Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

csziggy

(34,189 posts)
9. He wasn't arrested for BURNING the Qurans
Mon Sep 16, 2013, 09:19 AM
Sep 2013

Jones was arrested for "unlawful conveyance of fuel" and for "unlawful open-carry of a firearm".

Mulberry residents had already made their displeasure with his planned activities known. He had been denied a permit to have his demonstration of intolerance in a public park but had announced that he planned to do it with the required permit.

While I usually don't agree with Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd, on this case I think he did a good job. He avoided first amendment issues but stopped Jones' offensive behavior.

From the OP linked article:

Sheriff Judd stated:
“He then told our detectives that he was going to come to the park without a permit and that he was going to burn the Qurans on the park property. We explained clearly to him that that was a violation of law. [...]We clearly told him, if you come to Polk County and violate the law, you will go to jail and that’s the way it is.”

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

You should be able to burn a flag, a book, an effigy, et cetera DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #1
Yes, but... PowerToThePeople Sep 2013 #2
That fool can burn any of the things I cited as long as he's not creating a fire hazard./nt DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #7
I agree. There is more than one issue here. PowerToThePeople Sep 2013 #11
America gets to allow disrespect to America as a form of protest, because that's inward. MH1 Sep 2013 #3
It's a slippery slope to start prohibiting speech because somebody's feelings might be hurt./nt DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #13
Yes, and it's a slippery slope to start prohibiting speech because someone might be PHYSICALLY hurt. MH1 Sep 2013 #21
There has to be a imminent and immediate threat. DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #23
The crux of your post assumes that Mulims and Americans are mutally exclusive groups. Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #14
That's an interesting point. MH1 Sep 2013 #28
Sorry, but your point of view is that point of view which allows anti gay laws.... Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #31
No that's not my point of view, and I'm sorry I bothered with you. MH1 Sep 2013 #39
If the non-violent action of another compells you to take violent action against them... prefunk Sep 2013 #19
I'm not the one who's compelled, but I might be the victim of the violent action MH1 Sep 2013 #22
I was using a rhetorical "you", not talking about you yourself. prefunk Sep 2013 #24
And I was using the rhetorical "I" MH1 Sep 2013 #30
I really have no idea what you are talking about. prefunk Sep 2013 #35
Violence is not an acceptable response to non-violence. Where do I say otherwise? MH1 Sep 2013 #36
I fail to see how (in this country, at least) resorting to violence over the burning of a book prefunk Sep 2013 #40
People who take violent action are wholly resposible for their own violence. Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #25
I just f*cking replied to you. Sheesh. MH1 Sep 2013 #29
And that as I said, explains your entire self to me. Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #33
Of course disrespecting other people is a horrible way to live one's life. DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #27
There were a couple issues that Jones was flirting with... Not Me Sep 2013 #4
He's not being charged with book burning,which sufrommich Sep 2013 #5
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2013 #6
He wasn't arrested for a tail light maddezmom Sep 2013 #12
Seriously? Its against the law to drive a vehicle soaked sufrommich Sep 2013 #15
It would be akin DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2013 #18
Imagine women's-rights-activists torching a truckload of bras. DetlefK Sep 2013 #8
He wasn't arrested for BURNING the Qurans csziggy Sep 2013 #9
Yes, so is stupid. pintobean Sep 2013 #10
So he was arrested for creating a hazard, not for book burning? gollygee Sep 2013 #16
Book burning is protected, but public fire hazards are not. Jones was not arrested for Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #17
Are you asking me about the law, LWolf Sep 2013 #20
So dance is never expression to be protected because it is not verbal? Visual arts? Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #26
There are unlimited ways to express one's self. LWolf Sep 2013 #41
Free speech means even if I don't like it it goes. hobbit709 Sep 2013 #32
book burning is protected; driving around with kerosene-soaked books is not. charlie and algernon Sep 2013 #34
Yes, but the dumb ass pastor had flaaamble materials he was transporting gopiscrap Sep 2013 #37
a speech element doesn't make otherwise criminal behavior legal nt geek tragedy Sep 2013 #38
Laws governing burning and similar hazards are common struggle4progress Sep 2013 #42
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Question for DU: If flag ...»Reply #9