Not from the police, but from the mob the individual protestors formed.

Looks at the damage caused in various cities after sporting championships or even the idiocy that followed the G-n-R/Metallica concert in Canada back in the day. Heck, even Woodstock '99 wasn't immune to mob mentality.

This headed off a problem before it started.

And tear gas, bean bags and rubber bullets beats live ammunition hands down.

jafs 3 years, 5 months ago

Do you think that police never abuse the power and force they have?

Armored_One 3 years, 5 months ago

Never once said that abuse of power has never occured, so I am not really sure why you are asking that question.

I, however, do not think that this was anything approaching an abuse of power. I think it was quite restrained, all things being considered.

I've been exposed to all the above listed items, as well as live ammunition. Having been shot with a bean bag, a rubber bullet and a live round, the first two hurt like hell, but a death is a hell of a lot less likely with suppression gear than with ammunition.

Flap Doodle 3 years, 5 months ago

B_C knocks it out of the park. "That is not a protest group. It is more of a mental illness gathering..." (from a source)

gudpoynt 3 years, 5 months ago

Given the amount of attention they have received for camping in the park, compared with the presumed lack thereof they would receive from camping or protesting anywhere else, I think it is in the protesters' best interest to try and continue their occupation in the park.

Think about it. They hit the nail on the head as far as finding a place that would garner the most possible attention for their cause. Exposure is everything to a protest, just as important as their message. (Indeed, arguably moreso, when you consider how OWS has received so much media attention while remaining fairly nebulous in their definitive message and goals).

Nobody, not even the South Park campers, are arguing the validity of the ordinance, nor the actions by law enforcement in enforcing it.

What I would be interested to see is why the permit to continue the protest has not been renewed on a daily basis. Did they not apply for another one? If not, then why? if so, and were denied, then why?

If a permit is the legal way to camp overnight in the park, then why aren't permits being issues?

Is there an ordinance that disallows issuance of multiple permits for a similar use within a given period of time? Is there a "don't bogart the park" ordinance? What gives?

Perhaps the protest organizers should investigate all the reasons why an overnight park permit would be denied, and then carefully craft their next application to avoid any of those reasons.

Then, designate a representative to be responsible for issuing the permit request on a daily basis.

If they still get denied after that, then they could make a discrimination argument.

The 3rd most important thing to a protest movement, behind message and exposure, is persistence.

gudpoynt 3 years, 5 months ago

And to all the regular naysayers who reiterate that the protest is just a waste of time....

How much press coverage have you received for your thousands upon thousands of inane opinions posted on this site? I'm guessing approximately zero.

And here these protesters have received numerous news articles recognizing them and their cause in just a few weeks... all by simply "wasting time".

Who's wasting time again? Please explain in 3,000 inane posts or less.

Flap Doodle 3 years, 5 months ago

They've identified themselves as laughing stocks to rival the KU football team. That's a lot to accomplish in a short time.

nekansan 3 years, 5 months ago

http://kansascityjellystone.com/

http://www.nwk.usace.army.mil/cl/Camping.cfm

Plenty of places to camp. Don't see why it should be the city's responsibility to provide help locating a camp site. And the best I can tell the city has been quite accommodating of their use of any and all public space during normal hours to get their message across, just not as a place to live.

fastwalker 3 years, 5 months ago

The headline encapsulates the stupidity of the protesters. Cromwell hit the nail on the head (for once). If you can't decide what the heck you're doing as a "movement" , ask the city where you can go to obstruct park-goers, dog-walkers, joggers, and whoever else might want to use the park they're paying taxes to maintain. On the flipside, the local occupy-sleepingbaggers are a detrimental example to the broader "movement" . . .

cozborn 3 years, 5 months ago

I am the π percent, We believe haters are always gonna hate, and that the cake is a lie. We believe you have been successfully infiltrated for the lulz and provocateurs have been trolling you hard,

Richard Heckler 3 years, 5 months ago

Yes the young bright minds displayed a bit of wisdom by leaving as they were asked rather than waste their time and money on the law enforcement system. Excellent choice. Hats off for taking the non violent approach.

I do believe primarily locating to one spot reduces their effectiveness after the initial impact. There are a few other quite strategic locations that they could entertain while still remaining within the law and of course within their right to do so.

Hmmmmmmmmmm

bearded_gnome 3 years, 5 months ago

help put Merrill in context ... one of Merrill's best posts, was RE women complaining about a nude man seen through the window of his home. note Merrill's attitude:

"merrill (anonymous) says…

These women were feeling depressed that the man would not invite them in.

Most windows do not allow vision with clarity unless one puts some effort into the viewing.

Naked people in their own homes goes on daily ..... this is not new.

After all we are born naked.

December 19, 2009 at 9:33 a.m."

Godot 3 years, 5 months ago

The Fawkers have to abide by the same rules the rest of us do? Fawke, yeah!

bearded_gnome 3 years, 5 months ago

3 December 2005 at 4:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Anonymous

merrill (Anonymous) says…

It seems like the neighborhood has learned to live with the situation[location of Naughty but Nice across from Mass st. Dillans]. So don't make them move. Business will no doubt improve with the new attention…kids will become aware. That part of Mass is so retail. How many gas stations sell rubbers aka Condums? I've never checked these places out but I am becoming evermore curious.

bearded_gnome 3 years, 5 months ago

yes, fitting justice: I've been cut-and-pasting Merrill's own comments above.

here's a summary of some of his other wacky ideas, makes you wonder what he means by "earthy!"

he endorses and promotes naked gardening ; Merrill also endorses naked biking; he wants laws calling for mandatory rolling blackouts to -force- energy conservation; he wants more people residing in caves to be nice to the planet; he believes that broken streets are good because they serve as passive traffic calming devices; he has called for closure of the lawrence airport since only fat cats fly in and out of there; he calls for building more roundabouts with money that otherwise could fix streets in bad shape; Merrill blames Bush and Cheney for all our national ills; etc.

"earthy" huh.

Grump 3 years, 5 months ago

Portland, "Where young people go to retire."

Liberty275 3 years, 5 months ago

You'd think them being 99% and all, some business manager that agrees with them would volunteer his store's parking lot for protesting. Try Hobby Lobby, they've had lots of empty space in their parking lot since Michaels came to town.

Flap Doodle 3 years, 5 months ago

The usual suspects seem to have moved on from defending the occupy jazz. What will be their next cause-of-the-day? Stay tuned to this award-winning website to find out.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.