Word just came in through Porc 411 that Cassidy Nicosia’s “Indecent Exposure” charge has been dropped by KPD’s prosecutor, Eli Rivera. Does this mean the KPD is liable for false arrest, kidnapping, or official oppression? I don’t know, but I forgive them for what they’ve done and would encourage them to leave peaceful people alone in the future. Thankfully, now Cassidy doesn’t need to be concerned about being deemed a “sex offender” for acting as free as her male counterparts.
Some liberty ladies had scheduled another topless event in advance of Cassidy’s arraignment, so will that event occur or be rescheduled? I’ll let you know.
Also, here was the Ridley Report’s coverage of the topless outreach event arrest, which did not get pulled from Youtube as our original footage did:
Fantastic news! Are women indeed equal to men under the law in Keene? Can they now appear in public without a shirt *and* without being harassed and assaulted by government agents? Or will government agents still arrest, charge, and jail a peaceful, topless woman if they have an actual complainant (i.e., will they still harm a peaceful person when there is not a victim, but only someone who's offended)?
I have a feeling that the lawyers (or as I like to call them liars) figured that this could be taken to higher courts to show the gender discrimination of the laws just like it was shown in other states. If they do not prosecute the case then the defendants cannot take the discriminatory ruling to a higher court. Maybe I am just a little cynical but I do not see this as Mr. Rivera being nice he is just protecting the system that he and the rest of the LEO's use to put slaves with limited freedom in to… Read more »
Only the beginning. Until we can all go fully nude, we clearly don't even have the same basic rights afforded to babies – BABIES! 🙂
I'm teasing 'cause it's funny, but I'm also serious. "indecency" is not a crime – it's a minimum requirement for any good party.
OH man! We all KNEW this would happen! The liberty movement is so dead and Cassidy killed it! The Free State Project has failed, government has been vindicated, and the individual will be reduced to abject serfdom… Its all over! All b/c of boobs in public. How could we all let this happen?
😉
—
D
I agree with Slim. By dropping the charges, this does not get an official ruling (which they knew would go against them), so they can keep harassing and arresting innocent women.
Hopefully, Cassidy will seek redress of grievances, and obtain a ruling that explicitly states that walking around without a covered chest is not indecent exposure, regardless of the gender of the individual doing it.
Great news. All they have to do is say there's no likely chance of conviction or a few other things, if they say anything at all.
False arrest is rather hard to prove, and unlikely to succeed here. I'd concentrate on furthering this victory.
More later . . .
I loved the line in the video, "Even the anarchist's are voting."
Good luck proving false arrest.
There seems to be 2 approaches you could take.
1. try proving false arrest.
2. try changing the law/statute that allows the police to arrest individuals for indecent exposure….(this might be the better one to pursue)
Ryan,
I don't think 'changing the law' is the right approach since 'discretionary' law enforcement makes despotism obvious, deteriorates the divine authority of the legislator, thereby turning the state against itself and enable an officer to realize the problems with their employer, and potentially become a real friend to libertarians
Is there some sort of a "gender profiling" complaint or charge that can be levied against the thugs in this case?
Much like "gender profiling" stuff we hear about.
If they constantly pick on just girls in a group of shirtless folks, and haul them away in cuffs; that alone appears "discriminatory".
Does anyone really think they will stop harassing and entrapping others they can get a rise out of? Sorry to be so pessimistic but come on now… they are dishing up, creating, imagining, all kinds of crap on people who drive, video record, and stand and such… I hope they get all those standers!
Ryan: changing the law won't work, because what she did doesn't violate the current law. Breasts are not genitals. The issue is not that there's a discriminatory law, since the law is quite clearly gender-neutral. The issue is that the officer arrested her for something that did not violate the law.
Well, I do hope Cassidy will petition the government for grievances of re-dress . . .
Ian, you're always carping–justifiably–that police, bureaucrats, and other public officials can get away with anything they do, knowing they can expect no consequences from their actions. But I think this ostentatious "forgiveness" you indiscriminately mete out is part of the exact same mindset. I don't think they should be forgiven until they demonstrate compliance with the "three Rs" of atonement: Recognition of their culpability; Resolution to atone for it; and Restitution to those harmed. Without that, forgiveness is just obsequious Resignation.
Interesting point Sam…I wonder if they laugh everytime they hear they're "forgiven." Seems the only thing they understand is doing whatever they want, whenever they want and always feeling quite confident the system will protect their actions/crimes.
I think the only thing they do understand is financial penality/accountability.
All the gunvernment understands is aggression/force/fraud.
Their method is to squeeze as many folks as possible to get every last drop of blood that they can.
When the gravy-train goes off the rails and the loot and booty become non-existent, then the riots and burning of the cities will begin in earnest.
Read Starving The Monkeys today!
The looter monkeys are already shrieking about this book and they want it banned!
Sincerely,
John and Dagny Galt
http://www.starvingthemonkeys.com/
http://voluntaryist.com/fundamentals/introduction…
Atlas Shrugged, Owner's Manual For The Universe!(tm)
I note that the letter to Cassidy isn't signed. That may be a problem. I'm waiting to see or hear proof that it's real, independently of that detail . . .
@Galt The use of force by the government is a legitimate function as long as the force is RETALIATORY. In a civil society the individual delegates the retaliatory use of force (excluding imminent harm self defense) to a specified entity that acts on their behalf. This is usually called a government. This government is intended to act as an objective third party in the resolution of disputes. It is only when the government INITIATES the use of force that individual liberty is violated. You might want to reread Atlas and I would also recommend "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal" since you… Read more »
leave that to cassidy, narcissist. your inflating jesus/gandhi routine blows on all counts. the correct response, at minimum, is outrage that a peaceful woman was kidnapped under your nose. keep "forgiving" that sickness and the sick fucks will flourish even more.
resistance. the kidnappers are not your pals. they do not deserve a pass because they assert nonexistent rights. the legs-splayed approach is no strength.
You might want to reread Atlas and I would also recommend “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal” since you don’t seem to have grasped Rands concepts very well. you should learn to read, then you can try logic after that hurdle. i guess the timing was wrong for aristotle to classify a fallacy specifically for randroids. funny stuff: In a civil society the individual delegates the retaliatory use of force (excluding imminent harm self defense) to a specified entity that acts on their behalf. This is usually called a government. This government is intended to act as an objective third party in… Read more »
The Randian Paradox
<blockquote cite="IceTrey"> The use of force by the government is a legitimate function as long as the force is RETALIATORY.
That's not correct, IceTrey. You could argue that retaliatory aggression is morally acceptable (as opposed to initiated aggression), but only by the person aggressed against or an agent they voluntary contract with. The government is not voluntarily contracted with by anyone. Even people who *want* the government to exist and to protect them are not able to voluntarily contract with the government to do so, because the government takes their money and does what it wants *anyway*.
@Ian wrote:
"I don’t know, but I forgive them for what they’ve done"
I'm sure this will be a great relief to "them'.
Clinical.
@Hardman "you should learn to read, then you can try logic after that hurdle." I have no idea what you mean by that in relation to what I wrote. @Mike Since we were referencing Rand I was talking about government as an ideal, not any specific government and certainly not the one we have now. The reason after the fact retaliatory force is unacceptable by individuals is because the aggressed is not neutral or objective concerning their plight. As for everyone voluntarily contracting for police services, who polices the police? You hire company A and I hire company B. You… Read more »
oh, let me help; i meant that what you wrote is bullshit.
Congrats on the 'nobody-wins' decision.This is a strange story-I was working in LA when the arrest happened,i hadn't been on the FreeKeene site in a few days,then I got an e-mail and link to the story with the original Youtube video from a friend,he is a cop in Phoenix! So the story had gotten that far.It also showed up on a site with some gun guys out there,Arizona takes the right to bear arms seriously.They are also very leary of any government intervention and are also in favor of women wearing guns but not shirts!The weather there is more favorable… Read more »
The story is covered in a minimal but I hope useful way on http://www.topfree.ca. That site is the prime resource for this topic, partly because it's been around for twelve years. None of the political bickering is there, because it's a distraction in the context of that site. The gun stuff isn't an issue, nor is the organization many of you seem part of. One thing one learns early in this is that clouding issues with what are perceived as irrelevancies (I'm not saying they always are) is a sure way not to get anywhere. Neither the news media nor… Read more »
<blockquote cite="MaineShark">changing the law won’t work, because what she did doesn’t violate the current law. Breasts are not genitals. The issue is not that there’s a discriminatory law, since the law is quite clearly gender-neutral. The issue is that the officer arrested her for something that did not violate the law. Yes, and no. As much as we expect the officers to be well versed in the laws they uphold, the law books are absurdly long and nobody has their entirety committed to memory. The law commonly labeled as 'indecent exposure' has a certain connotation to it just by its… Read more »
the "i know what i'm writing is idiotic" notice is missing from your comment.
Ioldanach, you speak sense. The main thing you omit is that the law is almost always applied with a political subtext. Person complains, officer shows he cares by arresting someone, at the same time playing to what he thinks is the constituency that supports him.
Elected judges do this often. Is this notably different?
Then there are the massive body phobia and sex negativity America is famous for, with all the neurotic obsessions and hypocritical manipulations that go with those. Don't get me started.
Wait, you already did. It's your fault!
before the kidnap stage (euphemism: "arrest"), badged criminals routinely practice "legislation by phone call", using an alleged phone call as pretext to "investigate" something "suspicious" with more perceived weight than the usual overt fuck-with-the-ruled shimmy. first words normally, "you have any ID on you?"
in this example the badged criminals broke even more "law" to play the phone-legislation scam, calling in "a false tip to an anonymous driving under the influence (DUI) hotline".
@IceTrey: I think the "gangs fighting another" argument is a common one. But just like today, where the "gangs" of any given industry don't fight each other but work together to establish standards and smooth customer experiences, so would they in a free society where there were competing security agencies. For example, different telecommunication companies compete against each other now, yet they agree on standards so that their customers can easily call the customers of their competitors (they even allow their customers to keep their phone numbers when switching to their competitors!). Different computer companies compete directly with each other,… Read more »
<blockquote cite="82491"> For example, different telecommunication companies compete against each other now, yet they agree on standards so that their customers can easily call the customers of their competitors (they even allow their customers to keep their phone numbers when switching to their competitors!). Different computer companies compete directly with each other, yet they agree on standards that allow even more third-party developers to create software that works across multiple platforms, so the customer has the best experience possible. Et cetera. As much as I dislike controls on free commerce, I think your observations are mistaken. Telecom companies such as… Read more »
@Hardman
Well thanks for putting forth that well reasoned and logical counter argument. You've completely won me over to your side. NOT!!!!!
well reasoned and logical counter argument like most dogma-spewing stupid people, you pretend a comment on your ludicrousness is an attempted argument. i made no argument; none required. that i made no argument supports nothing of your absurd assertions. you stated, "I have no idea what you mean by that in relation to what I wrote." i cleared it up in direct and full answer of your alleged perplexity in that regard. yours is a pathetically prevalent fallacy, the posture that engaging your horse shit is somehow expected for intellectual integrity. you have no idea what you're talking about. randroid… Read more »
@CHARLEY HARDMAN
"i made no argument; none required."
You don't need an argument when you have nothing say but hate filled whining.
I forgive you for all the mean things you say. In hopes that you can add something other than hate to the discussion some day.
Maybe you will find peace with liberty like others here on this forum and let go of your hate.
Live and let live.
try truth, asshole. truth. think truth, and the liberty follows.
I got Ron Paul's new book, Charley. I know how you love the good Doctor but seriously, great. The book needs to be #1 on the best seller list, the exposure of Ron's monetary ideas is a very good thing. My sister-in-law wants to read it so she went to the library to get it. In the 7 library system there is one copy of the book and she went on the waiting list. 213th in line. Those tax fed libraries sure do respond well to market signals, don't they? Anyway, I stuck this in here cuz Charley loves Ron… Read more »
The book needs to be #1 on the best seller list, the exposure of Ron’s monetary ideas is a very good thing. foolishness. ron paul doesn't say a damned thing that hasn't been said better and more often by far better writers. he's lew's golden boy and the idol of people like you because he's a traitor to his professed principle of non-aggression. few would give a fuck what RP said if he weren't a fedgoon. his popularity is a scourge against liberty, intellectually and practically — product of fedgoon worship in the guise of fedgoon scorn. don't buy into… Read more »
IOLDANACH:
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. We're expected to know and obey every trivial detail of their laws, without assistance or education. They are trained and can use those radios they have to call in for professional opinions on matters, before kidnapping innocent people. If they can't be bothered, they should be treated like the kidnappers they are. NH laws are pretty strict on kidnapping and the like, and should be enforced against those who profess to support them, as appropriate.
While much of what you say is factually correct (excluding the 'idol' part, I've grown past that, and I cringe whenever I hear Ron talk about a 'border fence'), the fact remains that as of right now, Ron is a means to a good end. He is the most public face of the anti-fed movement right now, and these ideas are ideas that need to get into people's eyes and ears. You could give Ron a little credit, Charley. He's been out there beating the bankscam drum for a good long time, and his name recognition is helping the cause… Read more »
BTW I know Ron doesn't believe in 'illegal people', I looked at his positions in his 1988 presidential run and I doubt he has changed much. Considering the 'ideological' position of the drooling masses on the immigration topic, I can understand why he backed off of the correct libertarian position on that issue. You can call that selling out or deride him in whatever manner you wish, but this is one of the only cases where I can say that I personally believe that Ron has the liberty and prosperity of the people toward the top of his list of… Read more »
2008$3M bandit of "peace". he's a career parasite, and there isn't a damned thing you can say to change that truth.
a career parasite good for liberty? up your ass. you know better even now.
Fine, fine. Who else is down there beating the individual liberty drum in Congress?
No-fucking-body, that's who.
I wanted a Rolls but drove a Pinto because I had to get to work, you know?
How better can we maximize the spread of the bankscam message?
I understand the principle behind what you're saying, but where is the better alternative to get these ideas out to the people? Most good liberty media is still stuck in obscurity.
ron paul is spreading the message of statism, not liberty. his net influence for liberty: negative. a bunch of constitution-slurping sheep who needed a career parasite to steer them toward a liberty message does dick for liberty, despite the noise. ron paul has helped spread the idiotic notion that all the state needs is the "right people" aiming the guns. sickening to watch the spread of this anti-liberty idolatry. "audit the fed". BFD. it's lew rockwell making an ass of you and many others. getting "these ideas out to the people" is best accomplished by keeping the idea intact and… Read more »
For what it's worth, I was a libertarianish leaning neocon before RP, a constitutionalist for a while, and now a voluntaryist, and I know there are quite a few like me.
*Cue snarky hardman comment
Charley, I can keep my Catalina 'intact' by locking it in the garage and never taking it out. But who's gonna see it? Like Paul, before RP I was a neocon Repub type. Unlike Paul, I was also a howling bigot. Ron Paul and his message, whether you appreciate it or not, steered me toward the consensualist ideas that I embrace today. And I'm sure there are many more like myself and Paul. Would I like the institution of government eliminated? Is a frog's ass watertight? Can I see the value in steering the sheep in the right direction? YES.… Read more »
For what it’s worth, I was a libertarianish leaning neocon before RP, a constitutionalist for a while, and now a voluntaryist, and I know there are quite a few like me. read what i wrote. nothing i've written here or elsewhere regarding ron paul disavows the possibility that the RP PR machine influences some toward liberty. however, anyone who needed ron paul to steer them toward liberty probably isn't worth a fuck for it. even at LRC those neocon/socialist roots die a damned slow death. similarly, the socialist leanings of many on this site are obvious. i've argued with hundreds… Read more »
No, fuck that, YOU can tell ME how we get the Catalina out of the garage and show it off.
'now you may describe how that matters materially.'
In what context?
No, fuck that, YOU can tell ME how we get the Catalina out of the garage and show it off. i'm going to answer that in this comment, but first i'll address the usual noob act of demanding of a "liberty advocate" critic a mythical solution. listen closely: there is no mythical solution. it's the holy grail of all liberty circles, and the first step is recognizing that it doesn't exist. so if you're expecting me to offer some easy answer that advertises like a widget the message of liberty to even a hundredth of those exposed to ron paul's… Read more »
In what context? life. Whose life? 'however, there is an answer to the “what to do” question, and it is individual. live as a voluntarist. resist crime in whatever way you can while — if possible — surviving physically. share truth with others you meet. confront their crimes. risk losing business relationships and friends because you require integrity.' Fuck, man, that's hard. I can't really raise my children in that environment of abject hostility toward all authority based everything. i can teach them about the wrongs of government and I do. But it's not just about me, you know? Little… Read more »