F-Bomb Free Or Die!
It’s kind of hard to tell from this Portsmouth Herald article. But it sounds like your right to remove signs other people have planted without authority on your property, and to do so without interference from busybodies, and to express yourself when those things have transpired, is in jeopardy in the Live Free or Die State.
The report indicates that on Election Day, Nov. 4, 2008, a New Hampshire property owner was removing Democratic political signs someone else had planted on his property, when some busybody walking his dog verbally accosted him with the words, “What are you doing? You can’t do that. Who do you think you are?”
To which the property owner, quite reasonably, responded, “Who the (F-bomb) are you?”
At which point the dog owner, who turns out to be a professional busybody, a.k.a. lawyer,* sought to impress the property owner with that fact by presenting his business card. The property owner looked it over, and announced, “Ryan Russman, you are a (F-bombing) (expletive).”
I dunno, sounds like fair comment. But apparently the words were accompanied by some gesturing.
The police, to whom said lawyer complained that he felt threatened, opined in the ensuing disorderly conduct and criminal threatening complaints that the property owner’s “language combined with physical gestures and in the context of the incident shows that the (F-bomb) is used to provoke physical violence.” The police complaint further opines that “his use of the language” was “not an exercise in free speech.” Rather, they were fighting words.
The property owner’s lawyer has countered in a motion that he googled the F-bomb and found 663 million uses “within ten seconds” running a “gamut from nouns, adjectives to strong emphatic.”
And while it may well be that the F-bombee may have been made nervous and felt threatened by the frustrated property owner’s actions, counsel for the defense posits that no ordinary person would have been provoked into violence, and further, the F-bombed busybody lawyer “is not an ordinary person in that an ordinary person would not have placed his nose in other people’s business without expecting that behavior to provoke a response.” Which is to suggest, as the property owner did, that said busybody is ipso facto an (F-bombing) (expletive).
Seems like a fair argument.
The property owner is due in Portsmouth District Court Tuesday, Feb. 17, to see whether, his property having been trespassed upon by someone else’s political demonstration, his personal business intruded upon by some busybody lawyer and his tranquility disturbed by same, his free-speech right to tell said lawyer off will now be trampled upon. Kind of sounds like the defendant was the one who was provoked. On the other hand, maybe the local constabulary knows something we don’t know. Like I said, a little hard to tell from this report.
It’s probably worth noting that Democrats, or the left in general, may have a dog in this fight, in favor of the Granite State property owner’s free speech rights. As Gateway’s research has shown, the F-bomb and related verbiage is used by the left in public venues as much as 18 times more frequently than it is used by the right. Anecdotally, I’d add that terms such as “(F-bomb) you!” and “(expletive)!” not infrequently comprise the main thrust if not the entirety of political discourse at some lefty sites, such as this one.
Riehl: What Would Eastwood Do? w/ vid.
Tim Blair: Lawyer vs. Lawn-tidier
Important Update: Protein Wisdom commenter claims to recognize the F-bombee from local ambulance chasing TV ads. Hey, maybe the F-bomber should hire personal injury attorney Ryan Russman to sue to the F-bombee for emotional distress.
Defense may want to go on offense, see if they can’t get the local constabulary to mull charges on someone who wanders the streets verbally accosting people who are minding their own business on their own property. A little investigative work could turn up any Obamist or Democratic tendencies, which would elevate public nuisance to a hate crime.
* Not that there’s anything wrong with that. A lot of us mind other people’s business for a living. Lawyers, politicians, newspapermen, etc. In this case, however, the professional busybody appears to have made a legal determination (”You can’t do that”) in advance of amassing all relevant facts (”Who do you think you are?”) when in fact he had no standing in the matter (political signs on someone else’s property not being within the purview of other people’s business he has a right in mind).
Topics: free speech
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:02 am on Saturday, February 14, 2009
8 Responses to “F-Bomb Free Or Die!”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
February 14th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Jules,
Oh, I can testify about the effect such things can have and the frequency of their use. Why, in Maine, I was visiting a small shop to get a cuppa joe, and was wearing a T-shirt with a political message on it. Apparently, some of the college-aged children there didn’t appreciate my support for conservative values. I was barraged by comments from 5 or 6 of the little brown shorts about any number of topics, including whether I belonged to the Klan, the Nazi Party, why I hated blacks, and (fill in the blank), etc. All with a great deal of profanity. I was amazed at my being able to remain calm and not respomd to the situation with the language and response I would have liked to.
The kids thought they were going to have the last laugh, as the older guy (me) with the coffee would leave and they could return to their lattes’ bottled water, and the NYT and gloat over their victory of driving me out. Rather, I calmly went over to empty table beside them and sat myself down. This caused the kids to come unglued and they ramped up their language, which I probably enabled by ignoring them. Finally, the owner came over and told the miscreants to leave, which shocked them to no end. They literally had gone pale about being told to “get out”. The best part, however, was having several other customers applaud as they left the store.
The owner came over and refunded my money, but i said that wasn”t at all necessary, but the owner insisted, so i took it and put it in the tip jar on the counter.
I guess what bothers me the most is that we have lost the days of reasonably civil discourse. I have a gentleman whom I have known for many many years. He and I are polar opposites, politically. We’ve clashed at a number of debates, rallies, and town meetings, but always without acrimony. It was never personal. Afterward, we could always have a couple drinks together, and he and I have had each other over for dinner many times. I consider us political enemies, but good friends.
Nowadays, not so much with other folks. He’s retired from politics and is a gentleman retiree. The new wave of “in your face” activists are a bothersome lot, and I can see little good coming in the next few years. Rather, I see an escalation to where riot and violence replaces debate and reason. Sooner, rather than later.
respects,
February 14th, 2009 at 11:50 am
Could be the lawyer was just looking for work. Frankly, I think the lawyer’s shoving his business card at the property owner was a little threatening.
February 14th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
[...] Jules Crittendend has to be fucking me (in a heteronormative way): It’s kind of hard to tell from this Portsmouth Herald article. But it sounds like your right to remove signs other people have planted without authority on your property, and to do so without interference from busybodies, and to express yourself when those things have transpired, is in jeopardy in the Live Free or Die State. [...]
February 14th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Well, since they A. are massively full of unrestrained rage and B. have no real argument to offer, bad words are pretty much all they have.
February 14th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
[...] Jules Crittenden has a few things to say on the matter. What say we spread the word around and let people know about [...]
February 15th, 2009 at 4:07 am
Ryan Russbaum, Harvard Law School graduate … as in “National College of DUI Defense: Harvard Law School”.
Also trained in “Navigating the Mental Health System”
http://www.russmanlaw.com/new-hampshire-dui-personal-injury-attorney-about-us
Cheers
February 15th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Dude… here in Australia you get sworn at in the course of general conversation.
Arj Barker Explains
February 15th, 2009 at 8:30 am
This is typical of the liberal scum that have infested NH of late.
In this case, the lawyer is focusing on the F-word to play the victim and to obfuscate the real issue which is that the property owner has every right to remove signs that were planted without his permission on HIS OWN PROPERTY, by law! The law that says you cannot touch political signs does not apply in these cases.
Conversely, they liberals love to steal signs then run away and hide them, and the next day vote illegally.
Witness the audacity, as of yet, unprosecuted:
http://www.cnht.org/news/2008/06/09/voter-fraud-takes-center-stage/
These f-n lawyers are just sick, especially the liberal ones.