Flipping The Bird At Cops Is Constitutional -- U.S. Court of Appeals

[Mozart]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/03/flip-off-police_n_2403563.html?ir=Politics



WASHINGTON -- A police officer can't pull you over and arrest you just because you gave him the finger, a federal appeals court declared Thursday.

In a 14-page opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruled that the "ancient gesture of insult is not the basis for a reasonable suspicion of a traffic violation or impending criminal activity."


About effing time!


I suggest that each of you print out a copy of this important Supreme Court decision, laminate it, then start to flip the bird at every goddamn cop that you see. Let them know that we won't put up with their police state **** anymore!


I'm making this suggestion in jest.


Eff cops!


~Mozart

[spiritguide]

The thread title is misleading as the reference is to the court of appeals and not the supreme court.

The article referenced stated that the case was remanded back the the original court for retrial. With this , one should not just jump out and be disrespectful because of one appeal court opinion. the play is not over till the fat lady sings. IMHO

[Lost Soul]

Certainly is Constitutional as free speech. You will even win the lawsuit for him beating the snot out of you. The point? That which is protected by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is not a necessarily a license excusing one from exercising courtesy and common sense. People are killed for perceived slights (road rage).

[Mozart]

The thread title is misleading as the reference is to the court of appeals and not the supreme court.

The article referenced stated that the case was remanded back the the original court for retrial. With this , one should not just jump out and be disrespectful because of one appeal court opinion. the play is not over till the fat lady sings. IMHO


Spiritguide ~


Oh, my bad. Thank you for catching that.


If a mod is reading this thread, can you kindly fix the subject line to say "Court of Appeals", rather than "Supreme Court"?

[ThePythonicCow]

The thread title is misleading as the reference is to the court of appeals and not the supreme court.


If a mod is reading this thread, can you kindly fix the subject line to say "Court of Appeals", rather than "Supreme Court"?

I just changed this thread's title from referring to the Supreme Court, to referring to the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Thanks for noticing :).

[gripreaper]

The thread title is misleading as the reference is to the court of appeals and not the supreme court.


If a mod is reading this thread, can you kindly fix the subject line to say "Court of Appeals", rather than "Supreme Court"?

I just changed this thread's title from referring to the Supreme Court, to referring to the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Thanks for noticing :).

The ruling was also in the 2nd appellate district, which means only people within that district can flip off cops. I'm in the 9th district on the west coast, and there is no such provision within our appellate district. So we buy them coffee and donuts instead, and while they are drugged and mesmerized, we just run off!

[kaon]

Certainly is Constitutional as free speech. You will even win the lawsuit for him beating the snot out of you. The point? That which is protected by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is not a necessarily a license excusing one from exercising courtesy and common sense. People are killed for perceived slights (road rage).

I couldn't agree with you more. This decision does not mean that people should go ahead and flip off the cops just because you can.

[Warlock]

Yeah, go ahead and do it.

You'll be on the receiving end of about 50,000 volts.

Warlock