Even the director knows of the risks involved since they won’t self insure the risk themselves. Why would he think the City would expose itself to the risk, oh yeah, that’s the liberal way of thinking.
I’m sorry, I guess I missed that part of the constitution providing your freedom to assemble, “unless you obtain valid & collectible insurance.”
If people want to assemble & protest it’s quite sad that they are waiting for NCLC to tell them where to go, when to go, where to walk and what to say!
The OWS 99% didn’t have to apply for any type of insurance to march in protest and these folks caused a lot of destruction. Why then would this protest not have the same legal rights? The OWS folks marched wherever they wanted to, broke store windows, and spray-painted business. That is vandalism. The also set up camps and didn’t have any permits to do that either. I guess the laws are just different in Tallahassee.
Freedom of speech and assembly does not mean disregard for the city ordinances or laws, no matter how valid the cause…this ‘event’ will be causing added security and a disruption to traffic flows, closed roads, health and safety concerns especially due to the size of the crowd–personally, I do not want tax dollars funding someone else’s personal cause, no matter how I feel about it. And, PLEASE, do NOT compare this ‘event’ to the George Soros backed OWS idiocy.
Really? Isn’t that what protesting is about…civil disobedience, or diregarding an ordinance/law that you admantly oppose? Jeez.
Oh, by the way, please don’t instruct us on what is relevant and what is not. That’s the primary reason we are where we are today because so many people believe that what is irrelevant to them should be irrelavant to everyone and be held to a different standard.
OK, I’ll step down off my box now. Sorry for the rant.
Prudent underwriting decision. The exposures, hazards and the lack of the ability to influence risk management make this a hard event to insure.
There is little premium for a one day special event policy and a huge potential for a large loss.
Even the director knows of the risks involved since they won’t self insure the risk themselves. Why would he think the City would expose itself to the risk, oh yeah, that’s the liberal way of thinking.
I’m sorry, I guess I missed that part of the constitution providing your freedom to assemble, “unless you obtain valid & collectible insurance.”
If people want to assemble & protest it’s quite sad that they are waiting for NCLC to tell them where to go, when to go, where to walk and what to say!
The OWS 99% didn’t have to apply for any type of insurance to march in protest and these folks caused a lot of destruction. Why then would this protest not have the same legal rights? The OWS folks marched wherever they wanted to, broke store windows, and spray-painted business. That is vandalism. The also set up camps and didn’t have any permits to do that either. I guess the laws are just different in Tallahassee.
I guess Tallahassee has it figured out. Good for them.
Wow SWFL Agent, we are getting booed. I think that’s a first for both of us. It’s usually OPOV who gets this treatment.
Freedom of speech and assembly does not mean disregard for the city ordinances or laws, no matter how valid the cause…this ‘event’ will be causing added security and a disruption to traffic flows, closed roads, health and safety concerns especially due to the size of the crowd–personally, I do not want tax dollars funding someone else’s personal cause, no matter how I feel about it. And, PLEASE, do NOT compare this ‘event’ to the George Soros backed OWS idiocy.
Really? Isn’t that what protesting is about…civil disobedience, or diregarding an ordinance/law that you admantly oppose? Jeez.
Oh, by the way, please don’t instruct us on what is relevant and what is not. That’s the primary reason we are where we are today because so many people believe that what is irrelevant to them should be irrelavant to everyone and be held to a different standard.
OK, I’ll step down off my box now. Sorry for the rant.