Welcome to the APBWeb.
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Pudge's Avatar
    Pudge is online now Site Admin
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    12-04-05
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    10,320
    Rep Power
    8591417

    City To Ticket Annoying People - NSFW (Language)

    http://www.newsnet5.com/news/18319300/detail.html


    BRIGHTON, Mich. -- Ticking someone off could get you a ticket in one Michigan city.

    The Brighton City Council on Thursday approved an ordinance allowing police in the Livingston County community to ticket and fine anyone who is annoying in public "by word of mouth, sign or motions."

    The Livingston County Daily Press & Argus of Howell reports the measure is modeled on a similar ordinance in the Detroit suburb of Royal Oak.

    A city attorney said there could be situations where the measure would violate freedom of speech, but that those cases will be reviewed by the city.

    The ban takes effect Jan. 2.



    Ladies and gentlemen, the time is near. Soon our wishes will come true. It'll eventually be against the law to be stupid.
    "Like" us on facebook! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Offic...93147194083228

    Follow members of O/R as they tweet a "Ride a long" on their shifts on the front page of the site and on twitter at the following links:

    www.twitter.com/PoliceRideAlong
    www.twitter.com/lewisipso
    www.twitter.com/ORgopher
    www.twitter.com/SecondChance122
    www.twitter.com/pojmm
    www.twitter.com/ORGIB

    The opinions given in my posts & threads DO NOT reflect the opinions, views, policies, and/or procedures of my employing agency. They are my personal opinions only, thereby releasing my agency of any liability, or involvement in anything posted under the username "Pudge" on Officerresource.com

  2. #2
    Jenna's Avatar
    Jenna is offline sheep
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Join Date
    06-11-06
    Posts
    24,369
    Rep Power
    4817856
    Quote Originally Posted by Pudge113 View Post
    The Brighton City Council on Thursday approved an ordinance allowing police in the Livingston County community to ticket and fine anyone who is annoying in public "by word of mouth, sign or motions."
    'I'd better not tell bad jokes in that city!

  3. #3
    kcnuke's Avatar
    kcnuke is offline Corporal
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    06-02-07
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    522
    Rep Power
    117108
    I'm hoping Jenna doesn't live in Brighton, Michigan . She'll be a felon in no time.

  4. #4
    Odd's Avatar
    Odd
    Odd is offline Cosmonaut Trainer
    Supporting Member Lvl 3
    Join Date
    10-08-08
    Posts
    2,056
    Rep Power
    2508663
    Not satisfied with trying to legislate a risk-free life, an annoyance-free life is the government's next pledge to us? I find that very annoying.

    As City Councils conduct their business verbally, in public, it is my hope a citizen celebrates the new ordinance by demanding each member of the council who voted in favor of this be ticketed and fined under it.

  5. #5
    IndianaFuzz's Avatar
    IndianaFuzz is offline Policeman Perry fan club
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    11-09-08
    Location
    Muncie, IN
    Posts
    1,616
    Rep Power
    1596350
    No....I don't think anyone would ever abuse such a law....

    *sarcasm off*
    CHIRP! CHIRP!

  6. #6
    countybear's Avatar
    countybear is offline BDRT - Baby Daddy Removal Team
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    01-18-07
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    6,512
    Rep Power
    4611627
    Um... is this the first time we've seen a 'Disorderly Conduct' statute?

    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."
    - Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

    Tell me not, Sweet, I am unkind,
    That from the nunnery
    Of thy chaste breast and quiet mind
    To war and arms I fly.
    - Lovelace

    The opinions expressed by this poster are wholly his own, and should never be construed to even remotely be in representation of his employer, its agencies or assigns. In fact, they probably fail to be in alignment with the opinions of any rational human being.

  7. #7
    jmur5074's Avatar
    jmur5074 is offline Moderator
    Premium Lifetime Member
    Verified LEO
    Site Moderator
    Join Date
    12-04-05
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    9,051
    Rep Power
    6232622
    Quote Originally Posted by countybear View Post
    Um... is this the first time we've seen a 'Disorderly Conduct' statute?
    Or public nuisance?
    No one has greater love than this, to lay down ones life for ones friends - John 15:13

    "The Wicked Flee When No Man Pursueth: But The Righteous Are Bold As A Lion".

    We lucky few, we band of brothers. For he who today sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
    The opinions, beliefs, and ideas expressed in this post are mine, and mine alone. They are NOT the opinions, beliefs, ideas, or policies of my Agency, Police Chief, City Council, or any member of my department.

  8. #8
    MacLean's Avatar
    MacLean is offline O/R Gun mod
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    09-05-07
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    11,802
    Rep Power
    4584773
    Disorderly conduct or public nuisance must rise to a greater level than annoyance - in fact, there is bright line case law established which says offensive speech is the *most* protected.

    This law, as written, would not survive a serious constitutional review.
    I'm your huckleberry...

    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentus telum est!

    You can be the weapon, and the gun in your hand is a tool - or the gun is a weapon and you are the tool.


    I was looking for a saint who was a devil of a lover,
    but every girl I found was either one way or the other...



  9. #9
    Terminator's Avatar
    Terminator is offline BANNED
    Join Date
    12-03-05
    Location
    None of your business
    Posts
    16,064
    Rep Power
    0
    There is a fine line between being disorderly and/or creating a public nuisance, and just being annoying. Any law like this is completely ridiculous and unconstitutional.

  10. #10
    countybear's Avatar
    countybear is offline BDRT - Baby Daddy Removal Team
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    01-18-07
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    6,512
    Rep Power
    4611627
    NSFW - Offensive Language!! (and disorderly conduct)!

    You guys claim that this law is ridiculous, and will not stand constitutional muster. All that based upon one slanted news story (which doesn't even actually give you the wording of the law, itself)??

    Come on, we're better here at O/R than that... we fully well know how media writes from its own perception and squelches out objectivity... Shame on you.

    Lets keep in mind that all of these laws are tested statutorily by the 'reasonable man doctrine', as under common law they are required to withstand such test by legal precedent. And then let's compare then, (since you believe there to be a major difference).

    The 'annoyance' law in Brighton: (the one you call 'ridiculous')

    It shall be unlawful for a person to engage in a course of conduct or repeatedly commit acts that alarm or seriously annoy another person and that serve no legitimate purpose...

    It shall be unlawful for any person in the city to insult, accost, molest or otherwise annoy, either by word of mouth, sign or motions any person in any public place...
    Notice the 'course of conduct' and 'repeatedly' references. Also, while I'll give you 'otherwise annoy' is way too vague and ambiguous and certainly lends to over-application, looking at State Discon statutes tell me that there are certainly broad potential mis-applications of those as well:

    Disorderly Conduct statute (State of California):
    Wow, its against the law in CA to wander the street without reason... holy shit. I don't even need a victim, I guess the victim is 'the street'? Better tell all those homeless bastards in L.A. to move, or is being homeless in CA enough 'reason' to wander the street?
    (e) Who loiters or wanders upon the streets or from place to place without apparent reason or business and who refuses to identify themselves and to account for their presence when requested by any peace officer so to do, if the surrounding circumstances would indicate to a reasonable person that the public safety demands this identification.
    State of Ohio: Rut row... better not stand still on a sidewalk with your arms stretched out in Ohio and say 'cunt' out loud!
    ...(2) Making unreasonable noise or an offensively coarse utterance, gesture, or display or communicating unwarranted and grossly abusive language to any person;

    (3) Insulting, taunting, or challenging another, under circumstances in which that conduct is likely to provoke a violent response;

    (4) Hindering or preventing the movement of persons on a public street, road, highway, or right-of-way, or to, from, within, or upon public or private property, so as to interfere with the rights of others, and by any act that serves no lawful and reasonable purpose of the offender;...
    Minnesota: In Minnesota, I can't even be an asshole in a private place!! (I do like how MN exempts 'epileptic siezure', though.. My faith in humanity is bolstered by the fact that I can uncontrollably fall down unconscious and piss on myself without getting locked up for it. But, I guess having Tourette's Syndrome is still illegal there, though).

    Whoever does any of the following in a public or private place,
    including on a school bus, knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor:...
    (3) Engages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive,
    obscene, or abusive language tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others.

    A person does not violate this section if the person's disorderly conduct was caused by
    an epileptic seizure.
    Connecticut: Don't flip the bird in CT! (also, notice the wording 'annoys or interferes'? Call 911! That bum is interfering with me! THE BASTARD!)
    "Abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture."... and By offensive or disorderly conduct, annoys or interferes with another person
    Wisconsin: (It is also notable that the Wisconsin statute has also been applied to even written communications by its high court, in a case where a 13-year old boy penned a school threat)
    Whoever, in a public or private place, engages in violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud or otherwise disorderly conduct under circumstances
    in which the conduct tends to cause or provoke a disturbance is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor...
    New Jersey: I've never met anyone from New Jersey NOT GUILTY of publicly using offensive language, have you? Hell, the accent itself should be grounds for incarceration...
    ... Offensive language. A person is guilty of a petty disorderly persons offense if, in a public place, and with purpose to offend the sensibilities of a hearer or in reckless disregard of the probability of so doing, he addresses unreasonably loud and offensively coarse or abusive language, given the circumstances of the person present and the setting of the utterance, to any person present...
    New York: (Home of "What the fuck are you lookin' at?")

    Sec. 240.20 Disorderly conductA person is guilty of disorderly conduct when, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof:

    1. He engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior; or
    2. He makes unreasonable noise; or
    3. In a public place, he uses abusive or obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or
    4. Without lawful authority, he disturbs any lawful assembly or meeting of persons; or
    5. He obstructs vehicular or pedestrian traffic; or
    6. He congregates with other persons in a public place and refuses to comply with a lawful order of the police to disperse; or
    7. He creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose.
    Now then...

    We know that the vast majority of the States have DisCon laws (I like to call them 'asshole' laws, actually). We also know that as police officers, we are charged with the literal application and 'street' interpretation of what does, and does not constitute a degree of conduct that breaches the given language of the statute in our particular jurisdictions.

    The point that I am attempting to make here is that I see very little difference in the Brighton law (a municipal ordinance) that this article references, and other 'annoyance' (or 'asshole') laws in other States, yet this article seeks to take a poke at it, particularly. I am suprised to notice how quickly other (and well-respected, I might add) law enforcement officers like you both will jump on the "chaos" bandwagon, calling this law 'ridiculous', when in fact, similar laws certainly already exist on the books of even State statutes, and have already well passed 'constitutional muster'.

    Of course, we don't write the laws, we enforce them.

    Our enforcement of these laws, (and the descretion that we routinely use in their application), is actually what usually has to withstand such tests as 'constitutional muster', for if we were to delve into the topic of ridiculous laws, we'd certainly have a long list of 'spitting on the sidewalk' and 'waving flags at passing trains' statutes to play with in our sandbox...

    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."
    - Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

    Tell me not, Sweet, I am unkind,
    That from the nunnery
    Of thy chaste breast and quiet mind
    To war and arms I fly.
    - Lovelace

    The opinions expressed by this poster are wholly his own, and should never be construed to even remotely be in representation of his employer, its agencies or assigns. In fact, they probably fail to be in alignment with the opinions of any rational human being.

  11. #11
    pac201's Avatar
    pac201 is offline Used up and retired
    Verified LEO
    Join Date
    05-26-08
    Location
    a handbasket...guess where we're going...
    Posts
    1,110
    Rep Power
    872608
    I teared up when I read all of that countybear, that's the nicest a$$ chewing I've seen in a long time...

    Job security...

    Ecclesiastes 8:11 Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.

  12. #12
    countybear's Avatar
    countybear is offline BDRT - Baby Daddy Removal Team
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    01-18-07
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    6,512
    Rep Power
    4611627
    Quote Originally Posted by pac201 View Post
    I teared up when I read all of that countybear, that's the nicest a$$ chewing I've seen in a long time...

    Nah, pac.. no 'ass chewing', moreso (yet another) gig thrown at media sensationalism, and how quick we tend to be to buy into the hype and hypocrisy.

    In just the past six months, we've allowed the media to choose our president for us, indict a governor, and create a shake up of consumer (and financial market) confidence unseen since 1929.

    When are we going to take the tofu spoon our of their hands, and go back to the buffet for the real meal?

    "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."
    - Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

    Tell me not, Sweet, I am unkind,
    That from the nunnery
    Of thy chaste breast and quiet mind
    To war and arms I fly.
    - Lovelace

    The opinions expressed by this poster are wholly his own, and should never be construed to even remotely be in representation of his employer, its agencies or assigns. In fact, they probably fail to be in alignment with the opinions of any rational human being.

  13. #13
    lewisipso's Avatar
    lewisipso is offline Injustice/Indifference/In God we trust
    Supporting Member Lvl 3
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    02-02-07
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    14,720
    Rep Power
    6936011
    Ah yes, the annoyance laws. Here's ours.



    103. Disturbing the peace
    A. Disturbing the peace is the doing of any of the following in such manner as would foreseeably disturb or alarm the public:
    (1) Engaging in a fistic encounter; or
    (2) Addressing any offensive, derisive, or annoying words to any other person who is lawfully in any street, or other public place; or call him by any offensive or derisive name, or make any noise or exclamation in his presence and hearing with the intent to deride, offend, or annoy him, or to prevent him from pursuing his lawful business, occupation, or duty; or
    (Does not apply to law enforcement officers) (Period)



    (3) Appearing in an intoxicated condition; or
    (4) Engaging in any act in a violent and tumultuous manner by any three or more persons; or
    (5) Holding of an unlawful assembly; or
    (6) Interruption of any lawful assembly of people; or
    (7) Intentionally engaging in any act or any utterance, gesture, or display designed to disrupt a funeral, funeral home viewing, funeral procession, wake, memorial service, or burial of a deceased person.
    (8) Intentionally blocking, impeding, inhibiting, or in any other manner obstructing or interfering with access into or from any building or parking lot of a building in which a funeral, wake, memorial service, or burial is being conducted, or any burial plot or the parking lot of the cemetery in which a funeral, wake, memorial service, or burial is being conducted.
    You would think we have a lot of this.

    B.(1) Whoever commits the crime of disturbing the peace shall be fined not more than one hundred dollars or imprisoned for not more than ninety days, or both.
    (2) Whoever commits the crime of disturbing the peace as provided in Paragraphs (A)(7) and (8) of this Section shall be fined not more than one hundred dollars or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both.
    Amended by Acts 1960, No. 70, 1; Acts 1963, No. 93, 1; Acts 1968, No. 647, 1; Acts 1979, No. 222, 1; Acts 2006, No. 805, 1.

    Technically, as I have been told, a person could stand next to me and my children and exclaim a loud list of vulgar words and as long as it is not directed toward anyone specific it would not be illegal. Although the punch in his mouth would be.
    Do not war for peace. If you must war, war for justice. For without justice there is no peace. -me

    We are who we choose to be.

    R.I.P. Arielle. 08/20/2010-09/16/2012


  14. #14
    lewisipso's Avatar
    lewisipso is offline Injustice/Indifference/In God we trust
    Supporting Member Lvl 3
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    02-02-07
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    14,720
    Rep Power
    6936011
    By the way, I have never known anyone here to do a seconds jail time, post conviction, for this offense.
    Do not war for peace. If you must war, war for justice. For without justice there is no peace. -me

    We are who we choose to be.

    R.I.P. Arielle. 08/20/2010-09/16/2012


  15. #15
    MacLean's Avatar
    MacLean is offline O/R Gun mod
    Verified LEO
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    09-05-07
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    11,802
    Rep Power
    4584773
    I still have a problem with passing a vague and constitutionally overbroad law cb - and yes I did read the law.

    When a city attorney says "there could be situations where the measure would violate freedom of speech," then my comments stand.

    I certainly won't take issue with your interpretation of the media, but Terminator and I both deserve a little more credit for our comments.

    The existance of a stupid or unconstitutional law in one or multiple States does not excuse the creation of a new law with the same fault.

    The legal climate - even if you disagree - has the SCOTUS making decisions like Ashcroft Vs. Free Speech Coalition!

    Read that decision and tell me that these kinds of speech are worse than the types of photos the court declined to put outside the first amendment!

    This may not be a popular stance amongst law enforcement, but I stand by it. We should not be arresting someone for being an asshole.

    Here is the law in my State, for reference:

    RCW 9A.84.030

    Disorderly conduct.



    (1) A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if the person:

    (a) Uses abusive language and thereby intentionally creates a risk of assault; (Already ruled unenforceable)

    (b) Intentionally disrupts any lawful assembly or meeting of persons without lawful authority; (Usually not enforceable, depends on motivation of disruption)

    (c) Intentionally obstructs vehicular or pedestrian traffic without lawful authority; or (Usually not enforceable, depends on motivation of disruption.)

    (d)(i) Intentionally engages in fighting or in tumultuous conduct or makes unreasonable noise, within five hundred feet of: (Has not been tested yet, was in response to the Westboro nuts)

    (A) The location where a funeral or burial is being performed;

    (B) A funeral home during the viewing of a deceased person;

    (C) A funeral procession, if the person described in this subsection (1)(d) knows that the funeral procession is taking place; or

    (D) A building in which a funeral or memorial service is being conducted; and

    (ii) Knows that the activity adversely affects the funeral, burial, viewing, funeral procession, or memorial service.

    (2) Disorderly conduct is a misdemeanor.
    [2007 c 2 § 1; 1975 1st ex.s. c 260 § 9A.84.030.]
    I'm your huckleberry...

    Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentus telum est!

    You can be the weapon, and the gun in your hand is a tool - or the gun is a weapon and you are the tool.


    I was looking for a saint who was a devil of a lover,
    but every girl I found was either one way or the other...



 

 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •