Hacker News Reader

Comment by joshstrange | Hacker News Reader

I honestly didn't think you could be arrested for protesting like this without at least a warning and even then if only if it turned violent...

View on HN

You can be arrested for pretty much no reason.

You can be "briefly" (up to a day, and in some places up to the whole weekend if you are processed on Friday night) detained for pretty much any reason other than no reason.

One time, I was detained for three hours on suspicion of DUI because I was on my front porch with my car keys in my pocket... and not a drop of alcohol or drugs in my system, execept I was woozy from sleep deprivation.

Eventually they had me pee in a cup and then let me go. Since we talked IT with the medical person that was there, and he got a few tips out of me, I billed the PD for time at my consulting rate, and to my surprise six months later they paid the bill.

You can bill them? Surely you have to inform them beforehand that any further conversation about IT will be considered as a paid consultation, i.e. make a verbal agreement.

I did, the guy probably thought I was kidding :)

From what I've read, there had been plenty of warnings all day.

>The group was on East 17th Street about halfway down the block when police took a stand and ordered protesters to get on the sidewalk. Before the march, while the group was in Union Square, police handed out flyers and used loudspeakers to warn protesters that they would be arrested if they didn't stay on the sidewalk.

http://7online.com/news/more-than-140-protesters-arrested-in...

Here is the flyer that they were handing out: https://twitter.com/Azi/status/593536703324905473/photo/1

I mean, look at it that other way. People should not be able to openly obstruct traffic. If I were to go run out in the middle of Broadway and block traffic, I would probably be arrested. Just because someone is "protesting" doesn't give them free reign to violate the laws.

This is why public marches/protests require a permit. These guys did not have a permit to do so. See: http://www.nyclu.org/content/know-your-rights-demonstrating-...

> You may be able to march in a public street (as opposed to on a sidewalk) in some circumstances. To march in a street, you must obtain a permit from the Police Department. If you expect to have fewer than 1,000 people in your march, you can apply for a permit at the precinct in which the march will originate. If you expect 1,000 people or more or you prefer to use mail, send your application to: NYPD Investigation Review Section, 300 Gold St., Room 305, Brooklyn 11201. You can download a permit application from the front of the NYPD’s website

> From what I've read, there had been plenty of warnings all day.

That doesn't mean that e.g. someone who had just joined the protest was aware of that warning.

Unlikely. NYPD had been blasting the audio warning from LRAD trucks that people protesters in the streets would be arrested from the beginning of the rally all the way through the arrests.

It's unlikely that a protester missed one of the many forms of warnings (flyers, LRAD, verbal, etc) used in this case.

See:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ996JYzFME

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2SpC9PAuHb8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZoEBJDgHQU <-- you can hear the LRAD warnings in the background of this video during the arrests.

To give some context, in Washington, DC, it's explicitly legal to march in the streets without a permit, regardless of the amount of people.

The right to peaceable assembly in the First Amendment of the Constitution SHOULD mean that the government cannot require a permit to do so (otherwise, it wouldn't be a RIGHT).

If a large number of people want to get from point A to point B, even on foot, an accommodation of normal traffic laws should be made to allow that.

Why the hell are police arresting peaceful protestors?

Preach. There is effectively no right to assemble.

I agree, it's not a right if you have to ask permission first. OTOH I can see why cities require it because as another comment pointed out a random guy could sit/stand in the middle of the street and call it a protest but I still feel there are better ways to address that other than requiring a permit. A permit requires a level of planning that is not needed for a lot of these protests that get organised over social media and the like.

If I'm reading what you're saying correctly, this is EXACTLY how it works.

The protesters were allowed to peacefully assemble in Union Square. The protesters were allowed to peacefully march on the sidewalk to anywhere they wanted to go in the city.

What the protesters were NOT allowed to do is obstruct traffic and walk in the middle of the street without a permit. The people that were arrested were the ones that were walking on the streets and blocking traffic.

You only need a permit if you intend to march on the streets. It's the same as you or I needing a permit to host a parade through Midtown.

Yeah, it's pretty bizarre. Protesters are often arrested, held for 12 hours or so, then released without charges. Another thing I don't think the author mentioned is they often make you sign a form certifying your belongings are OK before giving you your belongings, so if you piss off a cop they can, for example, smash your smartphone and get away with it.

Well you could refuse to sign that form -- though they'll probably find some excuse to hold you for an extra 6 hours.

It's intimidation, imho. Classic scare tactics, scare off those who can be scared off - and no one cares about those who have nothing to lose (i.e. poor black people).

Fuck you, NYPD.

I was curious about this. I guess the protesters were blocking traffic? Maybe the people following in the back didn't realize what the people in the front had done in terms of blocking off the street. The followers then were among the arrested.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com