Feed Your Head

Yesterday while handing out some information at a local high school, the principal mistakenly thinks that free speech doesn’t apply in public spaces. Despite repeatedly making threats to use force (call the police), a student-council representative tells us he doesn’t appreciate how disrespectful the FreeKeene activists are toward the principal.

Are we forcing anyone to take the information? Will the police use force against us at the whim of a government worker’s say-so? You bet. I won’t speak for others, but I was prepared to be arrested if my only “crime” was handing out literature in a public space. Why? This is why:

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


64 Comments

  1. Mr. Student Representative needs to ditch the double stud earrings. He'll never get hired as School Resource Officer until he cleans up and gets a haircut.

  2. You should combine two protests and strip while handing out pamphlets at the high school.

  3. On behalf of the children who stood up these FREAKS, I am appauled that the school has relied on it's student body to deal with this.

    To the principal;

    As much as I deplore FK FSP and everything it really represents, what their doing is either legal or illegal. If it's illegal you have had ample opportunity to remove them by force.

    Because you havent, my guess is that it IS legal, so why "stir the pot" by making idle threats you can't enforce. Dont let your students go out there and be put through this!! My God!! Kids!!!

  4. enslave,

    go away; get a life

  5. let me guess "enslave's" response: "no I won't get a life" ..

  6. Mason's last name isn't Quisling by chance is it?

    It's good that the video included the dissenting student rep… although there were quite a few students eager to receive the literature.

    Discussing the information in "Civics" class seems to be the best course of action…

  7. The "Eager" were only taking it because the administration has "been telling us not to take it".

  8. i'm a little typo,

    short and stout,

    here is wear

    yew spelt it

    wrong, or

    there abouts.

    i'm dizmaid.

  9. Why on earth would you think it a good idea to immortalize a young man still in school by putting him this video like this.?. These are kids….leave them alone.

  10. i didnt know 224 hits on youtube confers immortality!

    maybe i too can become an immortal TRUE HERO!

  11. I think the fellow who said he represented the student body spoke well looked smart ; He shouldn't have worries about his representation on this video .

    I think all the student's parents have every reason to be proud of their kids in this video.

    🙂

    I didn't know handing out pamphlets was so horribly controversial.

    I'd like to hear a well reasoned response from a teacher who apposes the horrible pamphlets.

    You can do it using a fake name teacher…Lets hear it. It will be easy to tell if you are a troll faking like you're a teacher. I DON'T SEE ANY STRONG ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE PAMPHLETS :: ONES THAT STAND UP TO SCRUTINY.

  12. RIGHT ON ACTIVISTS! RIGHT ON . RIGHT ON ,RIGHT ON.

    R I G H T O N !

  13. (yes I messed up the spacing on one o word ;we know how people want to focus on periphery)

  14. When I said above:

    "I DON’T SEE ANY STRONG ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE PAMPHLETS :: ONES THAT STAND UP TO SCRUTINY."

    I have to correct myself,because there have been NO "arguments" against the handing out of pamphlets only "you can't do that here".

    "Why can't I see that, teacher?"

    "Why can't I see that, teacher?"

    Lets hear your answer TEACHER

    You have no answer teacher , you know the activists are right but I hope a teacher does answer .

    p.s. There would be no row or whatever if the teacher didn't try to stop free speach

  15. And FREE SPEECH on PUBLIC PROPERTY as admitted by the objector there.

  16. So lets break it down : the teacher wants to exemplify the squelching of free speech on public property to the students. And did. With threats of the police to STOP the free speech on public property.

    I say the bottom line is that the students get the best lesson they will get from the whole thing.

    ps.

    I'm not "against" the teacher.

  17. You morons. Why don't you all try this at Keene High School? Ian, you're running for school board in Keene. Keene doesn't run Monadnock Regional High School. Sounds like the campaign is off to a swinging start – you don't even know what district you're in.

  18. david, when you have six straight unanswered comments on the same thread, it's time to chech the med dosage. That may be s record. Even for you.

  19. Some might suggest these are the unintended consequences of "public property". If this school were privately owned and funded in a consensual and noncoercive manner I'm willing to bet these activists would not be there. Demanding that somebody pay for something under threat of loss of their home and then telling them to get lost seems contradictory.

    As an aside I wonder why home schooled kids do so much better in academic tests these days?

  20. Isn't it illegal to videotape minors without the consent of parents? And if the Principal says that the need to get off of school property then they have to go, no questions asked. I think the local police need to be present in the morning when school starts and when school lets out.

  21. And why is calling the police a threat of violence? Really? Just shows how ignorant you people are…lol.

  22. @KS1972

    This is what Ive been screaming about!!

    There are 2 choice, legal or illegal. If Illegal call cops remove by force. (Threat of violence) Not a lucid statement, sorry.

    However if legal, stop calling it illegal, just as the cops who claim during a traffic stop, youre only empowering their "fun" with all of this.

    It would take the school district's attorney 5 minutes to decree on the legality of this issue and act appropiately henceforth.

  23. If you watch the video you will see that the principal himself refers to the property as PUBLIC property , and if we were all restricted from taking pictures of minors than there would be no outside cameras anywhere because if a youth walked by the law would be broken.

    If they were breaking the law they would be gone.

    And having "enslave" in your camp does not help your reputation.

  24. David,

    Do you think you might take some time to conjur up the living force and fart out 1 sensible F****ng thought in your life!

  25. Hello, this is Mason, the kid from the video. I didn't get to fully speak my piece there when this was being filmed, so I would like to say a few things.

    First off, our school is not trying to censor the information you are passing out, we have even had students, including myself, willing to pass it out for you, within the school. The information is not the issue here, you guys make many valid points within the pamphlets that you are handing out. The issue lies in the methods you employ to distribute the information.

    Though the school is indeed public property, as it is owned by the district, that does not give you free range to come in and pass out fliers to its students. The fact that you were asked to leave, and then failed to comply causes your presence to constitute tresspassing, which is punishable by law. Calling the police is not a threat of violence, it isnt as though they are going to show up and start beating you are they? You were given ample opportunities to leave before the police arrived, yet you chose to disregard what you were told. Is this not disrespectful, to the principle, the parents of the students, and students like myself? Not to mention the fact that you have posted video content of minors without their consent, which is technically child abuse. Is it so hard for you guys to get permission to have your information passed out? I will personally offer your information to our students if you get a stack of pamphlets to me, and I mean that.

    The fact that you chose to not go about this the proper way, and not listen to the people informing you that you are wrong does not show that you are exercizing your 'civil liberties'. If anything, it shows that you just want to cause a stir and upset people. How is that peaceful? You decide to tromp up to a school and disrupt its policies and provoke the anger of its administration and student body, to try and prove what point? You make yourselves out to look like 'peaceful avengers', and you've convinced alot of people of that, but you're acting like children. So, give me your pamhplets, your information, and I will offer it out for you, or even refer people to you, in an acceptable way.

    Your cause is good, but somehow I don't believe you really stand for it. I think you just want to cause problems, to raise a ruckus, whether for your own enjoyment, or because you don't know any better, I'm not sure.

    You've already messaged me on facebook, send me your information, set up a meeting, or contact me somehow. I will happily work with you guys to get your message across, in a way that is ten times more effective and much less destructive and problematic.

    -Mason

    PS: I am not a member of any student leadership organization, I simply have a strong opinion. I don't stand on any particular side.

  26. Mason,

    You have a bright future ahead of you!! Believe that!!

    I would also like to know more about the legalities of the videotaping children, is that indeed true?

    I do not know either way.

  27. It's technically considered "child abuse" but I don't think its often taken in that extreme of a manner, depends on who is driving the charges.

  28. Cool that you are taking the time to stop by and further explain your position, Mason.

    Take a little time to think through your beliefs.

    All laws are administered with the implied threat of violence. Now if the law is just, such as against stealing or murder for example, most people feel the violence that may be used to back up the enforcement of the law is justified.

    The problem areas are when the "law" is against peaceful behavior that causes no harm to anyone else. If you don't obey the "law enforcer" they will use ever escalating levels of violence up to death.

    Peaceful civil disobedience is an effective, time honored approach to creating the environment for change. I bet your teachers applaud civil disobedience such as Rosa Parks, MLK, Ghandi, Thoreau etc. engaged in. They all "broke the law".

    Many would say, "Work within the system" to establish change. Well I've personally witnessed how "the system" is more interested in keeping the status quo and will break their own rules and prevent justice and block the citizens right to change laws and procedures.

    Blind obedience to "authority" is a very dangerous position to have.

    Do you believe video recorded in a public space is "abuse"? What harm was inflicted on any of the students. Weren't you give a fair opportunity to speak your mind?

    The only crime apparently was "failure to obey". Thanks god many people in our past failed to obey.

  29. The very school that this event took place at is maintained and paid for by the threat of violence. What happens if a person that does not use or support the school fails to pay the property tax strangers have told him/her that they "MUST" pay?

  30. Bob,

    There is simply no historical context for this argument. Although the taxes levied today on society were not around at the signing of this country's constitution. The laws enacted to collect them were enacted through by that process. Ratification, Taxation through the votes of our represenatives throughout history. There is no threat of violence, the process was approved of under our republic form of government.

    It was never said that the absence of taxes will remain consistent so we may adhere to our laws. No such thing Bob.

    The republic evolves or de-evolves depending on your stance but to claim a threat of violence against someone who refuses to pay a represenative tax is non-sensical.

    Yes, you may disagree with the allocation of the money and persue a grievence but it is not theft.

    For example, personally I am against the funding of my tax dollars to go torward sex education in schools btu I can not NOT pay that portion and then say "oh violence" because the people I elected voted that I must.

    The only solution is to vote out those who I find to abuse their power I gave to them originally. No violence BOB sorry man!

  31. it is NOT child abuse,nor is it illegal, to have a youth in a picture/video in a public place….end of conversation….

  32. thats common sense…of course that doesn't mean they won't arrest you on some trumped up charges

  33. The question is : What is the big deal? Why is the principal or the school making such a big deal about it?

  34. david,

    You seam most knowledgable about laws pertaining to the videoing or photography of children.

    Im just saying is all….

  35. Enslave,

    Who can give your consent, you or me and/or a group of others?

    I believe only you can give your consent. You apparently believe others can give it for you. That is where your logical disconnect occurs.

    The meaning of consent insists that an interaction is voluntary. Taxes demanded of people that do not want a particular "service" are nonconsensual and therefore involuntary. There is plenty of historical context for the intitiating of violence upon people that do not comply with the demands of the extortionist.

    Lysander Spooner called….he wants you to read his essays.

  36. enslave,

    its called common sense….acquaint your self with it…ever see cameras hanging off buildings?

    who do you think they catch on them…are you just being willfully ignorant?

  37. simple common sense … if one just stops to think …sway there's a kid in the background of a picture your taking ..is that a crime….why do I have to explain the obvious to you…

  38. court house cameras catch kids on them…again all you have to do is stop tp think.:no law degree required

  39. David/Bob, I am pressed for time right now and can't provide an in depth response to your questions, or counterpoints to your points, but before more comments separate ours and the conversation is lost, I want to hit on a few things.

    There is a major difference between cameras on buildings for security reasons, and the filming of children as they leave school to post on the Internet where anyone can access it, and use them to set an example. That requires consent, and though I disagree with the law that sates that the PARENTS of the child in question have to grant consent, the fact is that they do. It is illegal, and is covered by laws governing child abuse. That is why I said "technically considered child abuse".

    Secondly, they are infringing on the rights of those parents, as they have the right to give consent, or to not give consent. The rights of someone to NOT do something are just as valid of the rights of someone TO do something. You contradict your own points, as organizations such as CopBlock (which I completely agree with in most cases) stress your right to NOT give out information about yourself or your actions, etc etc.

    Peaceful civil disobedience has, historically, caused great change, however I hardly think that coming to a middle school/high school, targeting a bunch of hormonal minors with information that their school is "censoring" (which in fact, we're not. I want a stack of whatever they want to hand out, so that I can hand them out the right way, internally.) is going to cause any kind of a positive change. The information that can be given to the students can certainly influence them, and I want them to have it, in fact, I'm on the same side as you with a lot of todays issues. I really want to stress the fact that I'm disagreeing with the disrespect that is occurring, and they way the group is going about passing out the information. Standing outside a highschool, to film a principle trying to do his job, then mocking him in the video with heroic music and blatantly ignoring what he's trying to say isn't peaceful civil disobedience, it's just being a jerk.

    These kids have the right to know this information, and the right to know what constitutes their own rights, and that they can think for themselves on these issues, but the problem is that this is NOT the way to do it. This whole thing is only calculated to cause mayhem and frustration. Do you really think the issue lies in these kids not receiving this information? because if it did, I think everyone would be more concerned about distributing it, and not making a big scene outside. I have spoken with the administration, being on your side, and can receive permission to distribute the information to the student body.

    Is this not a fair compromise to the destructive demonstrations being carried out illegally on our front steps? It's the same laws for everyone, nobody besides students and faculty can be there when students leave. An hour before and an hour after we arrive and leave, the grounds are protected by law for the people and the parents of those in question.

    Thank you for the intelligent responses and the respect, I do appreciate that, and I am listening and taking to heart what you say.

    -Mason

  40. Oh, and a side note, I don't believe that laws are administered with a threat of violence, merely a threat of punishment (typically imprisonment for a set period of time). Why do you say that they are backed by violence? Aside from first degree murder, I don't see that as being the case.

  41. bob, I really do hate to beleaguer the point, but if you really don't consent to being governed, then move somewhere which doesn't require it. Put whatever spin you want on it, but you live in a country and a state which have governments. That really is the end of the story. You are either willfully blind to, or unfortunately ignorant of that fact.

  42. mason,

    i appreciate your input..my tone ..is the result of others in here .(not u) peace

  43. mason,

    In a nut shell . Why is it that they don't want the pamphlets handed out?

  44. ok,…Why do you think they haven't called the cops if it's against the law?

    (over look my prev post; I read what you wrote)

  45. i think i will try to talk to that principal guy. 🙂

  46. Good point Name,

    Bob the country in which we live still does resemble the founders construct. I grant you corruption is an issue and integrity is absent from many of the bodies but the government we have has the remedy to the English rule of monarchy. Anarchy or even extreme libertarianism was never the goal of even Jefferson. He owned slaves Bob, he was no libertarian. Our father and their fathers before them were born into this system. It is the best bar none. It can be improved but never changed unless ammended by the elected reps sent to Washington by us, the people..

  47. The fact of the matter is that Mason is offended people would want to come and distribute literature. There was no physical threat, and as it is schools already have dangerously broad reach over what happens in their students lives. Ever have a fight happen in a school? Both parties are suspended immediately without any care of how or why it occured. And people wonder why bullying takes place…

  48. Mason, you're wasting your time here – no matter how much good sense you write or bring to the table, the one's responsible (Ian and Derrick) won't respond to it, nor will they care to hear about it. You have seen firsthand and opined correctly that they are not interested in peace. I appreciate your willingness though to try and compromise with them; it is sad indeed they won't step up to the plate and accept your gracious offer to assist them in passing along their "message". You're a bright individual.

  49. mason isn't wasting his time ; you are though matt….you should leave matt…..mason stay you're smart

  50. I'm wasting my time? You replied again didn't you? LOL.

Care to comment?