So it OK to have tents outside stores on Black Friday but not for Occupy

OK to feed the big corporate profits

Corporations, good.

People, bad.

Grass (on City Hall lawn), good

Constitution, bad.

**********

FWIW, grass -- the stereotypical suburban middle-class lawn variety, that is :) -- is a non-native species to the Los Angeles desert basin. Graas lawns require a lot of upkeep and precious water resources, as opposed to native species.

Apples & oranges.

Completely different scenarios.

Best Buy privately owns/leases the property and is happy to have them there because they're going to spend money and then leave. Occupy is public property which is governed under an entirely different set of rules - including the concept that public property should be available for ALL groups and/or individuals to use, not just one.

If you have permission to set up a tent for a stated purpose, you have no problems. It's really not even germane to try and "compare." If you had a big lawn and wanted to let people "occupy" it for First Amendment purposes, your permission would be all that was needed for that purpose--and you would not have to be a corporation, either.

If your purpose conflicts with the overlords, you'll be shut down quickly.
I must have missed the part in the Constitution that time restricts the right of assembly.

then that's your issue. If you are allowing people to "camp" or "reside" on it, then zoning could play a role.

However, there's wiggle room there--are the people REALLY "camping" or "residing" or are they simply holding an integrated demonstration that involves a lot of tents and 24 hour presence?

You'd have to start smelling poop and meth from the street before the cops and health department would be moving in.

The "overlord"--immediately speaking, anyway--is the property owner. So long as the primary purpose is protest and not residence, you can push back for awhile.

Now, public property is a different story. If a small cadre of people are squatting on public property to the point where the rest of the public cannot use it, then there's an issue brewing with the town/city/county responsible for park management.

I think one could stiff-arm the cops for quite awhile in that circumstance.

Are the tents up to code and qualified to get a Certificate of Occupancy?

Is the lot zoned for multi-family dwellings?

Of course, the people would have to cough up a lawyer or two--that takes money unless they can get a pro-bono attorney.

If the authorities could get others in the neighborhood to complain, they might have more of a "public nuisance" argument.

:shrug:

:wtf:


Where do you get the idea that I work for ANY corporation, simply because I respond with accurate information?

For the record, I don't work for anyone but myself.

permission.

People outside of Best Buy AREN'T living there.

http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/does-the-constitution-protect-tents/

sleeping = living

Property owners can allow such action if they so choose for a limited time before civic ire starts to rise.

By going with what's worked for other occupiers in the past.

Have an Occupy protest in a Wal-Mart parking lot, and everybody should open-carry a (legally registered) gun. That way you're not hurting public property with your feet and you're not intimidating people with signs.

always a good idea.

ranting about this very thing. There were already tents outside the Best Buy in his area.

He, unable to make the 2400 round-mile trip to be with his family for the holiday due to economic issues, thought that they ought to spend their holiday at home with their families instead of tents so that they could buy stuff.