I found a very humorous incident that happen recently in Washington state. Apparently some people feel that honking your car horn should be protected under the 1st Amendment. They believe horn honking is a form of speech and they can do it whenever they want for however long. In Everett, Washington, Helen Immelt decided to seek revenge on her neighbor by parking in front of his house and laying on the horn for 10 straight minutes at 5:50 am. The police came, but two hours later she was back at it. She was arrested and convicted of noise violation after a 3-day trail. She appealed to the courts saying the noise violation was "vague, overbroad and interfered with her right to free speech.” On June 8th the judges ruling came down and he disagreed. “Horn honking which is done to annoy or harass others is not speech,” the judge added.
I found this very funny. I had never considered honking my horn a form of speech. Apparently though, Miss Immelt is not alone in her feelings. 10 years ago in Montana a lady tried the same argument. She repeatedly honked her horn as she drove past an RV park that she felt was an eyesore. After repeated trips, she was followed and her license number was turned over to police. The courts ruled what she did was simply disorderly conduct and not an example of free speech protected by the Constitution.
"She was not exercising her right to protest to her government and she was not protesting any allegedly unlawful act by her government or, indeed, by anyone," the unanimous court said. I find this statement at odds. According to this statement it is okay to honk and it will be protected if she is protesting the government or an equivalent. However, if she is just honking to be annoying, it is illegal and not protected under the 1st Amendment. So, what else will the government consider legal under specific situations, but illegal under others. If something is protected under the 1st Amendment is should be protected all the time. As far as honking, I really don't have an opinion if it is or isn't a 'form of speech.' (It's actually rather annoying!) But, I think the government has the right to pick and choose when something is protected or not.
For more on these two storied check out this link:
http://1stam.umn.edu/ Honking woman's free-speech argument falls on deaf ears; Ruling: Being honked off doesn't give right to honk
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Amber,
ReplyDeleteHow hilarious! On a serious note though, I do not think the government should pick and choose when something is legal or illegal. I see a horn as a safety entity of a car, since it should only be used to let another car know they are coming too close. Using your airbag is not free speech, so why should your horn be? Also, communities that have noise ordinances would write you a ticket for any noise past the legal time not just your horn.
I saw this in the news also. If the woman was really just laying on her horn at 5:50 a.m. for 10 straight minutes, that should not be protected under 1st amendment rights. Like Sarah mentioned, this has more to do with noise ordinances than free speech. The woman who honked her horn at the RV park doesn't seem as bad, but I wonder how often she was doing this and how much of a disturbance it was. It's interesting that her behavior is acceptable if it's to protest the government or an equivalent. I guess the difference is when you honk your horn in protest, such as when a person sees protesters on the streets, it's used to show support and not to disturb people in their everyday lives. I can kind of see a difference there, but as you point out the ruling seems a little arbitrary.
ReplyDeleteI don't have my trusty Black's Law Dictionary in front of me... but I don't think a horn honk would count as "speech" in ANY court of law! (Maybe if the car was the defendant, not the person... ha!) I don't even think this would count as "symbolic speech," the term used to define "speech" protected by the 1st Amendment such as sit-ins or protest buttons, which is not actually verbal speech. It's just plain annoying, really. The fewer people who overuse car horns the better, in my humble opinion... :)
ReplyDeleteHaha, thank you for sharing such an interesting article! Makes me want to honk off my neighbors too, even though it won't be protected speech. :)
ReplyDeleteWow. This actually made me laugh. As humorous as it is though, I think it illustrates a very important question. Should the government be allowed to pick and choose when something is or is not illegal? I say no. Things should either be illegal or not. But I also have to ask myself is there a gray area between the black and white here? In this particular case I'd have to say that no, honking your horn is not speech. Its noise pure and simple. I can assure you that if it had been someone else honking in front of Helen Immelt's house that she would have felt differently about it.
ReplyDeleteAmber,
ReplyDeleteLoved the article and link! While there are some people I'd love to blow my horn at nonstop because of their late night rude behavior and noise, I don't because I don't consider this as freedom of speech. I find it annoying at times, but as Sarah commented, I see the horn as a safety tool to warn or alert others.
Allowing the government to "pick and choose" what it deems legal or not is scary and warrants an examiniation into said gray areas.