1st Amendment vs. Bumper Sticker "FU Trump and FU You for Voting for Him"

[mdk]

No, it's NOT a free speech issue. I'm sick and damned tired of hearing people shout, "First Amendment!" to try to justify doing whatever they want, whenever they want, with no recognition of the rights of other people and demanding that there be no consequences whatsoever.

This is why communities have disorderly conduct laws: to delineate the point where your "freedom of speech" starts infringing on everyone else's freedoms.

Be sick and tired of it all you wish, but that doesn't change the fact that having a swear on your truck isn't aganist the law. It's tacky and vulgar, but shouldn't be aganist the law in the my opinion. Also, you're freedom isn't being infringed upon b/c you read curse words in public. Truck Nutz are crass as well. Should they be made illegal as well?

In South Carolina you will get pulled over for them. I forgot about those things. Lol

Swears, Calvin peeing on whatever, the "Shocker" decal, and, Truck Nutz on cars are all super trashy to me.

 

[jknowgood]

No, it's NOT a free speech issue. I'm sick and damned tired of hearing people shout, "First Amendment!" to try to justify doing whatever they want, whenever they want, with no recognition of the rights of other people and demanding that there be no consequences whatsoever.

This is why communities have disorderly conduct laws: to delineate the point where your "freedom of speech" starts infringing on everyone else's freedoms.

Be sick and tired of it all you wish, but that doesn't change the fact that having a swear on your truck isn't aganist the law. It's tacky and vulgar, but shouldn't be aganist the law in the my opinion. Also, you're freedom isn't being infringed upon b/c you read curse words in public. Truck Nutz are crass as well. Should they be made illegal as well?

In South Carolina you will get pulled over for them. I forgot about those things. Lol

Swears, Calvin peeing on whatever, the "Shocker" decal, and, Truck Nutz on cars are all super trashy to me.

Yes, but the first time I saw the nutz on the back of a truck. I busted out laughing. I used to have a sticker that had a squirrel standing and he had a big set. On the bottom it said hello ladies. Lol, my mom borrowed my car and made me take it off. Before she would drive it.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Be sick and tired of it all you wish, but that doesn't change the fact that having a swear on your truck isn't aganist the law. It's tacky and vulgar, but shouldn't be aganist the law in the my opinion

It is, and it isn't. A couple more SC picks could bring common sense back to the Supreme Court. Vulgarity is regulated by COMMUNITY STANDARDS. hopefully the vulgar left will be forced back under their rock soon enough.

 

[harmonica]

if society keeps going down the moral ladder, it will reach bottom
there has to be standards or no one will be civilized...the community will be ''out of control''/people can do whatever they want [ run naked down the streets---have sex in the streets---jerk off in front of kids--yell obscenities at kids--etc ]

I was in the store and bank with my kids and some ''libs''[ blacks ] were using the F word constantly

but if I used the N word in front of them or their kids--OMG !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! they would've wanted me dead
can't use the N word but you can use the F word?? no--unfair, wrong, etc

 

[Marion Morrison]

It's tacky and uncouth.

However, if that's the way they want to roll, more power to them.

They have every right to sport that bumper sticker and reap whatever they sow with it.

 

[harmonica]

maybe someone said it already, but some states reject certain vanity license plates
Banned Arizona license plates: 100 rejected plates
License plates rejected by the Texas DMV in early 2017

freedom of speech is curtailed in many ways
I thought some time ago they rejected a license plate that said JAP SAP--some thing like that--but it was only the owners' initials

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, it's NOT a free speech issue. I'm sick and damned tired of hearing people shout, "First Amendment!" to try to justify doing whatever they want, whenever they want, with no recognition of the rights of other people and demanding that there be no consequences whatsoever.

This is why communities have disorderly conduct laws: to delineate the point where your "freedom of speech" starts infringing on everyone else's freedoms.

Be sick and tired of it all you wish, but that doesn't change the fact that having a swear on your truck isn't aganist the law. It's tacky and vulgar, but shouldn't be aganist the law in the my opinion. Also, you're freedom isn't being infringed upon b/c you read curse words in public. Truck Nutz are crass as well. Should they be made illegal as well?

Okay, what part of there being a law against it, cited very carefully by the sheriff, are you not understanding? Are you so simple-minded that you think the Constitution is the ONLY set of laws in this country?

You're welcome to think it SHOULDN'T be against the law, if you wish, but unless you live in THAT community and can convince enough other people to agree with you that there's some compelling reason to allow others to make life miserable for them with their crass, boorish behavior, your thoughts on the subject don't amount to a fart in a wind tunnel. I think you'll find that most people don't wish to live in a chaotic free-for-all where the rules are made by the most uncivilized among us.

While we're sharing our thoughts, I think it says a lot about you that you don't value, or even seem to be aware of, any freedom to live peacefully without being visually and aurally assaulted every time you leave your house by those who cannot gain attention by any means other than behaving like primitives.

As for your false analogy of "all crass behavior must be illegalized, or none can be", I think you would find, if you had any mature, civilized behavior in you, that it is not only possible for communities to draw lines of what they will and will not tolerate, but that they do so on a regular basis, and have every right to. It's like we live in a society, instead of an anarchy, or something.

 

[Cecilie1200]

rush limpbough, hannity, and all the other big Hate Radio fucks insult millions of their perceived "enemies" 24/7. They're not honest enough to use the direct language the lady in the truck did, but the radio haters' language is even more hateful and divisive and insulting. Yet, you never hear right wingers whining about their language or intent, even though the meaning is far worse, far more divisive, and deeply disturbing.

These hate-filled radio hacks are nothing but treasonous trouble-makers.

So now you're saying that phrasing things in mature, diplomatic ways is less admirable than crude visual assaults delivered in a cowardly fashion that allows you to avoid having to hear the responses? Tells us a lot about you.

You can turn the radio to another station. It's a little hard to turn a truck ahead of you in traffic off. If you're so very fond of "direct language", I cordially invite you to grow a pair and at least use it to people's faces.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It's tacky, but it's a free speech issue. You have bigger problems if a bumper sticker can provoke you to violent encounters.

But.... but...... what about the children????

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have every right to say fuck you to Trump and his worthless supporters.

The very lowest in the human condition.

You have every right to say whatever you want. What you DON'T have a right to do is make a public nuisance out of yourself while trying to force others to listen to you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's tacky, but it's a free speech issue. You have bigger problems if a bumper sticker can provoke you to violent encounters.

I remembered, one can chant "F--- the police" on their porch, all day, not a crime. If it incites someone, then an arrest.

And if it's too loud, or too late at night, then you get a ticket for causing a public disturbance.

 

[mdk]

Okay, what part of there being a law against it, cited very carefully by the sheriff, are you not understanding? Are you so simple-minded that you think the Constitution is the ONLY set of laws in this country?

Yeah, and upon further thought decided not to charge the person with disorderly conduct. My guess is b/c it likely would have been challenged in court and they would've lost.

You're welcome to think it SHOULDN'T be against the law, if you wish, but unless you live in THAT community and can convince enough other people to agree with you that there's some compelling reason to allow others to make life miserable for them with their crass, boorish behavior, your thoughts on the subject don't amount to a fart in a wind tunnel. I think you'll find that most people don't wish to live in a chaotic free-for-all where the rules are made by the most uncivilized among us.

I don't live there and I suppose my thoughts on the matter do amount to a fart in the wind; however, unless you live there, so do yours.

While we're sharing our thoughts, I think it says a lot about you that you don't value, or even seem to be aware of, any freedom to live peacefully without being visually and aurally assaulted every time you leave your house by those who cannot gain attention by any means other than behaving like primitives.

As for your false analogy of "all crass behavior must be illegalized, or none can be", I think you would find, if you had any mature, civilized behavior in you, that it is not only possible for communities to draw lines of what they will and will not tolerate, but that they do so on a regular basis, and have every right to. It's like we live in a society, instead of an anarchy, or something.

Visually and aurally assaulted?! Bless your overly-dramatic heart! Oh, noes!! A sticker on a car visually assaulted me!? Call the police!

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is about partisan politics and the very thing the First Amendment was intended to prevent – government using its prosecutorial authority to discourage political dissent and to punish political opponents.

The bumper sticker is speech clearly entitled to Constitutional protections, whether Trump supporters like it or not.

really? its punishing your political opponent by telling them its not nice to say Fuck You to everybody? thats a truck load of crap. I would feel the same way if the sticker had Obamas name or Hillary's. But really, this is just a local public nuisance issue and local authorities have a right to enforce what they think is a public nuisance once they receive complaints from citizens. Unless you'd like to see a Federal police force out there protecting the right to express your profanity. Hey the woman probably would have never got called on it if it was just a normal sized bumper sticker, but she made it big so she could get a reaction. Guess what, she got what she wanted.

Reminds me of people who gets scads of facial tattoos and piercings, and then go, "What are YOU looking at?" Whaddaya THINK I'm looking at, freak?!

She wanted to piss people off. She's got no room to whine now that she's gotten what she wanted. Maybe if people kept trumpeting about the "rights" they think they have and spent more time considering the responsibilities that go with those rights, including the responsibility to live with the consequences of exercising your rights, we'd have a more functional society.

 

[Crixus]

A sheriff went looking for a truck with a profane anti-Trump sticker. He found controversy instead.

Texas penal code describes disorderly conduct as “intentionally or knowingly [using] abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of peace.” Making “an offensive gesture or display in a public place” is also prohibited if “the gesture or display tends to incite an immediate breach of peace.”


But the ACLU cited a 1971 Supreme Court decision, Cohen v. California, in which the high court overturned a man’s disturbing-the-peace conviction after he’d gone to a courthouse in Los Angeles wearing a jacket that said “F‑‑k the Draft.”

=====================
I don't agree that the environment in a CA courtroom is the same as displaying an obscene advertisement on a car sticker in public and especially on roadways with moving traffic (and children in cars who could be exposed). I believe the best way to address these cases are locally, between the people complaining who are directly affected.

I agree with the Sheriff in resolving complaints that the obscene sticker was causing disruption of the peace, distraction to drivers, and a nuisance to the local residents.

If someone advertised an obscene message on a car, or had an obscene reference on a license plate, this would not be allowed. Kids can be exposed to the obscenity without a way to "change the channel" or avoid the source. Obscene words in public broadcasts such as radio/TV are not allowed during regular hours, though some restrictions are relaxed for late night.

I also agree that the drivers/displayers of the bumper sticker have the right to free speech and to seek permission to exercise their rights. But if the residents around them say no, that's not welcome, they have the right to refuse being imposed upon as well. You can't just walk into a public place and make obscene gestures or statements, or other people will complain; someone will have to ask the person to resolve the issue civilly and not disturb others with the obscene language used.

I agree with both sides, and would have asked them to resolve it mutually.
The way this case ended, the authorities found open warrants on the driver and pursued an arrest for that.

They still didn't resolve the root issue. I think it is up to the people affected locally to decide if it is disruptive or not. In these case, too many people complained to authorities, so apparently it was considered disruptive and a breach of the peace.

The Sheriff handled it respectfully as possible, and only sought to communicate the complaints to the driver to request they resolve it. The driver refused, so they found another way around it.

Are you from here ? Really, this was nothing but a clever way to collect a warrant on the woman. Honestly, hi do believe the sheriff saying he was concerned for the drivers safety. But in the end they just wanted the warrant . And New Braunsfels can not be a good place to have a number sticker like that.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Needless to say, if the same bumper sticker was being displayed saying the same thing with the exact same words, except referring to Clinton, there’d be no issue, and no threat of prosecution.

That's needless to say because it's bullshit, and there's never any need to say bullshit.

I don't doubt for a second that there would be a lot of people who would find that just as offensive and unacceptable. Much as I don't like the Clintons, I don't particularly care to tolerate public tantrums about them in any form.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Regardless of the message, I would suggest that sticker blocks more than the allowable portion of the rear window of the vehicle, making it a driving hazard. I'm not sure what the statutes are for that in Texas, but I know that in numerous states that would be a ticket-able offense in and of itself.

No, it would not. Pickup trucks (and cargo vans) can have the entire rear window blocked, legally.

 

[Crixus]

Needless to say, if the same bumper sticker was being displayed saying the same thing with the exact same words, except referring to Clinton, there’d be no issue, and no threat of prosecution.

That's needless to say because it's bullshit, and there's never any need to say bullshit.

I don't doubt for a second that there would be a lot of people who would find that just as offensive and unacceptable. Much as I don't like the Clintons, I don't particularly care to tolerate public tantrums about them in any form.

I say let them speak their bullshit, jus that we don’t shield them from the consequences of that speech. Wonder if she will take it off?

 

[Baron]

Just imagine what would happen with driver if he put stickers like 'All Antifa gangsters in prison' on his car.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Needless to say, if the same bumper sticker was being displayed saying the same thing with the exact same words, except referring to Clinton, there’d be no issue, and no threat of prosecution.

That's needless to say because it's bullshit, and there's never any need to say bullshit.

I don't doubt for a second that there would be a lot of people who would find that just as offensive and unacceptable. Much as I don't like the Clintons, I don't particularly care to tolerate public tantrums about them in any form.

I say let them speak their bullshit, jus that we don’t shield them from the consequences of that speech. Wonder if she will take it off?

This doesn’t make any sense.

What ‘consequences’ – that the owner of the bumper sticker be subject to criminal prosecution or be subject to violent physical attack by Trump supporters.

If someone should be allowed to engage in unpopular political speech, they should be allowed to do so with impunity, absent any ‘consequences.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No, it's NOT a free speech issue. I'm sick and damned tired of hearing people shout, "First Amendment!" to try to justify doing whatever they want, whenever they want, with no recognition of the rights of other people and demanding that there be no consequences whatsoever.

This is why communities have disorderly conduct laws: to delineate the point where your "freedom of speech" starts infringing on everyone else's freedoms.

Be sick and tired of it all you wish, but that doesn't change the fact that having a swear on your truck isn't aganist the law. It's tacky and vulgar, but shouldn't be aganist the law in the my opinion. Also, you're freedom isn't being infringed upon b/c you read curse words in public. Truck Nutz are crass as well. Should they be made illegal as well?

Okay, what part of there being a law against it, cited very carefully by the sheriff, are you not understanding? Are you so simple-minded that you think the Constitution is the ONLY set of laws in this country?

You're welcome to think it SHOULDN'T be against the law, if you wish, but unless you live in THAT community and can convince enough other people to agree with you that there's some compelling reason to allow others to make life miserable for them with their crass, boorish behavior, your thoughts on the subject don't amount to a fart in a wind tunnel. I think you'll find that most people don't wish to live in a chaotic free-for-all where the rules are made by the most uncivilized among us.

While we're sharing our thoughts, I think it says a lot about you that you don't value, or even seem to be aware of, any freedom to live peacefully without being visually and aurally assaulted every time you leave your house by those who cannot gain attention by any means other than behaving like primitives.

As for your false analogy of "all crass behavior must be illegalized, or none can be", I think you would find, if you had any mature, civilized behavior in you, that it is not only possible for communities to draw lines of what they will and will not tolerate, but that they do so on a regular basis, and have every right to. It's like we live in a society, instead of an anarchy, or something.

You’re in no position to refer to others as ‘simple-minded’ given the stupidity of this post.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and the validity of state and local laws are subject to Constitutional case law, in this case First Amendment jurisprudence – where the speech expressed on the bumper sticker is clearly entitled to Constitutional protections.

That you and others on the right hostile to the rule of law oppose that speech on subjective, partisan grounds doesn’t ‘justify’ prosecuting speech that you oppose.