Valencia protester cries, ‘down with this sort of thing!’

“What thing?”, you ask. Well, isn’t it obvious?

23 Responses to “Valencia protester cries, ‘down with this sort of thing!’”

  1. “I feel strongly enough about my beliefs to come out here and protest this place… but not strong enough to engage in a conversation about it.”

  2. GG says:

    How is this not a violation of sit/lie? I believe the ordinance includes a prohibition on sitting “on an object placed on a public sidewalk” between 7AM and 11PM. Folding chairs like this one would seem to fall within that law.

    • KyleM says:

      She’s a fucking dumb ass, but don’t cry that what she’s doing is illegal and then bitch about how Occupy protesters are being treated unfairly. Who’s streets? Our streets. No matter what the political agenda is.

      • GG says:

        What??? Not sure how you possibly read anything related to Occupy protesters into that comment. I’m also not sure how, as an attorney, my questioning whether this violates sit/lie is “cry[ing] that what she’s doing is illegal.” I was addressing intelligent people and/or people who might know something about the topic, because I would imagine that not having an exception for people holding protests would seem to make the ordinance vulnerable to being stricken on First Amendment grounds — but you appear to be neither. To anyone else, I’m still curious. I’ve read the text of sit/lie but I am not very familiar with how it’s being interpreted by SFPD in contexts like these.

        • GG says:

          (Also, just to clarify, the ordinance exempts demonstrations, etc. “in compliance with a street use or other applicable permit,” but I’m assuming she does not have a permit.)

        • “I was addressing intelligent people and/or people who might know something about the topic”

          See, there’s your mistake right there! ;)

        • Daryl F. says:

          Honey, if you stopped being so defensive and insulting, intelligent people might be more likely to try and understand your reasoning. Childishly trying to prove yourself intellectually superior will backfire every time.

        • Herr Doktor Professor Deth Vegetable says:

          GG: Well, it seems like sit/lie, as written, would cover this. I mean, assuming the protestors are sitting down (as she is in this photo, and as the anti-Planned Parenthood protestors have been most times I have seen them outside that office), how could it not apply?

          • Daryl F. says:

            How could it not apply? Because sit/lie has a clear provision allowing for free speech and peaceful assembly. Have you not read the ordinance?

          • Herr Doktor Professor Deth Vegetable says:

            I have, but the exception is only for protests that have been issued a city permit, at least that is my understanding. Am I wrong about that?

          • Daryl F. says:

            Well that’s how it could not apply. I don’t have any information regarding the existence or lack of a permit in this case.

          • Herr Doktor Professor Deth Vegetable says:

            Well, that’s where it gets a little complicated. The thing is that SF doesn’t actually REQUIRE a permit for a protest of this size/type.

            So, it seems like a fairly reasonable assumption that the demonstrators would not have gone out of their way to apply for a permit that was not otherwise necessary outside of the specific Sit/Lie law.

          • GStorm says:

            The city is clueless on this issue which is why it is a colossally dumb law. I asked where I could get a permit to sit as a street performer and no one at city hall, the board or supervisors or the police department could tell me how to obtain one or whether my activity was illegal or not.

    • Thanks says:

      this is the same kind of attitude that is passing HR 347; i disagree with the reasons this woman is protesting. but i would never persecute someone for the general act of protesting in public, it’s a fundamental right in this country and it’s currently in jeopardy.

    • manymachines says:

      By my armchair/IANAL reading, you’re correct. This is (part of) why I voted against sit/lie — because it’s not making a real rule, it’s just creating a power that could be exercised arbitrarily.

    • GStorm says:

      The law allows an exception only for an abutting homeowner. Otherwise, it is against the law. As always, another law that those with money are exempt from.

  3. chalkman says:

    this woman routinely attends Dolores Park meetings…you can probably guess many of her wonderful contributions…

  4. think_for_me says:

    Down with homework; up with skirts!!!

  5. Meowingtons says:

    “Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!”

Leave a Reply

Current month ye@r day *