I’m not sure if I should take it as an endorsement of my work that the city finds me obscene, but I’m enjoying the new official designation… although I’m going to fight like hell to get the charges dropped.
Long story short:
I held up a sketch of seven assholes to traffic on Peters Creek Road in NW Roanoke City and was charged with public obscenity… and I believe that I have the right to grace the public of that particular stretch of road with my artwork.
(continued)
Long story long:
Today was a major protest day for anti-abortionists. They decided to spend the one day that Jesus can’t see them (the day after crucifixion and the day before resurrection) spewing lies and harassing women outside of the Planned Parenthood clinic located on Peters Creek. At my last count, there were 44 protesters before the cops shooed them (and CJ and me) away like children chasing after pidgins.
And by “the cops,” I of course mean Roanoke City Police Officer L. K. Bowman (Badge: 0713, Car: 231) and Roanoke City Police Sergeant C.R. Sacra (Badge: 0347, Car: 0009).
Because so many protesters were expected today, I wanted the women with scheduled abortions to feel like they weren’t alone, and do so through love and humour, so a friend and I made a sign that said, “I SUPPORT YOUR CHOICE!” on one side and, “IGNORE THESE ASSHOLES.” on the other. Love and humour.
Here’s the other side of the sign:
I arrived on the scene at 7:20 AM and found three people standing around with signs. One sign said “Gone today, but on your conscience forever.” The other two, held by men, had a picture of a baby on one corner and said, “Face it… Abortion Kills a Person.” I walked over to talk to them and found out that one of the men, Barney Arthur, attends Hollins Road Baptist Church in Roanoke with his wife (the woman present) and the other man attended Riverland Baptist Church. He and Shirley Jocelyn—I may not have the right spelling—of a Catholic group called Gift of Life organised the protest today. They expected more than five people and did not receive a permit, dumbasses.
(I did not know they did not have a permit until the police arrived to break up the protest. I was counting on them to have known the law and secured a permit, so I later tried to excuse CJ and myself by saying that because there was a physical barrier, a road sign and approximately 10 feet of open space, between us and the protesters, we were a second group. Had they secured a permit, I believe we would have been considered a part of the same assembly or we would have been considered a separate protest, under five people, and therefore legal.)
Officer L. K. Bowman circled the area and then sat in the parking lot for about an hour before he came out of the car and addressed me about the sign. I told him it was protected speech and he harassed me about not being able to quote word-for-word the city code or any Supreme Court ruling about protected speech, something he couldn’t do either. He went back to his car and returned a few minutes later and said more nonsense about the sign. I responded, “Look, I don’t think I broke any laws or that this is necessarily obscene, but if it bothers you so much, I can cover the word ass.” He went back to his car.
Later, his sergeant, Sergeant C. R. Sacra pulled into the parking lot and conversed with Bowman. I was told I was not allowed to talk to Sacra about the investigation of my own alleged crime, or, at that point, even know that I was under investigation. ::cough:: FASCISTS ::cough:: Sorry, I’m still getting over the flu.
After Bowman returned from talking with Sacra he grabbed my sign and said, “Let me see this.” He did not say, “I am taking this as evidence,” he said, “Let me see this.” I replied, “Okay, but I’d rather not take my hand off of it.” He held the sign and pretended to study it before grabbing my hand and trying to take my hand off the sign. ::cough:: ORWELL IS ROLLING IN HIS GRAVE ::cough:: Sorry again. Damn, this flu is persistent!
At the unwanted contact, I pulled the sign back to me [Add.: This was in my write-up to the ACLU, but I forgot to put it here: "and calmly said, 'You're touching me. Don't touch me.'"] (Remember, he has not yet said anything about my being under investigation or that the sign was evidence.) At which point, he firmly and forcefully ripped my hand away from the sign and told me that he could charge me for Obstruction of Justice and that I was under investigation for a crime. This was the first I heard of it. I told him again that I would be more than willing to cover the back of the sign with a shirt, but he resisted and locked my sign in his car. ::cough:: MARTIAL LAW IS NOT JUSTICE IT IS THE USURPATION OF JUSTICE ::cough:: Ouch. Can someone pass me the NyQuil?
After this, he went back to the parking lot (which, I might mention, is private property) to his secret caucus with the sergeant, discussed some stuff, and went away to talk on his radio or some other serious-business-looking thing. At this point, I shouted up to the sergeant, “Can I come up and talk to you?” He shook his head no. “Then can you come down and talk to me?” He shook his head no again. “So you don’t think it would be beneficial in an investigation of myself to talk to me?” He shook his head no and crossed his arms in the most intimidating way a phallicly-bald man can muster. “Can I get your badge number then,” I shouted while scrolling through my phone for the number to the police dispatch centre. Once again, he shook his head in a clear gesture of no. I’m fairly certain this is a violation of police code and probably some federal law. Maybe one of my less-exhausted readers could look this up for me. Uh oh… I feel a big one coming on. Excuse me for a second. ::cough:: SERGEANT SACRA’S OWN SURLINESS AND REFUSAL TO PRESENT HIS BADGE WHEN FIRST ASKED, AND OFFICER BOWMAN’S MANHANDLING OF ME BEFORE I WAS TOLD THAT MY SIGN WAS EVIDENCE OR THAT I WAS UNDER INVESTIGATION, IS PROBABLY GROUNDS FOR THE WHOLE CASE TO BE DISMISSED AUTOMATICALLY, GOOD GOING, GUYS! ::cough:: Medic.
After a while, Bowman and Sacra dispersed the entire crowd, even after I made the distinction between the two groups of protesters. (Since the others didn’t get a permit, we were legally one group.) Sacra still refused to acknowledge that I was talking to him the whole time until I said, “I’m calling the station and making a formal complaint right now. I demand to see your badge number.” Then he told me his badge number and continued harassing the other protesters. After that, I headed to the police station to file a formal complaint and research the charge against me with another officer.
I believe I was as polite and cooperative as I could have been while watching two uniformed officers rape the Constitution.
I left the scene at 9 AM.
The Charge
(click to embiggen)
I was charged with “Displaying of obscenity in public.” For review purposes, this is the sign:
The “obscenity” was not defined at the time of arrest, so I’m not certain if the sketches of sphincters were considered obscene or if the offending part of the poster was the word assholes.
Here is the section of Roanoke City Code that defines obscenity:
ARTICLE IV. OBSCENITY
DIVISION 1. GENERALLY
Sec. 21-96. “Obscene” defined.
The word “obscene,” where it appears in this division, shall mean that which, considered as a whole, has as its dominant theme or purpose an appeal to the prurient interest in sex, that is, a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, excretory functions or products thereof or sadomasochistic abuse, and which goes substantially beyond customary limits of candor in description or representation of such matters and which, taken as a whole, does not have serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
(Ord. No. 23359, 12-6-76)
In defence of the word assholes:
In context, the word asshole was obviously meant to designate the other protesters. The illustrations accompanying the word were obviously meant to turn the wording of the poster into a pun. Given the two options of perceiving my sign literally as a poster covered in assholes telling you to ignore the assholes on that poster, or figuratively as a poster telling you to ignore the people around it who are, almost all of them, assholes while ironically covered in drawings of literal assholes, I believe that almost all sane people would choose the latter. That was the intent of the sign and so the text had no obscene intent, using the Roanoke City definition of obscene.
The poster’s declaration that people who protest at abortion clinics and harass women at a time when they most need support are assholes (in the figurative, not literal sense) obviously falls under having political value. When taken as a whole with the sketches, the text gains new literary and artistic value.
In defence of the sphincter sketches:
The sketches of the sphincters offered valid artistic, literary and political merit to the text of the poster. Artistic because they were a recreation of one of the many famous sketches of Kurt Vonnegut’s asshole.
Example:
The literary value of the assholes lies in the fact that their presence transformed the text into a double-entendre and without them, the poster would lose its (admittedly slight) cleverness.
HG Dumbass of the Week
So because it would be unwise of me, before my trial, to publicly declare the uninformed officer or his surly sergeant Homosecular Gaytheist’s second Dumbass of the Week, I’m going to declare the runners-up, Barney Arthur and his gang of ignorant women-haters Homosecular Gaytheist’s second Dumbass(es) of the Week.
Barney’s the Santa-looking goon.
Congratulations, Barney Arthur, Shirley Jocelyn, et. al., you earned it!

More pictures from the protest:
They only knew three chords… and neither of them knew the same three.











Call the ACLU and sue the living hell out of the city. Then use that money to move somewhere a little more civilized.
Comment by Friar_Zero — 11 April 2009 @ 2:23 pm
IANAL, but I think “which, taken as a whole, does not have serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value” is your lawful out, being as this certainly pertains to the definition of politics as the ‘affairs of government, politics, or the state’. Not to mention the removal of your property by force — your sign is as off limits to seizure as your wallet or your camera or your dog until such time as you are informed it is to be taken into evidence in relation to an investigation of a crime you are alleged to be involved in. Wish you’d had a video camera. That would have sealed the deal (the badge thing, taking your sign by ‘force’, your distance from the other group).
Comment by TankGrrl — 11 April 2009 @ 2:50 pm
No camera, but 45 witnesses should be enough.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 11 April 2009 @ 2:52 pm
*pounds fork and knife on the table*
Call the ACLU!
Call the ACLU!
Call the ACLU!
Call the ACLU!
If you need more peeps next time you protest, I’m not guaranteeing I can go (work), but I can spread the Good News.
Comment by Amanda — 11 April 2009 @ 3:02 pm
this is ridiculous…i love the fact that they couldn’t even think of their own visual aid, so they felt the need to steal from Jesus Camp. At least it keeps their mouths shut.
Comment by Krista — 11 April 2009 @ 4:59 pm
If you had a vagina, would you be a feminist? Serious question.
Comment by Jackson — 11 April 2009 @ 7:21 pm
No. Feminists see men as beneath women for some sort of bullshit, over-reaching apologetic reason. I see the two sexes as completely equal. Feminists see a world that they control. I see a world with no reason to have the term feminist.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 11 April 2009 @ 7:28 pm
Who, cowboy! I think when you say “feminist” your brain is thinking of something else (radical feminist/crazy bitch/nutjob/Andrea Dworkinbot). Being a feminist can certainly mean promoting exactly what you describe: equality in an unequal world.
Comment by TankGrrl — 11 April 2009 @ 7:38 pm
Why, cowgirl, I think that’s called rationalism, not feminism. Cunts have taken over the word feminist, so I say let them have it, we don’t need it. Why don’t we not give a label to the ones who want an equal society and just label the freaks: Feminists and chauvinists. The rest of us don’t need a label, thanks, we’re too busy living in the 21st century.
And I fail to see the relevance of this comment chain to the rest of the post, so I’m going to discourage its continuation.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 11 April 2009 @ 7:59 pm
Even if you wear a pant suit, you’re guaranteed to possess a smaller brain if you have a vagina.
I’m an agnostic who fucking hates feminists and abortionists. Could we ever be friends? Again, serious question.
Comment by Jackson — 11 April 2009 @ 8:10 pm
You’re on the verge of a perma-ban, mister. No one speaks that way to TankGrrl on my blog. Ever. Even sarcastically.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 11 April 2009 @ 9:26 pm
Bah. I could not drum up the energy to care even less than I do about this guy. People who make blanket ‘i hate feminists’ statement are, without fail in my experience, jerks acting out a public vendetta against someone who hurt or humiliated them. “Wah! I’ll get you back… I’ll hate on people similar to you! Wah! Then you’ll see. Wah! Cuz I don’t have the guts to deal with my pain and grow up. Wah!”
Comment by TankGrrl — 12 April 2009 @ 12:29 am
Also, another rule: TankGrrl gets to rip on anyone and everyone. And Thursday nights are pantsless nights. No one reading this blog is allowed to wear pants on Thursday night.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 12 April 2009 @ 2:33 am
My chauvinistic declaration of eentsy-weentsy brain mass in women not only wasn’t directed at you, TankGrrl, but neither was a result of being “hurt or humiliated” by any woman or feminist. I was merely stating a fact that’s been justified by my own experiences.
I should’ve been a little more precise about what I was actually asking. I want to know what Reed has to say to agnostics like me who hate religion as much as he does but still oppose feminism and abortion.
Comment by Jackson — 12 April 2009 @ 2:40 am
What have to I say? I say you caught me on a drinkin’ night and you’re being a little bitch. Perma-banned.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 12 April 2009 @ 2:49 am
You can appeal your ban by emailing me on a non-drinkin’ night.
Comment by Rev. Reed Braden — 12 April 2009 @ 2:53 am
ACLU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(etc.)
Comment by postsimian — 11 April 2009 @ 11:34 pm
While there are anii pictured on your sign, the depiction is not of a sexual fashion. Rather, it is a visual device which reinforces your stated opinion of the protestors, an opinion conveyed by the use of the word “assholes”.
When used as a noun to describe a person or a group of people, the word “asshole” implies that it’s subject is displaying or has displayed anti-social behaviour.
Given that such protestors are allowed – and often do – describe those who are pro-choice as murderers, use of literary and pictorial aids such as yours should be a non-issue.
Your sign is not the slightest bit sexual – it is a clever gimmick which draws attention to a behavioural observation.
Comment by Andrew Calder — 22 April 2009 @ 6:01 pm
Put your fucking sign down and stop being a little bitch when the Roanoke City Police ask you to stop displaying it. I think im in the mood for a perma-ban tonight. So make my dreams come true fag.
Comment by J.T. — 24 July 2009 @ 11:26 pm
Author : J.T. (IP: 24.149.68.38 , h38.68.149.24.cable.rdwd.cablerocket.net)
E-mail : J.Bridgeford@yahoo.com
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=24.149.68.38
Not banned. I feel you have so much potential for making yourself look retarded and I wouldn’t want to deprive you of the opportunity to do so. You’re only a little troll at the moment, but I have no doubt that with time, you can be the very best troll we’ve had here in a while.
Comment by Rev. J. Reed Braden — 24 July 2009 @ 11:39 pm