RAW VIDEO: Topless Equality Activist Arrested

It’s truly amusing to observe someone who reflexively sees enemies around so many corners talk about “liberty”. What must it feel like to live in such a psychological prison? You rail and rage against all the things you imagine are oppressing you, and yet at the end of the day you’re stuck with yourself, your limitations and the life you’ve made. Damn.

You think that's amusing, you should try listening to some of these deluded worshipers of the state who think "1984" is a how-to manual for success and who spend hours projecting their own failure of a life by arguing with abolitionists on internet messageboards and telling them (quite ironically) that wanting freedom makes them deranged and pathetic.

Oh wait, you're one of them. Oops.

I would like to know why "AnAmazedReader" reads this site. It's obvious he/she disagrees with most if not all of the posts on it.

You are rediculous!!! how can you justify coming down on a police officer who is merely doing his job. He is not the law maker. You should spend your time and energy lobbying the right people and the right places. You've just made an ass out of yourself and I promise you will look back on this and hope this video has disappeared. Of all the inequalities going on around us, you choose the one where we can't show our tits? Way to go!!! loser

Comment by interested observer:

"I would like to know why “AnAmazedReader” reads this site. It’s obvious he/she disagrees with most if not all of the posts on it."

In my youthful days of trendy liberalism, I'd read available venues ( no websites back then, of course)similar to this one with an inexplicable fascination. I realize now that I recognized the truth in them, albeit subconsciously, and was beginning the painful process of admitting my own faults as prelude to accepting it. It's difficult, but worth the effort for the better person you become.

And for those people complaining of "ant bites," or that "99% of people aren’t model quality hot," if you've never learned to appreciate the endless variety of sizes and shapes and colors and textures and flavors available in the vast panoply of the feminine form, I can't censure you any more than your own attitude automatically censures itself.

Great job being free Cassidy!

Too bad the agents of the State couldn't allow the rest of your town to view that wonderful spectacle: a human acting to spite the oppressive, monopolistic, unjust, and mechanically prudish State.

It's not that she was topless: it was that she was happily disobeying, and anyone could see that the World wasn't ending, there wasn't chaos, and the Emporer was naked. So they brought in the goons to put an end to the show.

It's not about nudity: they'll gladly give you a license to be nude in any number of similarly licensed facilities, and gladly allow men to be entranced by the nudity. Anything at all goes, as long as you remember to jump through their hoops.

As soon as you disobey, the State must "do something", lest the rest of the slaves get smart ideas.

OH YEAH: YouTube is a Statist patsy now; they knew there was no nudity, it was removed for political reasons.

The young woman is confused, so are all of you who post comments that agree with her broken reasoning.

There is NO constitutional right for a woman to go topless. This should have been obvious to you all, since the same people who wrote our Bill of Rights also supported decency laws. The argument that such a right exists is thoroughly fallacious, based on a misunderstanding of what 'equality' means in legal language.

Dikaiopolis, who cares about the "Constitution"? Certainly not the people in control of the government; they violate it with impunity every day. Hell even if they didn't, some piece of paper drafted by a bunch of self-appointed elites hundreds of years ago is hardly the end all and be all of what it means to be "free".

In other words, your appeal to authority won't work here.

I've read the whole Constitution and it doesn't say anything about the federal government establishing a dress code.

It also does not ban this power from the states.

So a given state could conceivably legislate this, or in other words a gang of criminals who claim to 'represent' you can force their 'morality' on you at the point of a gun.

That's what it gets down to. Those who wield power will wield it to try to make the world fit their image of what is 'right' or 'moral' or even 'ethical'.

What is unfortunate about the current paradigm is that people who agree with the legislation of morality vote to impose their views, and juries are not taught to throw these cases out of court if they find the 'law' distasteful or improper, and subjects of the government are looking to minimize their involvement with government and so are willing to 'cut a plea deal' with the gang.

Until more of the people realize what being free is, and honor their neighbors' choices, and act in their own lives to defend not only their choices, but those that their neighbors make, the oppression of the masses and harrassment of the few who are awake to logic will continue.

This 'system' that forever pits us against one another, clawing for the biggest piece of the (stolen) pie, or looking for the 'most' or 'best' rights, or even using the invisble gun to scare obedience or 'moral behavior' (think of the irony!) from the masses is just sad to watch in the news and sad to think about.

I am noticing that liberty is having a way of enabling itself. No one has harmed anyone during any freedom activist's demonstration (except cops kidnapping and locking people up) that I have heard about in New Hampshire. People living freely, not hurting anybody, and yet the state is expending their blood money to chase after these obviously peaceful people?

This will not endure. The people will tire of it and insist that their money stop being wasted and activists left alone.

Which is exactly my goal in life. To go about my business and be left alone.

Keep it up, tyrants. Your zeal will eventually be your downfall.

@DIKAIOPOLIS

"The constitution" is a worthless piece of paper that the government shows to idiots to gain support.

I did not sign or agree to be bound by the constitution. It does not give or take rights away from me. It's nothing more than a old piece of paper. It's also made from a plant that is "illegal" to grow in the US.

I just wrote down on a piece of paper that you have to give me everything you own. I am going to call it the law. It will be our constitution and it does not give you any rights. You HAVE to follow it. Or else!!!

greek guy: "There is NO constitutional right for a woman to go topless. This should have been obvious to you all, since the same people who wrote our Bill of Rights also supported decency laws. The argument that such a right exists is thoroughly fallacious, based on a misunderstanding of what ‘equality’ means in legal language."

While I agree with the other commentators that the Constitution does not create rights, the US Constitution does indeed include the 9th Amendment which codifies "other unenumerated rights" that may not be abridged. In this category courts have found rights to 'privacy', rights to free association (to an extent), reproductive rights, and even the right to 'travel'. So even according to their own (the US gov't) case law, a right does not have to be listed within the text to be protected: the individual only has to have a significant interest in keeping the claimed right, and show that it is not unlike other rights.

In this case there is probably more specific precedent dealing with "the right to breast-feed" in public, and with equal gender rights protection. Just because the US constitution doesn't specifically list a claimed 'right' doesn't even mean that the US courts won't protect that right from infringement by State governments.

If you're going to attack the activism, at least get your theory straight before you start spouting off.

A peaceful women was standing with some friends and two people in gang uniforms forceably took her freedom away. She was harming no one, they initiated force against her.

Whatever you think of their reasons, even if you think she was being childish – they were violent while she was peaceful.

This is what the liberty movement is supposed to be about. Highlighting that, showing the violence they resort to against peaceful people, and supporting those brave enough to put themselves in the way of such violence.

Oh, wait, liberty, violence against people who are peaceful, standing up for equal treatment … that's all far less important than not seeing breasts in public.

Brad,

Which part is losing you? The part where men can walk around without shirts or the part where women who do the same thing will be kidnapped at gunpoint, thrown in a cage and be forced to pay a small ransom in order to be set free?

The inequality and injustice of the law (a law the officer could not cite and just assumes to exist, mind you) is cut and dry here.

And don't even get us started on where the obligation to follow such illogical rules even comes from…

Brad,

You don't think, perhaps, that accusations of "declining into the muck" to describe what to me looks like a fight for equality and defense of a peaceful women who was imprisoned for harming no one, could lead to some of that frothing?

I understand you think the presence of breasts changes the equation in some way. Good, got that point. Don't take part in the effort. No problem, not every action is for everyone.

However, when you start using words like 'folly', 'declining into muck', to describe the actions being taken by those for whom this is important … don't you think it's a little disingenuous to complain when people react to it?

I don't know you, but I'm going to guess (correct me if I'm wrong) that since you are on this forum you are interested in the liberty movement. How many times in discussions with people not involved in the movement have they used words like silly to you? How frustrating is it to hear the issues you think of as important, basic to human rights, being dismissed as childish or folly?

How much more frustrating must it be for that same kind of response to come from people who are part of the movement? How lonely it must feel to see the issues you care enough about to put yourself in a position to be handcuffed and your liberty taken … only to see people you thought had your back belittle your effort?

You may be right about the frothing. And it probably isn't the most constructive way to work. But I hope at least you can see why, even though you disagree with the particular circumstances here, the response is as emotional as it is.

Cassidy, for what it's worth, thanks for being far braver than I've been so far. Thanks for being on the front line.

Brad, if the FS'ers are losing you, then you never got it the first place.

Try this: What percentage of an individuals' life should they be allowed to own?

OR:

I'll agree to not initiate the use of force/violence against you if you've harmed no one (no victim = no crime). But would you do the same? Apparently not as it looks as though it's still impossible for you get past all the government brainwashing (political correctness) you live by.

(Democracy = 2 Cats and Bird deciding what's for dinner.)

PS: Try thinking for yourself sometime and you will set yourself free.

obviously just out for attention ,.. or in other words,. out to ” cause alarm”..

just for you, joe.

Says the guy who makes a post containing nothing but ad hominem attacks and unsupported statements. Yeah, that's a sign of superior intelligence all right.

Um, I just realized. If it's not too late…I *NEVER *DID* get to see her boobs. Only *BEFORE* she took her top off…I *DO* remember thinking, DAMN! I wanna see them little BEAUTY-BREASTS!…can anybody post any photos of them???…Thanks!

not licensed to practice law in your state

surprisingly, no "license" required in NH for this case, even if it still existed.