Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday July 10 2015, @10:07AM   Printer-friendly
from the land-of-the-almost-free dept.

Photography Is Not A Crime (PINAC) correspondent Michale Hoffman has been found guilty of trespassing on public property. He was arrested in August 2014 for holding up signs saying "Police State," "Liars Investigating Liars," "F??K THE TSA" and "IRS = Terrorist" on a public road leading to the Jacksonville International Airport (JAX). Hoffman was barred from invoking a First Amendment defense at his trial. "While we are disappointed in the jury's verdict we look forward to appealing the judge's rulings on the First Amendment issues that the jury was not allowed to hear or consider," said attorney Eric Friday. Furthermore:

Duval County Judge Brent Shore also refused to answer the jury's question about whether or not holding up signs on public property is illegal. It's not, of course, but prosecutors convinced the jury that all the cops had to do was order him to leave, even if he was not breaking any law, to give them the right to arrest him for trespassing. "The state convinced the jury that I didn't have to break any law to be trespassed," Hoffman said.

Judge Brent Shore created arbitrary "credentialed media" rules that prevented PINAC from filming the court case, but allowed photographers from The Florida Times-Union and News4Jax to cover the trial at the last moment.

In an order issued after Michale Hoffman recorded himself hurling insults at journalists and cops [length: 5:36] on the court steps, Chief Fourth Circuit Judge Mark Mahon threatened to arrest anyone who recorded the Duval County Courthouse, even from across the street, for contempt of court. Additionally, Judge Mahon's order banned calling into question the integrity of the court or its judges, or calling them "corrupt." In response, another PINAC correspondent demonstrated what would happen if you tried to film the courthouse [length: 4:18] (the same user also engaged in the same conduct as Hoffman [length: 10:22] in front of JAX, and was not arrested). PINAC also filed a lawsuit in federal court against Mahon on Tuesday.

Eugene Volokh of the Washington Post's Volokh Conspiracy legal blog called Mahon's order unconstitutional. The order is also discussed at the Popehat legal blog. From the order:

[T]he proper procedure for challenging a court's decision is to file an appeal with the appropriate appellate court. Shouting out on the Courthouse grounds that the Court and judges are "corrupt" during business hours while people are entering the Courthouse is entirely inappropriate and disruptive and is analogous to falsely shouting "fire" in a crowded theater...

3. Demonstrations or dissemination of materials that degrade or call into question the integrity of the Court or any of its judges (e.g., claiming the Courts, Court personnel or judges are "corrupt," biased, dishonest, partial, or prejudiced), thereby tending to influence individuals appearing before the Courts, including jurors, witnesses, and litigants, shall be prohibited on the Duval County Courthouse grounds....


Original Submission

Related Stories

Right to Record Police Activities in Public Advances in U.S. District Court Win 13 comments

The Boston Globe has a story out about a ruling in US District court this week that narrows the scope of a 50-year old Massachusetts law that restricted recording of police and other government officials.

The law, and similar ones still in effect in 10 other states, was implemented long before the advent of now ubiquitous cell phones. It and similar laws criminalized recordings made of police and public officials in public even in performance of their duties, as felonies and have caught large numbers of individuals, activists, and journalists doing the same thing they always do in their net. (Most states are covered already by rulings which find such recording legal on first amendment grounds.)

But a ruling issued Monday by US District Court Judge Patti Saris found, "On the core constitutional issue, the Court holds that secret audio recording of government officials, including law enforcement officials, performing their duties in public is protected by the First Amendment, subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions." And so, she added, the law "is unconstitutional in those circumstances."

The attorney general's office is reviewing the decision so challenge or appeal may still be forthcoming. However, as the Globe notes

this is one law whose time has come and gone. Challenges to the law go back to at least 2001, when a spirited dissent in a case then before the Supreme Judicial Court insisted that the "legislative intent" was to regulate government surveillance, not that of private citizens trying to monitor police conduct in a public place.

This case was clearly a win for greater transparency — and that's all to the good. It should be allowed to stand.

More information on recording public officials is available here and here.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Maybe now we can, just a little bit more, in Massachusetts.

Good one Skippy.

Previously: Right to Record Police Established in U.S. Fifth Circuit
Right to Record Police Established in U.S. Third Circuit

Related: New Bill in Colorado Would Protect the Right to Record Police
PINAC Correspondent Found Guilty of Trespassing on Public Road
China Says it's OK for Members of the Public to Record the Police


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @10:12AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @10:12AM (#207351)

    Unpopular losers are trespassing on public land because nobody wants to see losers in public. Put all the undesirables in prison where they belong. Those undesirable anarchist losers are totally out of control.

    • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @04:54PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @04:54PM (#207530)

      I am with you, but there is not enough room for all the corrupt cops.

  • (Score: 0, Offtopic) by FatPhil on Friday July 10 2015, @10:22AM

    by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Friday July 10 2015, @10:22AM (#207355) Homepage
    He starts with an inane rant that displays his complete lack of understanding of the use of tropes in English. Of course those three entities do not form a singular thing that either is or represents "Europe", it's just a simple metonymy, using one term to refer to things that it is associated with. His literal interpretation is just plain dumb.

    However, he continues to call those three entities "the troika". So they are a sled or carriage pulled by three horses? Nope, that would be a dumb literalist interpretation of what he wrote. So he's a fucking hypocrite too.

    I didn't read any further, as clearly he was just puffing himself up for a rant, rather than laying the foundations for a sensible argument.

    So am I, you may say. In which case, I suggest you also stop reading this post - right here.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 2) by M. Baranczak on Friday July 10 2015, @12:03PM

      by M. Baranczak (1673) on Friday July 10 2015, @12:03PM (#207381)

      I didn't read any further

      I'm not sure if you even read the headline.

      • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Friday July 10 2015, @02:11PM

        by Nerdfest (80) on Friday July 10 2015, @02:11PM (#207446)

        I'm fairly sure it was a response to the previous story about Greek debt.

        • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Saturday July 11 2015, @02:30PM

          by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Saturday July 11 2015, @02:30PM (#207881) Homepage
          Yup, looks like a rehash bug. I've never even seen this story, there's no way I could have posted to it.
          --
          Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
      • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Saturday July 11 2015, @02:29PM

        by FatPhil (863) <{pc-soylent} {at} {asdf.fi}> on Saturday July 11 2015, @02:29PM (#207880) Homepage
        I've not even seen this story before, there's no way I could have posted to it.
        --
        Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday July 10 2015, @03:55PM

      by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Friday July 10 2015, @03:55PM (#207501) Journal

      It's all Greek to me.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @10:23AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @10:23AM (#207356)

    The Jury are fucking guilty of being stupid obedient shits, or in other words, Americans. If there were even one juror with any integrity, this mistrial should have ended in deadlock.

    • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @12:26PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @12:26PM (#207389)

      They were probably also Obama voters.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @12:54PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @12:54PM (#207399)

      Voire dire filters out any such people by design.

  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @10:32AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @10:32AM (#207360)

    attorney Eric Friday. He's just so fucking pleased to be a lawyer in a litigious police state. There's plenty of lucrative work for lawyers, until they're disbarred for failure to suck honorable judge cock, that is. So the real winners are the judges, because they can make thinking contemptuous thoughts illegal, that's contempt!

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Friday July 10 2015, @06:32PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday July 10 2015, @06:32PM (#207574) Journal

      It is unfortunate that someone has to throw themself on the grenade to enact real change in this country. But, unfortunately, that's how our legal system works (e.g. requires standing).
       
      This guy is an activist for this exact cause. Much like Rosa Parks, presumably he knew exactly what he was getting himself into. And, he is willing to fight this for all of us.
       
      So, thank you Mr. Hoffman and Mr. Friday. You are doing the FSM's work.
       
      The silver lining is that this is exactly the cut-and-dry case we want to be escalated to the highest courts.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Justin Case on Friday July 10 2015, @10:48AM

    by Justin Case (4239) on Friday July 10 2015, @10:48AM (#207365) Journal

    I guess today is an appropriate day for my sig...

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @02:15PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @02:15PM (#207450)

      Quoting your sig so that the context doesn't get lost if some day you should change it:

      Before a revolution can take place, the population must lose faith in both the police and the courts -Heinlein, "Friday"

      Especially nice coincidence is that the attorney is named Eric Friday.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Friday July 10 2015, @02:19PM

      by Phoenix666 (552) on Friday July 10 2015, @02:19PM (#207451) Journal

      Yep. It seems the first step is to completely blow away the illusion of authority, especially moral authority, of the police and courts and politicians and bankers and CEOs. It must be made abundantly clear, not simply based on supposition and suspicion because nearly everyone is already there, but through mountains of facts and data. It must be inescapably clear that they are the criminals and cheats who are destroying everyone else for their own mere vanity. The conclusion must be absolutely unavoidable: Washington DC et Wall Street delenda est ("delenda sunt?" Latinists please feel free to step in and correct the conjugation).

      --
      Washington DC delenda est.
      • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday July 10 2015, @07:12PM

        by HiThere (866) on Friday July 10 2015, @07:12PM (#207597) Journal

        delenda est.

        I'm not a real Latin scholar, but Cato the Elder was, and he said "Carthago delenda est" for over a decade before it was destroyed. I was told it meant "Carthage *must* be destroyed.", so it's probably a tense that wasn't covered in a basic Latin class.

        --
        Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
      • (Score: 2) by edIII on Friday July 10 2015, @10:55PM

        by edIII (791) on Friday July 10 2015, @10:55PM (#207683)

        blow away the illusion of authority, especially moral authority, of the police and courts and politicians and bankers and CEOs.

        Police? Check. They're moral authority has been obliterated for years. Aside from the fact that most often they're nothing more than glorified tax collectors for the state, they've been faced with scandal after scandal that shows an endemic state of corruption. Cops do, and have, regularly abused the law to prevent recording and transparency. All of it under the guise of either operational security, resisting arrest, or basically anything a cop can come up with just to book somebody. If we bring in the War on Drugs, then you have cops and law enforcement greatly motivated to violate civil rights as they can seize entire properties with Federal assistance . Stuff like that was only quite recently prevented by law in California. When you become a state sponsored and licensed highwayman, it's not shocking that you would act like a highwayman. Why not? You have the guns, and obviously anybody that has drugs has completely forfeited all of their assets to the state without due process. Obviously.

        Courts? Double and triple check. This article is a good example, but in general many judges have abdicated their responsibilities. Courts have simply become a vehicle for corruption.

        Politicians? CHECK. I don't think we need to look any further than Net Neutrality, the unPatriot Act, etc. to see government wildly out of control and disconnected for the will of the people. I would say at this point, it's completely flagrant.

        Bankers? Definitely checked. These are the same people who refused to work with home loan modifications to keep people in their homes. Bankers colluded with rich friends to negotiate all modifications in bad faith enabling the friends to pick up property on the cheap, then flip it on an already depressed market for less than market value. They're part of what keeps fucking up the market. If the home loan mods went through, there would be far less properties on the market at all. The people really buying everything up are *LARGE* investors working with 100 properties at a time, and foreign interests. If you look up the little miracle of the Deed of Trust, many properties were outright stolen since you can't argue about the Deed of Trust in the same venue that the foreclosure process takes. You need to lose your house first, *then* sue them.

        CEOs? Check. They've already escaped all accountability and responsibility, even when they kill people, since corporations can now be persons. Through shortsightedness and greed, American CEOs have destroyed the country in many ways from H1B nonsense, to only allowing 29 hours to employees to "put up the good fight" against Obamacare. Are we talking pharmaceutical? Some of those CEOs I directly liken to the "Doctors" helping the Nazis, since medical and humanitarian concerns are the *last* things on their minds.

        It must be made abundantly clear, not simply based on supposition and suspicion because nearly everyone is already there, but through mountains of facts and data.

        This occurs more or less on a weekly basis. I honestly think most people are completely aware of the situation, but feel like they have less choice than a guy in prison wearing lipstick. We know unequivocally at this point just how corrupt our country really is. The question really is, just how much longer till America snaps?

        --
        Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 11 2015, @12:23AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 11 2015, @12:23AM (#207712)

          Yeah, those two or three police cases ("scandal after scandal") you obsess over out of the millions of police-public interactions per year. I don't think you understand what "endemic" means.

          Tl;dr. Yes, I'm sorry the rest of us aren't as obviously smart and insightful as you. I pity you that has to live every day so obviously smarter than everyone else. The sky really is falling, I know. I'm impressed you didn't work in "circuses" and "bread" because a few douches have recently been adding that because I guess they think it makes them sound smart. Try some Plutarch quotes too, like every fucking intellectual hipster has every decade for hundreds of years. It is amazing how the conditions in THIS COUNTRY (user to fill in their own country name) are EXACTLY like it was for the Romans before they fell, and we've been like that for a thousand years. Must be a very long fall.

  • (Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Friday July 10 2015, @11:22AM

    by wonkey_monkey (279) on Friday July 10 2015, @11:22AM (#207372) Homepage

    Judge Brent Shore created arbitrary "credentialed media" rules that prevented PINAC from filming the court case, but allowed photographers from The Florida Times-Union and News4Jax to cover the trial at the last moment.

    So, usually anyone can start snapping photos or recording from their seat during a trial if they feel like it?

    Admittedly I haven't clicked on all ten links in the summary, but in at least one, it sounds like the rules on credentialled media were already in place and being followed as intended.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Spamalope on Friday July 10 2015, @03:44PM

      by Spamalope (5233) on Friday July 10 2015, @03:44PM (#207493) Homepage

      Legally, main stream media have no greater rights than anyone with a cell phone camera.

      The courts may address the number of media people to address space constraints, and the manner the recordings are made to prevent disruption in the courtroom. (i.e. control over-crowding if the trial is a media circus, and block overly noisy cameras or disruptive placement/operation)

      I've read about that courts media rules. The original credentialing system seemed designed to restrict press access to mainstream media. Such rules have been struck down in the past. In this case, each time Pinac met the requirements they were changed. The bar was moved several times, to include impermissible restrictions. (you must have credentials to record, you must prove you've recorded court proceedings for the past 6 months to get the credentials you require in advance to be permitted to record... Pinac had been recording in other districts so they actually met that one - and surprise - new requirements added)

      The friendly media were allowed to record *without* credentials while the reporters with an interest in the case from Pinac were barred. That's judicial over-reach meant to chill speech.

              Pinac appears to be an advocacy group started by an independent professional photographer (stringer?) who was prosecuted for photography despite Florida's right to record laws specifically protecting his activity. The group takes an interest open records laws and right to record/petition incidents, especially if there is a assault on a photographer, false charges files against one, or attempts to destroy recordings.

              The protestor on trial appears to be a paranoid crazy person (or he's been acting to bait authorities). In either case, he was behaving in a constitutionally protected way, on public land. The charges don't have legal merit beyond 'because I said so, I don't have to follow the law, I have the gavel'. Sadly, that has been enough so far - which may be exactly the point of this protest.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @04:57PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @04:57PM (#207533)

      New rules were created specifically for this trial. Then changed whenever those associated with the defendant met them.

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @11:36AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @11:36AM (#207374)

    "Shouting out on the Courthouse grounds that the Court and judges are "corrupt" during business hours while people are entering the Courthouse is entirely inappropriate and disruptive and is analogous to falsely shouting "fire" in a crowded theater..."

    People say that shouting "fire" in a crowded theater creates a clear and present danger. This isn't even slightly related.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Friday July 10 2015, @02:12PM

      by Nerdfest (80) on Friday July 10 2015, @02:12PM (#207447)

      I would think charging someone for trespassing on a public road is a far more clear and present danger.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @10:32PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @10:32PM (#207673)

      "Shouting out on the Courthouse grounds that the Court and judges are "corrupt" during business hours while people are entering the Courthouse is entirely inappropriate and disruptive and is analogous to falsely shouting "fire" in a crowded theater..."

      Evidently he was speaking just a little too much truth to power. That had to be stopped.

  • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @11:40AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @11:40AM (#207376)

    Shouting out on the Courthouse grounds that the Court and judges are "corrupt" during business hours while people are entering the Courthouse is entirely inappropriate and disruptive and is analogous to falsely shouting "fire" in a crowded theater.

    Yes, it's analogous to disagree with the ruling party, aka. "shouting fire in a crowded theater".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater#The_Schenck_case [wikipedia.org]

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @03:26PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @03:26PM (#207484)

      Shouting [...] that the Court and judges are "corrupt" during business hours [...] is entirely inappropriate [...]

      I have to agree: It is completely inappropriate to suggest that they are corrupt only during business hours. ;-)

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Friday July 10 2015, @11:44AM

    by bradley13 (3053) Subscriber Badge on Friday July 10 2015, @11:44AM (#207377) Homepage Journal

    Popehat did a detailed analysis [popehat.com] of the "shouting 'fire' in a theater" nonsense, in the context of a different case.

    tl;dr: This was a precedent used around WWI to punish people protesting against the war. Since then, such protests have been declared absolutely legal. So this phrase refers to a legal precedent that has been overturned.

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by Freeman on Friday July 10 2015, @02:14PM

    by Freeman (732) on Friday July 10 2015, @02:14PM (#207449) Journal

    Seems like a regular Circus. Some Clown going around doing stupid stuff, but clearly not illegal. Some Judge taking the law and making a pretzel out of it as far as I can tell, because he felt like it. Really, the sad part is the Jury Not Throwing the stupid allegations into a toilet bowl and flushing them. Seriously, they should have written their verdict on toilet paper as Not Guilty. Because where else were they to find paper when dealing with something like this.

    --
    Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @02:48PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @02:48PM (#207462)
      You know what else is a regular circus? Random unnecessary capitalization.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @08:40PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @08:40PM (#207635)
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Friday July 10 2015, @02:26PM

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Friday July 10 2015, @02:26PM (#207453) Journal

    Really, since when? Can you also be barred from invoking your 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination, too? How about habeus corpus? Any other bedrock principle in American law that this or any judge can summarily rule "out of bounds?"

    To me it's another data point that supports the hypothesis that the government in this country has abandoned the Rule of Law for Rule by Fiat. Of course they still want to tie our hands with "the law," but when one side of a contract has egregiously violated, and continues to egregiously violate, the Social Contract [wikipedia.org], then the other side of the contract is under no obligation to continue to honor it. This is how revolutions have started, this is how another revolution will start.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
    • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @03:26PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @03:26PM (#207483)

      Since you gave up your liberties in the name of security. Gee, who could have thought that the price of authoritarianism is freedom.

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday July 10 2015, @06:25PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday July 10 2015, @06:25PM (#207572) Journal

        Since you gave up your liberties in the name of security.
         
        Funny, I didn't notice when that constitutional amendment was ratified.

        • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Saturday July 11 2015, @04:41AM

          by Immerman (3985) on Saturday July 11 2015, @04:41AM (#207769)

          Didn't have to be. All it takes is a lack of sufficiently strenuous objection by the populous when it starts being ignored.

        • (Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday July 13 2015, @02:52PM

          by Freeman (732) on Monday July 13 2015, @02:52PM (#208516) Journal

          Oh, you neglected to notice the fine print in the "Patriot" / "Freedom" Acts?

          --
          Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @03:29PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @03:29PM (#207485)

      To me it's another data point that supports the hypothesis that the government in this country has abandoned the Rule of Law for Rule by Fiat.

      You mean, America is ruled by an Italian car company? :-)

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @03:51PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @03:51PM (#207495)

    The garbage dump of the country. What else did you expect?

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by fnj on Friday July 10 2015, @03:55PM

    by fnj (1654) on Friday July 10 2015, @03:55PM (#207500)

    Shouting out on the Courthouse grounds that the Court and judges are "corrupt" during business hours while people are entering the Courthouse is ... analogous to falsely shouting "fire" in a crowded theater

    Horseshit, the hell it is, you horse's ass. How does a stupid bastard like you find enough IQ to remember how to breathe?

  • (Score: 1) by angst_ridden_hipster on Friday July 10 2015, @04:20PM

    by angst_ridden_hipster (5616) on Friday July 10 2015, @04:20PM (#207516) Homepage

    what this all means is that there will be more time and expense before this court's rulings are overturned by a competent court.

    If the defendant can afford it, he'll win in the end.

    --
    Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
    www.fogbound.net
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @05:04PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 10 2015, @05:04PM (#207535)
    Sounds more like it's honestly shouting "fire" in a burning theatre.
    • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday July 10 2015, @07:24PM

      by HiThere (866) on Friday July 10 2015, @07:24PM (#207601) Journal

      That was the original meaning. Such a cry in the age of highly flamable theaters would tend to create such panic that almost nobody could get out. What you were supposed to do was suggest loudly and forcefully that people should leave in a calm and orderly manner. Frightening people far from the entrance tended to lead to panics such that almost nobody could get out.

      Now it's true that a false cry of fire was also damaging, and had caused people to panic and be trampled to death with no danger present, but even if a fire was present, panic needed to be avoided.

      --
      Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.