biafra
El Dandy
Biafra Who?
Posts: 7,617
|
Post by biafra on Jan 26, 2011 17:44:37 GMT -5
The video starts at an awfully convenient time to make Hat McCullough (as he will be referenced throughout this post) seem like the anti-establishment hero, while at the same time make the bailiff and arresting officers seem like overzealous tyrants ruling with arbitrary laws. We don't know what happened in the minutes and seconds leading up to Hat's arrest, but judging from how suddenly he was placed in handcuffs, I'm willing to bet there is a lot more to this than the video is implying. Notice how after he is put on the ground, another person grabs their phone and one person grabs an actual video camera and starts recording it. These people are reacting to what's happening as it is occurring. Their video, capturing the arrest and the aftermath could be entitled 'GUY ARRESTED FOR WEARING HAT' and we'd know nothing about it otherwise. I'm sure the person recording the original video only broke out his camera/phone after some ordeal went down that would necessitate a recording. Nobody outside of that room knows what happened leading up to the arrest, but something obviously went down, otherwise our documentarian would not have felt the need to record the moments leading up to the arrest. There's obviously a reason for the court to justify their actions, but even if there aren't, and this video is what it is on the surface alone, there's nothing that can be done about it. The court is literally the house of law, and if you disobey a rule or law, you face the consequences. It may be an arbitrary rule that led to a potential overreaction, but the bigger overreaction was Hat not taking his hat off after being asked, then complaining about how the officers reacted to his blatant disrespect for figures of authority. That being said, it was a pretty sweet hat. He is an activist that doesn't believe in violence. Their cameras were going the entire time. They are professionals and get arrested all the time for these stupid laws. That is why the cops jumped on him so fast. They have a prejudice against activists up in New Hampshire who are trying to make changes with civil disobedience. If someone was in my house and I told them to take off their hat and they didn't and I tackled him and held him against his will and locked him up for it I would be call a kidnapper and a violent person. There is no difference here. Judges are not god. They are suppose to be civil servants. A court room is a public place paid for by the public. I agree. Then again, I am of a decided anti authoritarian mindset and philosophy so I would see it that way.
|
|
|
Post by 01010010 01101001 01100011 on Jan 26, 2011 17:49:49 GMT -5
As a cop, hat guy got what he was asking for. The law (at least here in Texas) is respect the court and it's orders. Once you walk into that court you've agreed to that and the fact that he snapped and refused to take the hat off is more than enough to drag his happy ass out and charge him with contempt. His refusal to leave caused force to be justifiably used as well.
Simple rule of thumb, when getting arrested and a cop tells you to do something, do it or we can and most likely will make your life a living hell for making our job harder. Not popular but, thems the breaks.
|
|
biafra
El Dandy
Biafra Who?
Posts: 7,617
|
Post by biafra on Jan 26, 2011 17:54:34 GMT -5
As a cop, hat guy got what he was asking for. The law (at least here in Texas) is respect the court and it's orders. Once you walk into that court you've agreed to that and the fact that he snapped and refused to take the hat off is more than enough to drag his happy ass out and charge him with contempt. His refusal to leave caused force to be justifiably used as well. Simple rule of thumb, when getting arrested and a cop tells you to do something, do it or we can and most likely will make your life a living hell for making our job harder. Not popular but, thems the breaks. I respect where you are coming from by I have never and will never be able to find justification in one person forcing another to do something "just because they said so" or for any other illogical reason. You're a cop, of course you're going to see things the way you do. I am most certainly not one. LOL. I'll always have an anti authoritarian/social libertarian bent I guess.
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 41,975
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Jan 26, 2011 17:54:35 GMT -5
Suspect is hatted, repeated suspect is hatted. I hope they throw his hatted butt in jail. Nice. You win. ;D
|
|
sryans
Don Corleone
BROOKLYN, BROOKLYN
Posts: 2,001
|
Post by sryans on Jan 26, 2011 17:56:54 GMT -5
It's disrespectful if the judge sees it that way. Like has been said before, in the courtroom, the judge is essentially God. Removing the hat is a sign of respect, and if the judge asks you to remove your hat, you take the dang thing off. It's protocol, and it's how things are done. Don't like it? Enjoy your time in the holding cell for contempt. Haha @ the notion that judges are 'god's; they deserve no more respect than anyone else, they're simply there to place the final judgement and they're certainly not equatable to a deity. As it has been mentioned before, whilst the man in question could have removed his hat to save himself this inconvenience, this antiquated and rather arbitrary rule shouldn't even be in place. Why is removing ones hat a sign of respect? What is it - specifically - about that article of clothing that signifies disrespect? The court proceedings would play out were he wearing a hat or not. Arbitrary and unnecessary laws like this are all too common, unfortunately - this video is evidence that these laws should be expelled as they have no place in a progressive society. The court is a judge's domain, they can have whatever rules they like. Perhaps the judge is old fashioned, perhaps the judge deals with enough court cases to make your head spin and does not like seeing people in his courtroom look undignified, perhaps he feels that if everyone has a certain attire, the proceedings will be more seamless if everyone is wearing proper attire. It does not matter. If the judge wants it a certain way, it shall be that way. I think there are some looking too far into this as some sort of rights issue when it isn't, it is just some idiot looking to make a point by disrespecting the will of the court and getting arrested for it.
|
|
BRV
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Wants him some Taco Flavored Kisses.
Posts: 17,012
|
Post by BRV on Jan 26, 2011 18:05:49 GMT -5
He is an activist that doesn't believe in violence. Their cameras were going the entire time. They are professionals and get arrested all the time for these stupid laws. Then that makes him even worse in my opinion. Instead of being just a guy who didn't want to take his hat off, he's a guy who didn't want to take his hat off because he wanted to martyr himself. I have nothing against civil disobedience, but I have a lot against people attempting to martyr themselves for a blue law. In Massachusetts, there is a blue law that prohibits the use of tomatoes in the production of clam chowder. (We take our chowder very seriously, apparently). These are the kind of guys who would build a stand in the middle of Boston Common with a sign that said "CLAM CHOWDER WITH TOMATOES!" just because they think they are proving a point, when in actuality, they are doing nothing more than drawing attention to their cause in order to become a martyr, which, in the internet age, is all too easy. Was the whole "no wearing hats in court" law in Keene, New Hampshire really affecting people so significantly that a group of "professional activists" felt the need to make a statement? Probably not, but hey, they got what they wanted. They made a scene and they got arrested, and now to all outsiders, the arresting officers look like the villains and they look like the anti-establishment heroes they believe that they are.
|
|
BR329
King Koopa
Support the WWF
Posts: 11,477
|
Post by BR329 on Jan 26, 2011 18:23:22 GMT -5
Am I the only one the thinks this is staged by these copblock.org guys? It's kinda weird how everyone is ready and seemingly in position with cameras? Like the kid in the front who just whips out a camera on a cue. And then there guy sitting next to the hat guy who was laughing as the incident started and at 0.54 he suddenly hes taping the whole thing (Which I think is posted in this thread). I dunno this seems kinda fishy to me but hey I could be wrong but I just feel this was done just to get some hits to some blog.
|
|
Dave at the Movies
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
VINTAGE D-DAY DAVE! Always cranking dat thing.
Posts: 18,224
|
Post by Dave at the Movies on Jan 26, 2011 19:25:21 GMT -5
He is an activist that doesn't believe in violence. Their cameras were going the entire time. They are professionals and get arrested all the time for these stupid laws. Then that makes him even worse in my opinion. Instead of being just a guy who didn't want to take his hat off, he's a guy who didn't want to take his hat off because he wanted to martyr himself. I have nothing against civil disobedience, but I have a lot against people attempting to martyr themselves for a blue law. In Massachusetts, there is a blue law that prohibits the use of tomatoes in the production of clam chowder. (We take our chowder very seriously, apparently). These are the kind of guys who would build a stand in the middle of Boston Common with a sign that said "CLAM CHOWDER WITH TOMATOES!" just because they think they are proving a point, when in actuality, they are doing nothing more than drawing attention to their cause in order to become a martyr, which, in the internet age, is all too easy. Was the whole "no wearing hats in court" law in Keene, New Hampshire really affecting people so significantly that a group of "professional activists" felt the need to make a statement? Probably not, but hey, they got what they wanted. They made a scene and they got arrested, and now to all outsiders, the arresting officers look like the villains and they look like the anti-establishment heroes they believe that they are. Okay so you believe it is okay for cops and judges to do whatever they want. We get it. The guy with the hat did nothing but question authority. I guess that is illegal now huh? Welcome to Nazi Land everyone.
|
|
|
Post by 01010010 01101001 01100011 on Jan 26, 2011 19:34:17 GMT -5
Then that makes him even worse in my opinion. Instead of being just a guy who didn't want to take his hat off, he's a guy who didn't want to take his hat off because he wanted to martyr himself. I have nothing against civil disobedience, but I have a lot against people attempting to martyr themselves for a blue law. In Massachusetts, there is a blue law that prohibits the use of tomatoes in the production of clam chowder. (We take our chowder very seriously, apparently). These are the kind of guys who would build a stand in the middle of Boston Common with a sign that said "CLAM CHOWDER WITH TOMATOES!" just because they think they are proving a point, when in actuality, they are doing nothing more than drawing attention to their cause in order to become a martyr, which, in the internet age, is all too easy. Was the whole "no wearing hats in court" law in Keene, New Hampshire really affecting people so significantly that a group of "professional activists" felt the need to make a statement? Probably not, but hey, they got what they wanted. They made a scene and they got arrested, and now to all outsiders, the arresting officers look like the villains and they look like the anti-establishment heroes they believe that they are. Okay so you believe it is okay for cops and judges to do whatever they want. We get it. The guy with the hat did nothing but question authority. I guess that is illegal now huh? Welcome to Nazi Land everyone. Actually, he refused an order from the court which is against the law.
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Jan 26, 2011 19:54:31 GMT -5
It was a pretty tacky hat, now had it been a fedora or a bowler, things would be different.
|
|
|
Post by A Dubya (El Hombre Muerto) on Jan 26, 2011 20:04:36 GMT -5
DUMB.
hats = evil apparently
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2011 20:05:46 GMT -5
Then that makes him even worse in my opinion. Instead of being just a guy who didn't want to take his hat off, he's a guy who didn't want to take his hat off because he wanted to martyr himself. I have nothing against civil disobedience, but I have a lot against people attempting to martyr themselves for a blue law. In Massachusetts, there is a blue law that prohibits the use of tomatoes in the production of clam chowder. (We take our chowder very seriously, apparently). These are the kind of guys who would build a stand in the middle of Boston Common with a sign that said "CLAM CHOWDER WITH TOMATOES!" just because they think they are proving a point, when in actuality, they are doing nothing more than drawing attention to their cause in order to become a martyr, which, in the internet age, is all too easy. Was the whole "no wearing hats in court" law in Keene, New Hampshire really affecting people so significantly that a group of "professional activists" felt the need to make a statement? Probably not, but hey, they got what they wanted. They made a scene and they got arrested, and now to all outsiders, the arresting officers look like the villains and they look like the anti-establishment heroes they believe that they are. Okay so you believe it is okay for cops and judges to do whatever they want. We get it. The guy with the hat did nothing but question authority. I guess that is illegal now huh? Welcome to Nazi Land everyone. Wow. You are absolutely correct. People not allowed to wear hats in a courtroom? NAZILAND. Give me a freaking break. The dude you quoted has a point that I and many other people agree with. There's a difference between fighting for human rights and being difficult JUST to be difficult. Also, it doesn't mean he believes it's "okay for cops and judges to do whatever they want". Don't paint these pictures just because you disagree.
|
|
sryans
Don Corleone
BROOKLYN, BROOKLYN
Posts: 2,001
|
Post by sryans on Jan 26, 2011 20:08:48 GMT -5
First they came for those with hats, I did not speak up, for I did not wear a hat...
|
|
h
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,734
|
Post by h on Jan 26, 2011 20:10:51 GMT -5
The guy with the hat did nothing but question authority. I guess that is illegal now huh? Welcome to Nazi Land everyone. I'm disgusted that you would even attempt to draw a comparison between a guy who chose to break a law and will have to spend a night or so in jail vs. the murder of 15,000,000 people. I dare you to ask a Holocaust survivor if they see any connection between this idiot and what they experienced under Hitler's regime. Just sickening... Wearing a hat in a courtroom is disrespectful. The rule is that you take off your hat. Take off the hat, and there will be no problem. Choose to pick a pointless fight, and you'll lose...in large part because your side has absolutely no merit.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Jan 26, 2011 20:16:55 GMT -5
Considering I spent 8 years of my life in a private school where we had to wear a boater to and from the campus, I've sat through a lot of stupid, dated rules.
But you know what? Even back then when I was a stupid asshole teenager, I still followed them because that's how the f***ing world works.
|
|
Dave at the Movies
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
VINTAGE D-DAY DAVE! Always cranking dat thing.
Posts: 18,224
|
Post by Dave at the Movies on Jan 26, 2011 20:23:25 GMT -5
Okay so you believe it is okay for cops and judges to do whatever they want. We get it. The guy with the hat did nothing but question authority. I guess that is illegal now huh? Welcome to Nazi Land everyone. Wow. You are absolutely correct. People not allowed to wear hats in a courtroom? NAZILAND. Give me a freaking break. The dude you quoted has a point that I and many other people agree with. There's a difference between fighting for human rights and being difficult JUST to be difficult. Also, it doesn't mean he believes it's "okay for cops and judges to do whatever they want". Don't paint these pictures just because you disagree. His point was painting a group of people as attention seekers that just need to follow the rules no matter how dumb those rules are. Listen to what you guys are saying. "It is okay to use violence and kidnap someone if they wear a hat inside a court room." How can you guys support that argument? What makes the guy in the black robe any better than anyone else? You guys are also not addressing the fact that an off duty police officer was also wearing a hat in the court room. Shouldn't by your guy's logic be that he also should get locked in a cage?
|
|
sryans
Don Corleone
BROOKLYN, BROOKLYN
Posts: 2,001
|
Post by sryans on Jan 26, 2011 20:27:51 GMT -5
He did not get arrested for wearing a hat, he got arrested for not taking it off when asked.
I think you are just simplifying everything everyone else says to something like "We should obey all rules at all times no matter what." No one has said that. The man in the robe runs the courtroom and can make a dress code as he sees fit.
And the off duty officer probably would have removed his damn hat instead of acting like he was being persecuted.
|
|
|
Post by A Dubya (El Hombre Muerto) on Jan 26, 2011 20:29:16 GMT -5
I have never ever understood how wearing a hat is construed as disrespectful to anyone. I have noticed especially in churches or formal places, for guys, we are always told to take them off, however women are allowed to wear them. I mean, at what point does this all just become.....oh I don't know, something that somebody just made up?
I understand having respect for the court, when it is warranted (I don't just blindly respect people because I'm told to) and yes, the dude could have picked his battles better perhaps, but come on. If somebody could intelligently explain to me why it is disrespectful for one gender to remove their hats while indoors, and it is perfectly fine for another to leave them on, then maybe I wouldn't feel like this whole hat shit is all just some type of superstitious, antiquated nonsense that has no true bearing on anything of importance.
|
|
Dean-o
Grimlock
Haha we're having fun Maggle!
Posts: 13,865
|
Post by Dean-o on Jan 26, 2011 20:29:24 GMT -5
Let me guess,
He's one of those "Against The System" types huh?
|
|
Dave at the Movies
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
VINTAGE D-DAY DAVE! Always cranking dat thing.
Posts: 18,224
|
Post by Dave at the Movies on Jan 26, 2011 20:31:51 GMT -5
Considering I spent 8 years of my life in a private school where we had to wear a boater to and from the campus, I've sat through a lot of stupid, dated rules. But you know what? Even back then when I was a stupid asshole teenager, I still followed them because that's how the f***ing world works. Private is the key word there though. A court is public. I totally understand following rules on private property. Would anyone here agree if the judge made you wear a suit in court. Should he be allowed to control your wardrobe in a public setting?
|
|