This article was originally published on the Marijuana Patients Organization site on March 28, 2011.
There is no fighting fair apparently by our opponents in the ever increasing medical marijuana debate in Michigan. Oakland County Sheriff’s department recently gave the Oakland Press video of medical marijuana defendants in a Waterford case. The tape was filled with profanity and messages of rage towards a corrupt police department and Sheriff.
Now while we do not condone the actions of the couple on tape we are amazed at the attempts the Sheriff department will take and the willingness of a non profiting and poorly staffed news publication to distribute such swine. By the way my children and several other children witnessed the tape and heard even the most offensive words outside the normal F&#$ and S*#!, “what about the children?”
Certainly an even more zealous prosecutor will jump at the chance to seek charges against the Oakland Press editor, Allen Adler for publishing such profanity and an ever willing Sheriff Michael Bouchard for his redistribution of such material, and maybe a few more charges that are obvious from their actions. Section 337 of the Michigan statute reads: “Indecent, etc., language in presence of women or children–Any person who shall use any indecent, immoral, obscene, vulgar or insulting language in the presence or hearing of any woman or child shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.”
Freedom of speech is not freedom from responsibility, nor is it freedom from the consequences of that speech, OCSD had no right to redistribute recordings to media outlets knowing that it would be redistributed to woman and children, understanding that this would violate state statute. Not to mention the fact both are currently under trial in Oakland county raises several other questions.
Case law has stated that editors weigh the newsworthiness of the event in question against concerns about community standards. Readers can be just as distracted when a newspaper clumsily sidesteps profanity as when a paper uses it; it’s up to the editor to decide whether the journalistic purpose of the story is best served by bluntness or decorum. The VIDEO did little to demonstrate the points of the authors’ story and had clearly done more damage to the community standards.
Those who argue that profanity is a protected free speech, free press right always want to quote Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The articles of delaration of human rights were adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948 and have been ratified twice in the last sixty years. Those who argue they can use profanity under Article 19 say it is their civil and political right. When is the last time someone read Article 19? Let us look at it now. “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
The key phrase in Article 19 is “freedom of opinion and expression”. Everyone has a belief or opinion, but they can always keep it to themselves, especially if it is truly something profane. Freedom of expression is actually freedom of conscience. The definition of conscience is a sense of right and wrong. Many people cannot distinguish right from wrong and in the media circus wrong sells more papers, news time and program slots. This brings in media censorship. Those involved in selling newspapers, developing program ideas, writing songs for a CD or blogging on the Internet do not like censorship. This official bureau was created to suppress speech or written material that is considered harmful, objectionable or sensitive to others.
Oakland Press your actions were harmful and objectionable to me and my neighbors. See you in court.