ACLU Defends "Taps"

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Tom Montgomery
    Lurking since 1997
    • Sep 1999
    • 35611

    #31
    Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

    Originally posted by Brian Palmer

    Now that is obnoxious. I thought the guy was playing the music loudly on his home stereo system. That would be one thing. Three loudspeakers on a telephone pole is something else altogether.

    No surprise that the ACLU is defending him. They tend to take extreme positions with regard to interpreting the 1st Amendment.

    He should be allowed to play taps on his home stereo equipment as loudly as he can stand it. But the loudspeakers should have to go.

    This guy must be a real tool.
    "They have a lot of stupid people that vote in their primaries. They really do. I'm not really supposed to say that but it's an obvious fact. But when stupid people vote, you know who they nominate? Other stupid people." -- James Carville on the plethora of low-quality GQP candidates in the mid-term election.

    Comment

    • Keith Wilson
      Trying to be reasonable
      • Oct 1999
      • 64114

      #32
      Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

      I expect that the town's attitude would have been the same had he been playing Taps, the Marseillaise, Beethoven, or the Grateful Dead. Still, it's only a minute, but really, three loudspeakers?
      "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations,
      for nature cannot be fooled."

      Richard Feynman

      Comment

      • SKIP KILPATRICK
        Senior Member
        • Jan 2013
        • 13573

        #33
        Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

        Originally posted by Keith Wilson
        three loudspeakers?
        Looks like the guy was in search of a Constitutional fight!

        I stand by #23
        Skip

        ---This post is delivered with righteous passion and with a solemn southern directness --
        ...........fighting against the deliberate polarization of politics...

        Comment

        • skuthorp
          Senior Member
          • Jan 2002
          • 73602

          #34
          Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

          I would have defended the guys right to play it, but those speakers?…………………..

          Comment

          • L.W. Baxter
            can eat fifty eggs
            • Sep 2003
            • 23618

            #35
            Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

            I bet there is more going on between this jagoff and his neighbors than just his loudspeaker boorishness.

            Comment

            • Phillip Allen
              new member
              • May 2002
              • 63618

              #36
              Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

              Originally posted by skuthorp
              I would have defended the guys right to play it, but those speakers?…………………..
              how high were they turned?
              The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
              Personal failures are too important to be trusted to others.

              Comment

              • Tom Montgomery
                Lurking since 1997
                • Sep 1999
                • 35611

                #37
                Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

                Originally posted by Phillip Allen
                how high were they turned?
                Well... the ACLU claims, "the recording neither exceeds any established noise levels nor is it as loud as many other sounds the borough tolerates — including many sounds that do not communicate a message, like lawnmowers, leaf blowers, chainsaws, and vehicles."

                Evidently the complainant disagrees.

                So do you believe the American Civil Liberties Union? Or the neighbor who complained about the level of noise?
                "They have a lot of stupid people that vote in their primaries. They really do. I'm not really supposed to say that but it's an obvious fact. But when stupid people vote, you know who they nominate? Other stupid people." -- James Carville on the plethora of low-quality GQP candidates in the mid-term election.

                Comment

                • Phillip Allen
                  new member
                  • May 2002
                  • 63618

                  #38
                  Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

                  Originally posted by Tom Montgomery
                  Well... the ACLU claims, "the recording neither exceeds any established noise levels nor is it as loud as many other sounds the borough tolerates — including many sounds that do not communicate a message, like lawnmowers, leaf blowers, chainsaws, and vehicles."

                  Evidently the complainant disagrees.

                  So do you believe the American Civil Liberties Union? Or the neighbor who complained about the level of noise?
                  it's a loaded question for me... I don't want to type it all out but my job was shut down once because someone with very loud shop air conditioners didn't want us to start equipment before 0800 in the morning... we were trying to avoid as much heat as possible and the sob put four guys in the hospital with heat stroke... I still don't forgive the jerk

                  as it stands, I agree with the ACLU
                  The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
                  Personal failures are too important to be trusted to others.

                  Comment

                  • Oysterhouse
                    Senior Member
                    • Sep 2012
                    • 1207

                    #39
                    Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

                    It would be an interesting juxtaposition if a Muslim family moved across the street from him, erected loudspeakers and played their call to prayer at the same volume that he plays taps.

                    The guy has a right to his freedom of speech, so does everyone else. That is a double-edged sword.
                    Even a fish wouldn’t get in trouble if it kept it's mouth shut.

                    Comment

                    • seanz
                      Resilient?
                      • Nov 2006
                      • 23662

                      #40
                      Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

                      War Pigs would fix this problem....
                      We don't know how lucky we are....

                      Comment

                      • skuthorp
                        Senior Member
                        • Jan 2002
                        • 73602

                        #41
                        Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

                        Originally posted by Phillip Allen
                        how high were they turned?
                        You don't go to that trouble and spend that amount of money to play them softly. They are racetrack type OB speakers and may very well be directional as well.
                        There's a bit more to this I expect.

                        Comment

                        • Sky Blue
                          Banned
                          • Feb 2014
                          • 15090

                          #42
                          Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

                          War Pigs could fix it
                          I think I would go with this...

                          Comment

                          • Phillip Allen
                            new member
                            • May 2002
                            • 63618

                            #43
                            Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

                            Originally posted by skuthorp
                            You don't go to that trouble and spend that amount of money to play them softly. They are racetrack type OB speakers and may very well be directional as well.
                            There's a bit more to this I expect.
                            what if they just happened to be a good deal somewhere... there are more possibilities
                            The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.
                            Personal failures are too important to be trusted to others.

                            Comment

                            • Ron Williamson
                              Rocketman
                              • Apr 2000
                              • 7880

                              #44
                              Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

                              I wonder who owns the pole that they are mounted on.
                              Our utility companies get bitchy when people infringe.

                              Just because he can doesn't mean that he should.
                              Same as open carry.
                              R
                              Sleep with one eye open.

                              Comment

                              • Ian McColgin
                                Senior Member
                                • Apr 1999
                                • 51639

                                #45
                                Re: ACLU Defends "Taps"

                                The OP is an argument, not an even handed report. Brian Palmer's picture (#21) sheds more light, at least on the size of the speakers. We don't know if the ACLU claim that the actual noise level is lower than town limits and/or lower than other regular sounds in the neighborhood. If the noise is audible but within limits, then it's hard to escape the conclusion that the town action is in actuality content targeted.

                                That does look like a utility pole. Given how it's on his property, it may well be a "private pole", installed and maintained by the utility at the property owner's expense and legally owned by the property owner. I am well away from my time regulating utilities in this state and I don't know if the utility can bar non-utility uses such as this. I think they could but I don't think they have a compelling reason to wade into this mess.

                                I remain of the opinion that if the guy's not violating a decibel regulation, he's a bit tasteless but within his rights. Add to that, he seems to be a jerk pushing his rights. Well, they're his rights. We're a nation where everyone has the freedom to be a jerk.

                                Comment

                                Working...