Dancing for Freedom in Public Will Get You Arrested

[henschman]

video of the events in question: This is how it went down « Free the Jefferson 1!

Dancing for Freedom in Public Will Get You Arrested

Jefferson Memorial Visitor Charged with “Interfering with an Agency Function”

Washington, D.C., April 15, 2008— A DC resident celebrating Thomas Jefferson’s contributions to our nation’s founding was arrested at the Jefferson Memorial on Saturday night, April 12th. Now known as “The Jefferson 1,” 28 year-old Brooke Oberwetter and approximately 20 other fans of the founders’ ideas were present at the monument in celebration of Jefferson’s birthday.

The revelers gathered just before midnight to silently dance with iPods and headphones in front of the statue of Jefferson, who once noted that “Dancing is a healthy and elegant exercise, a specific against social awkwardness.” The celebration was intentionally scheduled late at night—the memorial is open 24 hours a day—in order to not disturb other visitors.

Shortly after the dancing began, U.S. Park Police officers began forcibly pushing people toward the steps. According to witnesses, an officer approached Oberwetter, who was near a wall in the chamber, talking to friends, and standing in place “bopping” to the beat of Rob Base’s 1988 classic “It Takes Two.” The officer, later identified as Officer Hilliard, badge number 246, unit D-1, asked her to leave and physically pushed her toward the outer chamber of the memorial.

Oberwetter repeatedly asked the officer what rule or law she was breaking and why she was being asked to leave. The officer responded that she was being “noisy” and “disrespectful” before shoving her against a column and placing her in handcuffs, all under the watchful stare of the 19-foot statue of the author of the Declaration of Independence. Oberwetter did not resist and went quietly with the officers.

Although initially charged with disorderly conduct, the charge was later reduced to “interfering with an agency function” under Title 36, Sec. 2.32 of the code of federal regulations. Oberwetter was released from custody over 5 hours later, and a court date has been set for April 29, 2008.

Pete Eyre of Bureaucrash, who was present at the event, noted, “This incident speaks volumes about the status of our rights in 2008 America.” Jason Talley, who organized the Thomas Jefferson Dance Party and shot the video available at FreeTheJefferson1.com, concluded, “Thomas Jefferson would be very dissatisfied.”

FreeTheJefferson1 was formed to advocate that the unjust charges against Brooke Oberwetter be dropped and that she receive an apology from the U.S. Park Police.

Bureaucrash is an international network of individuals dedicated to fighting government control through creative activism.

[Mac in SD]

Originally Posted by henschman

video of the events in question: This is how it went down « Free the Jefferson 1!

It's the Jefferson MEMORIAL. Get it? MEMORIAL!

It's a place for decent people to reflect decently on the life of Jefferson.
Not a place for disruptive behavior that disturbs decent, respectful people.

You want to dance around like a jerkoff? There are a zillion other places in D.C. to do it. We don't have to allow it at memorials or Arlington or the National Archives. That's the problem with you Libertarians: you don't know when to stop with theory and apply reality.

I wish they'd pulled a Tonya Harding on all of them.

[Weester]

What about the Beach Boys concerts at the Washington Monument on the 4th of July? Is that disrespectful too?

[slow87]

They could of just forced them to leave. Being arrested even when your later released(because you were innocent) is still a big pita.
No matter how stupid these kids are. Being arrested for dancing is pushing things way to far.

[henschman]

your argument might make sense if they were actually disturbing any "decent, respectful people." they were doing this in the middle of the night, for crying out loud. we'll see what the court has to say about this charge. i have a hunch it will be either dropped, or dismissed on the merits.

Originally Posted by Mac in SD

That's the problem with you Libertarians: you don't know when to stop with theory and apply reality.

you mean we don't know how to compromise our principles when the temptation arises, like good ol' "conservatives?" guilty as charged.

[salvageV6]

" Being arrested even when your later released(because you were innocent) is still a big pita. "

That's the whole point of "arresting" them in the first place.

Make it uncomfortable and not desirable to do it in the first place.

Behavior modification via the court system.

Works on lots of folks.

I bet if they were of a popular minority and had some rhythm they wouldn't have gotten arrested, probably would have gotten some good media coverage as well.

[IEATV8S]

Originally Posted by Weester

What about the Beach Boys concerts at the Washington Monument on the 4th of July? Is that disrespectful too?

Nope, just ANYTHING YOU agree with!

[Mac in SD]

Originally Posted by Weester

What about the Beach Boys concerts at the Washington Monument on the 4th of July? Is that disrespectful too?

Do you even think about what you write?

Washington MONUMENT.
Jefferson MEMORIAL.

See anything different there?

That Beach Boys thing is held on the Mall - a public open space - that is approriate for parties. I've been to it, and it sucks anyway.

[henschman]

Originally Posted by salvageV6

I bet if they were of a popular minority and had some rhythm they wouldn't have gotten arrested, probably would have gotten some good media coverage as well.

you forget that these are people who believe in the ideas of Thomas Jefferson. When "people of color" stand up for those kind of ideas, they get called traitors to their race.

[Weester]

"That Beach Boys thing is held on the Mall - a public open space - that is approriate for parties. I've been to it, and it sucks anyway. "

LOL

I went to it back in the late 70's when it was held in front of the Washington Monument! Lots of fun fun fun..................

Doesnt anyone here have a sense of humor????

[henschman]

this thing was a far cry from the beach boys parties, anyway... there were only 20 or so dancers, and they were all wearing headphones, so they weren't making any noise. all they were doing was moving around. they did it in the middle of the night, so very few other visitors would be there. if you watch the video, you can see that the place is very un-crowded. the people who are dancing are off in one corner, and aren't getting in anybody's way or disturbing anybody in any way whatsoever. it is very hard for me to think of any law these people were possibly violating.

[G. Price]

Originally Posted by henschman

this thing was a far cry from the beach boys parties, anyway... there were only 20 or so dancers, and they were all wearing headphones, so they weren't making any noise. all they were doing was moving around. they did it in the middle of the night, so very few other visitors would be there. if you watch the video, you can see that the place is very un-crowded. the people who are dancing are off in one corner, and aren't getting in anybody's way or disturbing anybody in any way whatsoever. it is very hard for me to think of any law these people were possibly violating.

I watched the video. I can tell you that if I had been there I would have been annoyed. This is a monument to one of our founding fathers. One should conduct himself with dignity and respect. These kids were not doing this. They were there to stir things up and got exactly what they were looking for. The video recorders were there just so they could start the trouble and then betray themselfs as the victim. Reminds me of "Don't taze me bro" boy.

[henschman]

sorry G. Price -- no matter how much the big government politicians insist on it, you do not have a right not to be annoyed in public.

[IEATV8S]

Originally Posted by henschman

sorry G. Price -- no matter how much the big government politicians insist on it, you do not have a right not to be annoyed in public.

But the officer who locked her up, had his right to be annoyed infringed upon, and took action! Now barrister, what do they say, SUE ME?

[The Blob]

Originally Posted by Mac in SD

That's the problem with you Libertarians: you don't know when to stop with theory and apply reality.

+1

[The Blob]

Originally Posted by henschman

this thing was a far cry from the beach boys parties, anyway... there were only 20 or so dancers, and they were all wearing headphones, so they weren't making any noise. all they were doing was moving around. they did it in the middle of the night, so very few other visitors would be there. if you watch the video, you can see that the place is very un-crowded. the people who are dancing are off in one corner, and aren't getting in anybody's way or disturbing anybody in any way whatsoever. it is very hard for me to think of any law these people were possibly violating.

What if a person was quietly sleeping off in one corner?

What if it was five people?

What if it was ten?

What if it was twenty?

What if it was fifty?

What if it was a hundred?

[Mac in SD]

Originally Posted by henschman

sorry G. Price -- no matter how much the big government politicians insist on it, you do not have a right not to be annoyed in public.

Okay...how about at the National Gallery or the Holocaust Memorial? Do you think that dancing around like a goofball and being disruptive (headphones or not) in those places is a constitutional right? Or could the government regulate behavior there for the patrons of those venues to appreciate them without unreasonable disturbance?

Remember, the MEMORIAL is not a sidewalk in the District of Columbia or even Libertarianland. It is a U.S. government property. Try not to let unfettered theory get inthe way of common sense.

[henschman]

alright, we'll use pure common sense. First, you have to understand that this is the federal government in question. they are obviously the most constrained level of our government as to what activities they can lawfully carry out. First off, to create criminal liability there has to be a federal law that prohibits the activity in question. If you could show me one that applies here, I might be more inclined to think you make any sense whatsoever. But that doesn't end the matter... since this is the National Government, they are constrained by the Constitution of the United States. Most inconveniently, the 1st Amendment of said Constitution says that says the government shall make NO LAW abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble. To make matters worse, the 5th Amendment says that NO PERSON shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process. But it doesn't end there... the national government is set up so that it cannot engage in any role outside of those which are expressly delegated to it in the Constitution. If you could show me something that allows them to police national monuments... or build national monuments at all... or... wait, wtf? you mean the government doesn't even have the authority to build a monument?

Maybe this is why the founders didn't have a problem with creating a national government that was so restricted by the constitution and the bill of rights (seemingly unreasonably so, given all the roles they play in our society today): The founders didn't consider it a problem to restrict the federal government from infringing on speech AT ALL, or on the right to bear arms AT ALL, or any number of other things, because they didn't give them the power to regulate in those areas AT ALL, except when they are secondarily involved in carrying out one of their few delegated powers.

Remember, the founders only intended the bill of rights to apply to the national government. the states were free to govern a lot more freely on matters, such as instituting REASONABLE restrictions on speech in order to promote public order. the feds were intended to be much more restricted.