Posted on 11/14/2011 3:44:15 AM PST by lowbridge
Meet New York’s newest hero.
Kevin Hiltunen, a former NYPD officer, yesterday grabbed an Occupy Wall Street demonstrator by the collar and dragged him out of a Queens school where he’d been heckling US Rep. Bob Turner at the congressman’s swearing-in ceremony.
“I guess you could say I sorted him out,” said Hiltunen, 48, his jacket and tie barely mussed after dragging the scruffy protester out on his rear end.
“All I was doing was trying to stop this historic occasion from being disrupt-ed. There is a time and place to exercise your First Amendment rights,’’ said Hiltunen, of Bergen Beach, Brooklyn, who was identified by people at the ceremony as an ex-Marine.
“This was not the time or the venue,” Hiltunen added.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Again can anyone answer how the ex-cop is on disability? Seems to be 2 problems here. The protestor and the disability fraudster
The people whose rights were being violated were the ones whose ceremony was being ruined by the heckler.
Wonder if you'd say the same thing about assault if it the heckler broke into a ceremony for a black official and started shouting racial slurs.
Thanks Diamond, for clearing that up. I appreciate the time and effort you gave to clear that up for me. That would then shift the discussion to how that situation was then remedied (which I would then agree with a citizens’ arrest). I find it odd that he wasn’t charged, considering that the police were already on scene (as seen in one of the “draggin” photos at the link). Thanks again, I do appreciate your time and research.
The middle picture is a hoot. The officer seems to be on a scattered run for cover. I don’t believe the authorities would have taken any action to have stopped the dragee. That is how all these people have ended up in parks. They didn’t ask permission. They just moved in and the authorities are walking on eggshells.
“Are you saying Weismann’s actions were totally acceptable?”
Nope, I actually asked for more details of the event and applicable laws. Diamond provided the applicable law somewhere around #80 or so.
“Illegal acts are rarely followed by actual arrest, unfortunately. Which is what the left depends on.”
Maybe, but police were already on scene, and thus could have dealt with the matter, in addition to a citizens’ arrest if properly performed. So I have to wonder, why no arrest was made.
“I, sir, do not wish to be ruled by the warped interpretation of Constitutional rights by those who would trample the rights of everyone except themselves.”
Ditto.
Well said mo.
I say it was a clear-cut case of self-defense. The Marine, being a gentleman, just wanted to take it outside and settle it.
Back in 1776, John Rutledge and the Committee of Safety in Charleston, South Carolina, completely ignored “the Rule of Law” and forcefully removed the English governor of South Carolina, who was lawfully appointed by King George III.
Back then, some people understood freedom and the actions necessary to secure it. And others supported the king’s rule of law. They were called Tories and traitors.
Even if it’s a public event on public property, do people have the right to disrupt, not necessarily protest, a legally-held public event? I would say no, they don’t. If people want to protest by holding signs outside the ceremony or speaking to other protesters, they have that right. No one has the right to disrupt a legally held ceremony. If I went to Obama’s inauguration and started banging on things and shouting and screaming with the specific intent to disrupt the swearing in, I should expect to either be arrested or thrown out by the scruff of my neck. Weissman had the right to protest the ceremony, but only so far as to not interfere with it. He did not have the right to disrupt it.
I love the caption “Occupy sidewalk.”
This whole thread has gotten unbelievable.
A Marine removes an idiot who had CLEARLY planned to disrupt a legal gathering, and we’ve got people here who are demanding to know if this action was justified by statute. Common sense, apparently, isn’t good enough.
And once someone else has gone to the trouble of citing the specific New York statute concerning this illegality, then he wants to “shift the discussion” as to why there was no arrest. Why not man up and just apologize for jerking everyone around?
And now we have one poster who has already tarred said Marine with the accusation of a false disability, without knowing any of the facts.
That’s it for me. It’s gotten way too absurd.
zot
Do you know his disability? How does dragging out a loser mean he isn't disabled?
zot
Good, because you weren’t paying attention, anyway. You merely decided to try and put words in my mouth, and it didn’t work. I said all the way, way, way back in the thread, responding to the “under what authority” question, that I wanted to know if it was a citizens’ arrest (and subsequently that that would make a difference regarding the scenario, along with whether the man violate a criminal law). Given the further information, the scenario would now be different if it was a citizens’ arrest. So, if your attention span is too fleeting to pay attention, I’m overwhelmed with joy at the prospect of you not addressing me anymore. I don’t owe anyone an apology, and I assure you none is forthcoming.
From my first post on the thread:
“Just logged in to say the same thing [re: by what authority]. I couldn’t tell from the article, but I was going to ask if anyone knew if the retired officer was performing a citizen[s]’ arrest (I thought it required 2 people), was part of private security (doesn’t sound like it), or someone who assaulted someone else because he didn’t like the fact that he spoke during the ceremony.”
Why would it matter if it was a public or private event? If the butt head is standing next to me and shouting so I can’t hear the ceremony then he is interfering with my rights to listen. No matter whether he touches me or not the volume of his voice is assaulting my ears - just like loud motorcycle pipes are outlawed in some places, loud, obnoxious people have no right to assault my hearing. They become assaultive when they refuse to shut up so I can hear.
And for way too long we have stood quietly and permitted butt heads to bring about this kind of crap. The majority DOES rule and we have let the minority dictate what is acceptable for too long. I have the right to listen and the right to ask that the offensive person leave - I am there for the purpose of listening. If the offender does not leave then do we just disband the entire affair so they can have their “free speech rights” or does the majority take a stand and remove him from our presence?
I go with removal of the offender every time.
And you are not to stop protesters from entering anywhere you are and disrupting you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.