Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Is Love More Powerful than Hate on UVa’s Lawn?

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

A University of Virginia student shared the photo above and appended the following anonymous note:

I am a student at UVA. I put out these signs this morning (10/31) to show my support for the University, and to counter the hate in the messages posted on the doors behind the signs. All they say is the simple message “I love UVA.”

I put the signs up at 8:00 am. In less than 1 hr 1/2 hours, the fourth year living in lawn Room 10, with friends, ripped all the signs down. You can see my signs in Room 10 in one of the attached photos.

So much for free speech.

Please speak out. The First Amendment applies to everyone.

Question: How will the UVa administration spin this incident? President Jim Ryan says the student who posted “F— UVA” on her door is protected by free speech. Does our correspondent also have a protected right to express the sentiment on a sign that says “I ♥ UVA”? Does the occupant of Room 10, which is located near the room with the “F— UVA” sign, have the right to take down signs she disapproves of? If so, do other students have the right to take down her sign?

My prediction: The administration’s first instinct will be to ignore the incident in the hope that it will just go away. Its second instinct, if pressed, will be to find some pharisaical distinction why the one is different from the other, how the one warrants protection and the other doesn’t. We’ll see…

The signs are now sequestered inside Room 10, as seen in this photo. How my correspondent gained access to the room to take the photo, he or she did not explain.

Update: I have updated the text to correct an error in which I identified “Room 10” as the room with the “F— UVA” sign.

— JAB

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

88 responses to “Is Love More Powerful than Hate on UVa’s Lawn?”

  1. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    He put signs in front of someone else’s residence and then somehow gained entrance to it to see the intact signs that were not “ripped up”?

    😉

    Sounds like some “spin” is already going on….. 😉

  2. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    He put signs in front of someone else’s residence and then somehow gained entrance to it to see the intact signs that were not “ripped up”?

    😉

    Sounds like some “spin” is already going on….. 😉

  3. cjbova Avatar
    cjbova

    Will be interesting to see what happens.

    PS Larry: Writer said ripped down, as in removed; not ripped up, as in torn.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      taken down without “ripping” maybe?

      You put signs up in front of someone elses place then enter their residence afterwards – then “share” it with Bacon to publish?

      ans some of you like this? 😉 lord.

  4. cjbova Avatar
    cjbova

    Will be interesting to see what happens.

    PS Larry: Writer said ripped down, as in removed; not ripped up, as in torn.

  5. Wahoo Avatar
    Wahoo

    Keep the signs coming, good guys. Hour by hour, replace them. Make
    President Nice feel uncomfortable.

  6. Wahoo Avatar
    Wahoo

    Keep the signs coming, good guys. Hour by hour, replace them. Make
    President Nice feel uncomfortable.

  7. Wahoo74 Avatar
    Wahoo74

    I don’t know who “Larry G” is but he makes absolutely no sense. You think this is a conspiracy theory? Who are you, Mel Gibson?

    So, if I were still an undergraduate, I would say this is the final straw. I would walk down the Lawn with about 30 of my biggest male buddies. We would then go to each and every door with “F UVA” on it and tear off the posters. The precedent has been sent.

    President Ryan and the BOV cannot not possibly “defend” the First Amendment Rights of the woke radicals then prosecute the normal undergraduates who retaliate. Unless “free speech” at UVA now only means self-hatred of the university that you attend.

  8. Wahoo74 Avatar
    Wahoo74

    I don’t know who “Larry G” is but he makes absolutely no sense. You think this is a conspiracy theory? Who are you, Mel Gibson?

    So, if I were still an undergraduate, I would say this is the final straw. I would walk down the Lawn with about 30 of my biggest male buddies. We would then go to each and every door with “F UVA” on it and tear off the posters. The precedent has been sent.

    President Ryan and the BOV cannot not possibly “defend” the First Amendment Rights of the woke radicals then prosecute the normal undergraduates who retaliate. Unless “free speech” at UVA now only means self-hatred of the university that you attend.

  9. bamesjr Avatar
    bamesjr

    I like the scenario. The I Love UVA signs elicited the intended reaction. Said student in 10 has thus painted herself into a very tight corner. Awaiting chapter 3.

  10. bamesjr Avatar
    bamesjr

    I like the scenario. The I Love UVA signs elicited the intended reaction. Said student in 10 has thus painted herself into a very tight corner. Awaiting chapter 3.

  11. V N Avatar
    V N

    Has any one looked on the pages of UVA to see what exactly is getting said there?

  12. V N Avatar
    V N

    Has any one looked on the pages of UVA to see what exactly is getting said there?

  13. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    Questions asked and answered. I have just received this response from the student who put up the signs. Emails the student:

    Thank you for your attention to my previous post. I saw that there were questions about my photo of the interior of Room 10 and I wanted to set the record straight. After I put up the signs at 8:00 am, I stayed on the lawn to see what would happen. Interestingly, UVA security walked by and did not remove the signs. Then a student came out of a lawn room about 9:15 and was joined by friends. They took down all the signs by 9:30 and put them in Room 10 and then left the door open. (Door 10 is not the “F— You” door, but is a lawn room in the immediate vicinity). The students who took down the signs sat in a group on the lawn away from the door, so I walked by the room and quickly took a video of the signs in the room. The photo I sent is from the video.

    Also, I thought you might be interested to know that I posted my story in Reddit the same day. A dean from the University responded saying I only put up the signs to “bait” people. She also said that it was fine the signs were taken down because I didn’t have permission to put them up.

    Again, so much for free speech on campus. Thank you.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      There is some confusion over what “free speech” is. “Free Speech” does NOT give you the right to put signs on property that is not yours and you don’t have permission to.

      “Free speech” also does not give you the right to intrude into someone elses residence. It’s even more creepy than knocking on the door to beret the occupant over their door signage.

      “Free Speech” does not allow one to exercise it anywhere one wants. It’s specific to property you own or rent per the rules (like HOAs) or some public spaces that allow it or explicit permission.

      1. Atlas Rand Avatar
        Atlas Rand

        Larry, you made his/her point for them! If the student doesn’t have free speech to put up signs on the lawn, neither does the other student to put up the F UVA signs.

      2. CrazyJD Avatar
        CrazyJD

        Don’t you love it?. Instead of addressing the issue head on, Larry engages in classic diversion, quibbling about whether “taken down” means “ripping” and jumping to the erroneous conclusion that someone entered the premises, all the while that he fails to miss the central point. When it’s pointed out that no one entered the premises, Larry doesn’t retreat. Oh no, he goes right on claiming, in Goebbelesque fashion, that somebody “intruded into another person’s residence”. Indeed, he does not address that central point, which might be summarized as, “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander” The problem for Larry is: he just doesn’t like the speech. But I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. I think he just likes to argue for its own sake. The problem is the foolishness that results when he does.

        But as long as we’re quibbling, where does the “F-UVA” residence stop and Lawn common property begin? It looks like the two “I love UVa” signs are posted off the brick pavement in front of “F_UVa”‘s residence, outside the pillars and on the lawn itself. It would seem that “I love UVa” was not violating any rule by posting the signs on the lawn, since security did not take them down. How much further away from “F_UVa’s” door would be acceptable to you, Larry? Two feet? Ten feet? Somewhere so far away that the sign poster’s point would be lost? I’m guessing you’d pick the latter, Larry. Finally, Larry ignores whether the “baiting” accusation from the Dean has any relevance at all to a free speech issue. Of course, speech that opposes someone else’s speech can always be considered baiting. So what?

        Sometimes you post good stuff, Larry. In this instance, you have regained your monopoly on twaddle.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          re: ” But as long as we’re quibbling, where does the “F-UVA” residence stop and Lawn common property begin? It looks like the two “I love UVa” signs are posted off the brick pavement in front of “F_UVa”‘s residence, outside the pillars and on the lawn itself.”

          Well, if those signs were legal – then it would have been “illegal” to take them down, no? Were his “rights” to post them “violated”?

          😉

          1. CrazyJD Avatar
            CrazyJD

            Yes

    2. Wahoo74 Avatar
      Wahoo74

      The UVA Dean’s reply, whoever she is, confirms that Marxist conformity to the systemic racist theory that defends Hari Azher (38 East Lawn original perpetrator of the “F UVA” signs fiasco) adheres to is also prevalent among the faculty. She sees no fault in the obscene, anti-UVA/Jefferson signs, yet remonstrates the Lawn resident who merely posts “I Love UVA” signs.

      This is beyond Orwellian. It is Alice in Wonderland where the opposite of what should be in the world is.

    3. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      I have conferred with “I Love UVa” who has shared the Reddit post by the “dean from the University.” The person in question identified him or herself as “UVaDeanJ.” The Reddit sign-in name could refer to a UVa dean — or it could refer to an individual with the first name of Dean and a middle or last name beginning with J.

      Although it is certainly possible that the individual was an administrative official with UVa, I do not think we can assume that to be the case without further verification.

      1. Izzo Avatar
        Izzo

        There is a Dean J in admissions. Jeannine Lalonde. She writes a popular blog. It may be her (or not).

      2. James A. Bacon Avatar
        James A. Bacon

        Thanks Izzo. Carol Bova wrote to make the same point. My searches were obviously inadequate.

        Jeannine Lalonde’s online profile identifies her as Associate Dean of Admissions. So, the “I Love UVa” student is vindicated in this particular.

        We do not know if Lalonde’s siding with those who removed the “I Love UVa” signs is representative of most of the upper echelons of the UVa administration, but it reasonable to suggest that she reflects at least a segment of it.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          re: ” but it reasonable to suggest….”

          I think when you do this , you go way beyond what is factual and tread into speculation which is more and more like some kinds of discredited journalism – both left and right.

          And i don’t think the “I Love” person is “vindicated” at all except in the minds of the supporters… It’s questionable behavior. If anyone showed up on the porch of most folks abodes, rented or leased or whatever – and started taking pictures of the interior using a justification that the “door was open” – I think most folks would not find that appropriate and would be hostile to the idea as “okay”.

          Ya’ll go off on these threads and you don’t seem to know where the line is … sometimes…. Anyone who shows on up a porch that is not their residence KNOWs it’s not their property and likely does not know the specifics of the arrangements of the resident with the owner of the property. To presume they do know is problematical.

          And again – if this was a non-offensive sign – would this behavior be any more or less acceptable?

          The justification seems to be that because some folks find the sign offensive and nothing was done about it, then they can do something. In other words, take the law into their own hands.

          Once more – let me make clear, I do not support what the resident did. I find it offensive and provocative but I find some of the political signs also that way. It’s a right.

          It’s pretty much what you’d expect on a lot of University grounds… lots of opinions…

          1. cjbova Avatar
            cjbova

            And i don’t think the “I Love” person is “vindicated” at all except in the minds of the supporters…

            Larry, you remind me of SNL’s Emily Litella, except you never say, “never mind” when someone points out your misunderstanding. Jim said “vindicated in this particular,” i.e., a university official with the title of associate dean of admissions did make the post on Reddit.

            I find it ironic that at the bottom of the university’s undergraduate admission page, they post this quote from a student:

            “The students here at UVA are catalysts for change – whenever we see a problem, we do something about it. This drive helps to make UVA a better place, year after year.”
            Ben Trombetta ’22

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            re” So, the “I Love UVa” student is vindicated in this particular.”

            see that word “student” ?

            is that a misunderstanding?

          3. cjbova Avatar
            cjbova

            Larry, the “particular” referred to whether the dean who replied to the I LOVE UVA student in Reddit was a university official. She is an associate dean.

            Has nothing to do with the word student, Emily.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Do me a favor and quote the passage you are referring to… thanks!

  14. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    Questions asked and answered. I have just received this response from the student who put up the signs. Emails the student:

    Thank you for your attention to my previous post. I saw that there were questions about my photo of the interior of Room 10 and I wanted to set the record straight. After I put up the signs at 8:00 am, I stayed on the lawn to see what would happen. Interestingly, UVA security walked by and did not remove the signs. Then a student came out of a lawn room about 9:15 and was joined by friends. They took down all the signs by 9:30 and put them in Room 10 and then left the door open. (Door 10 is not the “F— You” door, but is a lawn room in the immediate vicinity). The students who took down the signs sat in a group on the lawn away from the door, so I walked by the room and quickly took a video of the signs in the room. The photo I sent is from the video.

    Also, I thought you might be interested to know that I posted my story in Reddit the same day. A dean from the University responded saying I only put up the signs to “bait” people. She also said that it was fine the signs were taken down because I didn’t have permission to put them up.

    Again, so much for free speech on campus. Thank you.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      There is some confusion over what “free speech” is. “Free Speech” does NOT give you the right to put signs on property that is not yours and you don’t have permission to.

      “Free speech” also does not give you the right to intrude into someone elses residence. It’s even more creepy than knocking on the door to beret the occupant over their door signage.

      “Free Speech” does not allow one to exercise it anywhere one wants. It’s specific to property you own or rent per the rules (like HOAs) or some public spaces that allow it or explicit permission.

      1. Atlas Rand Avatar
        Atlas Rand

        Larry, you made his/her point for them! If the student doesn’t have free speech to put up signs on the lawn, neither does the other student to put up the F UVA signs.

    2. Wahoo74 Avatar
      Wahoo74

      The UVA Dean’s reply, whoever she is, confirms that Marxist conformity to the systemic racist theory that defends Hari Azher (38 East Lawn original perpetrator of the “F UVA” signs fiasco) adheres to is also prevalent among the faculty. She sees no fault in the obscene, anti-UVA/Jefferson signs, yet remonstrates the Lawn resident who merely posts “I Love UVA” signs.

      This is beyond Orwellian. It is Alice in Wonderland where the opposite of what should be in the world is.

    3. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      I have conferred with “I Love UVa” who has shared the Reddit post by the “dean from the University.” The person in question identified him or herself as “UVaDeanJ.” The Reddit sign-in name could refer to a UVa dean — or it could refer to an individual with the first name of Dean and a middle or last name beginning with J.

      Although it is certainly possible that the individual was an administrative official with UVa, I do not think we can assume that to be the case without further verification.

      1. Izzo Avatar
        Izzo

        There is a Dean J in admissions. Jeannine Lalonde. She writes a popular blog. It may be her (or not).

      2. James A. Bacon Avatar
        James A. Bacon

        Thanks Izzo. Carol Bova wrote to make the same point. My searches were obviously inadequate.

        Jeannine Lalonde’s online profile identifies her as Associate Dean of Admissions. So, the “I Love UVa” student is vindicated in this particular.

        We do not know if Lalonde’s siding with those who removed the “I Love UVa” signs is representative of most of the upper echelons of the UVa administration, but it reasonable to suggest that she reflects at least a segment of it.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          re: ” but it reasonable to suggest….”

          I think when you do this , you go way beyond what is factual and tread into speculation which is more and more like some kinds of discredited journalism – both left and right.

          And i don’t think the “I Love” person is “vindicated” at all except in the minds of the supporters… It’s questionable behavior. If anyone showed up on the porch of most folks abodes, rented or leased or whatever – and started taking pictures of the interior using a justification that the “door was open” – I think most folks would not find that appropriate and would be hostile to the idea as “okay”.

          Ya’ll go off on these threads and you don’t seem to know where the line is … sometimes…. Anyone who shows on up a porch that is not their residence KNOWs it’s not their property and likely does not know the specifics of the arrangements of the resident with the owner of the property. To presume they do know is problematical.

          And again – if this was a non-offensive sign – would this behavior be any more or less acceptable?

          The justification seems to be that because some folks find the sign offensive and nothing was done about it, then they can do something. In other words, take the law into their own hands.

          Once more – let me make clear, I do not support what the resident did. I find it offensive and provocative but I find some of the political signs also that way. It’s a right.

          It’s pretty much what you’d expect on a lot of University grounds… lots of opinions…

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            re” So, the “I Love UVa” student is vindicated in this particular.”

            see that word “student” ?

            is that a misunderstanding?

          2. cjbova Avatar
            cjbova

            And i don’t think the “I Love” person is “vindicated” at all except in the minds of the supporters…

            Larry, you remind me of SNL’s Emily Litella, except you never say, “never mind” when someone points out your misunderstanding. Jim said “vindicated in this particular,” i.e., a university official with the title of associate dean of admissions did make the post on Reddit.

            I find it ironic that at the bottom of the university’s undergraduate admission page, they post this quote from a student:

            “The students here at UVA are catalysts for change – whenever we see a problem, we do something about it. This drive helps to make UVA a better place, year after year.”
            Ben Trombetta ’22

          3. cjbova Avatar
            cjbova

            Larry, the “particular” referred to whether the dean who replied to the I LOVE UVA student in Reddit was a university official. She is an associate dean.

            Has nothing to do with the word student, Emily.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Do me a favor and quote the passage you are referring to… thanks!

  15. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead V

    I think the Five Man Electric Band from Canada could mine this for a “Signs Part Deux” song.

    1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
      Reed Fawell 3rd

      By all reliable accounts, the Lawn at UVA today is a place of intolerance and hate generated by those who occupy it, a toxic atmosphere protected by university officials and obviously encouraged and taught by UVA’s faculty. This poison wholly defeats the purpose of a decent university.

      1. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
        James Wyatt Whitehead V

        All the more reason for conservative students to rebel by refusing to cooperate and even breaking those rules that restrict free speech on purpose. It might prove to be an effective way that the management at UVA is unjust not the rule breakers.

  16. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead V

    I think the Five Man Electric Band from Canada could mine this for a “Signs Part Deux” song.

    1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
      Reed Fawell 3rd

      By all reliable accounts, the Lawn at UVA today is a place of intolerance and hate generated by those who occupy it, a toxic atmosphere protected by university officials and obviously encouraged and taught by UVA’s faculty. This poison wholly defeats the purpose of a decent university.

      1. James Wyatt Whitehead V Avatar
        James Wyatt Whitehead V

        All the more reason for conservative students to rebel by refusing to cooperate and even breaking those rules that restrict free speech on purpose. It might prove to be an effective way that the management at UVA is unjust not the rule breakers.

  17. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    re: “twaddle”.

    No, it’s actually pretty simple. If it is YOUR residence – then you do have a right to free speech but if it is NOT your residence, you have no such right nor do you have a right to peer into a residence that is not yours.

    Can Crazy imagine someone peering into his/her residence and taking pictures ?

    I think posting obscene messages is crude myself but it also matters where you can do that and really , if it’s not your property or residence then you have no such “right” no matter whether your message is obscene or “love”. Either way, you’re exercising a “right” you really do not have, and, in fact, you may be breaking the law.

    You just cannot go onto property that is not yours – there is no such “right” unless it is public property and even then what you can do on public property is not unlimited. You walk into some public spaces to excercise your “free speech” and odds are you’re going to get escourted out.

    1. CrazyJD Avatar
      CrazyJD

      Where do you get this notion that if you simply reassert your arguments, their validity is improved. This really is Goebbelesque.

      Really, Larry. Your understanding of the law may be a little out of date. Read Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501 (1946) (distributing religious materials (speech, Larry) on the sidewalk of a company owned town, even though against the regulations of the town, is protected by the First Amendment)

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        If the space is a public space – like a sidewalk – that’s different than a non-publc space.

        Sometimes some try to regulate a public sidewalk and they cannot but there is no doubt about non-public property in my mind.

        If what you say is true then taking down that guys signs was a “violation” of his “rights” , no?

        And he also had the right to apparently to wander to a front door and peer inside ? You’d be okay with someone doing that to your door?

        You’d be wrong Crazy…. bad wrong… guy

    2. CrazyJD Avatar
      CrazyJD

      >>Can Crazy imagine someone peering into his/her residence and taking pictures ?

      If I leave my front door open, yes

  18. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    re: “twaddle”.

    No, it’s actually pretty simple. If it is YOUR residence – then you do have a right to free speech but if it is NOT your residence, you have no such right nor do you have a right to peer into a residence that is not yours.

    Can Crazy imagine someone peering into his/her residence and taking pictures ?

    I think posting obscene messages is crude myself but it also matters where you can do that and really , if it’s not your property or residence then you have no such “right” no matter whether your message is obscene or “love”. Either way, you’re exercising a “right” you really do not have, and, in fact, you may be breaking the law.

    You just cannot go onto property that is not yours – there is no such “right” unless it is public property and even then what you can do on public property is not unlimited. You walk into some public spaces to excercise your “free speech” and odds are you’re going to get escourted out.

    1. CrazyJD Avatar
      CrazyJD

      Where do you get this notion that if you simply reassert your arguments, their validity is improved. This really is Goebbelesque.

      Really, Larry. Your understanding of the law may be a little out of date. Read Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501 (1946) (distributing religious materials (speech, Larry) on the sidewalk of a company owned town, even though against the regulations of the town, is protected by the First Amendment)

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        If the space is a public space – like a sidewalk – that’s different than a non-publc space.

        Sometimes some try to regulate a public sidewalk and they cannot but there is no doubt about non-public property in my mind.

        If what you say is true then taking down that guys signs was a “violation” of his “rights” , no?

        And he also had the right to apparently to wander to a front door and peer inside ? You’d be okay with someone doing that to your door?

        You’d be wrong Crazy…. bad wrong… guy

    2. CrazyJD Avatar
      CrazyJD

      >>Can Crazy imagine someone peering into his/her residence and taking pictures ?

      If I leave my front door open, yes

  19. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Really? You don’t mind if someone peers through your window and door openings standing on your property?

    You’ve really gone off the farm on this , guy…. geeze

    Ya’ll are SO desperate on these issues that you’ll apparently contort yourself into a pretzel to stay the course, eh?

    1. CrazyJD Avatar
      CrazyJD

      You just don’t get it. Did you read the opinion? The Lawn is a public space. Unless i’m as far off the reservation as you seem to think, I can and have wandered onto the Lawn at any time. It’s open to the public. As such, it’s open to speech, and not just the speech that you select. If your door is open when someone walks by, he can take a picture through your door. Your window may be another thing, but don’t bring in new facts to suit your narrative. A window was not involved with this.
      So stop with your assertions about “You’re so desperate”. Argue the facts as they are, Larry, not as you wish they were. Stop making it up.
      You’ve left yourself with asserting that we’ve gone off the farm, that we’re contorting ourselves into pretzels. That’s called “projection”, a standard tactic of you lefties. See Russia Hoax and the more recent and real Biden Affair.

  20. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Really? You don’t mind if someone peers through your window and door openings standing on your property?

    You’ve really gone off the farm on this , guy…. geeze

    Ya’ll are SO desperate on these issues that you’ll apparently contort yourself into a pretzel to stay the course, eh?

    1. CrazyJD Avatar
      CrazyJD

      You just don’t get it. Did you read the opinion? The Lawn is a public space. Unless i’m as far off the reservation as you seem to think, I can and have wandered onto the Lawn at any time. It’s open to the public. As such, it’s open to speech, and not just the speech that you select. If your door is open when someone walks by, he can take a picture through your door. Your window may be another thing, but don’t bring in new facts to suit your narrative. A window was not involved with this.
      So stop with your assertions about “You’re so desperate”. Argue the facts as they are, Larry, not as you wish they were. Stop making it up.
      You’ve left yourself with asserting that we’ve gone off the farm, that we’re contorting ourselves into pretzels. That’s called “projection”, a standard tactic of you lefties. See Russia Hoax and the more recent and real Biden Affair.

  21. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    No one has a right to privacy when they leave their front door open! When the I-Love-UVA student glanced inside and saw his/her signs, he/she had every right to take a photograph to document the fact that they had been stolen and where they had been taken.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      If the door is open, anyone can come in ? Are you kidding? You guys are a HOOT! And when you place signs on property that is not yours, how can they be “stolen”. Do you think he could go to court and claim his signs were “stolen” and charge the resident of the home? This is funny….

      1. CrazyJD Avatar
        CrazyJD

        You just don’t get it. Did you read the opinion? The Lawn is a public space. Unless i’m as far off the reservation as you seem to think, I can and have wandered onto the Lawn at any time. It’s open to the public. As such, it’s open to speech, and not just the speech that you select. If your door is open when someone walks by, he can take a picture through your door. Your window may be another thing, but don’t bring in new facts to suit your narrative. A window was not involved with this.
        So stop with your assertions about “You’re so desperate”. Argue the facts as they are, Larry, not as you wish they were. Stop making it up.
        You’ve left yourself with asserting that we’ve gone off the farm, that we’re contorting ourselves into pretzels. That’s called “projection”, a standard tactic of you lefties. See Russia Hoax and the more recent and real Biden Affair.

      2. CrazyJD Avatar
        CrazyJD

        “Door is open, anyone can come in?” No, but again those aren’t the facts of this case, Larry. There is no evidence that anyone went in. Stop making up facts to suit your narrative.

        “signs on property that is not yours.” More twaddle. Check with your local municipality on their sign ordinances. You may remove a sign if you are under a program with your municipality to do so. Otherwise, yes, you could be charged with stealing the sign if it’s your intention to “permanently deprive the owner” of the sign. In any case I ever saw, removing the sign to inside your own residence would be evidence of your intent to permanently deprive.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Crazy – is the porch public space? And you can’t peek into a window but you can into a door (like one with a storm door? It’s doubtful the door was “open” but rather pushed open … who would leave a door actually open?

          And if those signs were REALLY on public property then the person who put them there actually could take legal action … except in this case, they’d end up with charges against themselves also.

          Why do you folks think it’s okay to push the boundaries on things like this to start with? Some of ya’ll are probably going to end up in jail if you persist in this kind of behavior, no?

          You don’t take photos of the insides of people’s houses from their porches and claim it’s “okay” because you’re on public property unless you live in your own little world until the law brings you back to reality.

          If this were your home, your porch and your open door – would you really think it okay for that person to be there taking pictures? I bet not. I bet you’d be in his face with a weapon, no?

  22. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    No one has a right to privacy when they leave their front door open! When the I-Love-UVA student glanced inside and saw his/her signs, he/she had every right to take a photograph to document the fact that they had been stolen and where they had been taken.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      If the door is open, anyone can come in ? Are you kidding? You guys are a HOOT! And when you place signs on property that is not yours, how can they be “stolen”. Do you think he could go to court and claim his signs were “stolen” and charge the resident of the home? This is funny….

      1. CrazyJD Avatar
        CrazyJD

        You just don’t get it. Did you read the opinion? The Lawn is a public space. Unless i’m as far off the reservation as you seem to think, I can and have wandered onto the Lawn at any time. It’s open to the public. As such, it’s open to speech, and not just the speech that you select. If your door is open when someone walks by, he can take a picture through your door. Your window may be another thing, but don’t bring in new facts to suit your narrative. A window was not involved with this.
        So stop with your assertions about “You’re so desperate”. Argue the facts as they are, Larry, not as you wish they were. Stop making it up.
        You’ve left yourself with asserting that we’ve gone off the farm, that we’re contorting ourselves into pretzels. That’s called “projection”, a standard tactic of you lefties. See Russia Hoax and the more recent and real Biden Affair.

      2. CrazyJD Avatar
        CrazyJD

        “Door is open, anyone can come in?” No, but again those aren’t the facts of this case, Larry. There is no evidence that anyone went in. Stop making up facts to suit your narrative.

        “signs on property that is not yours.” More twaddle. Check with your local municipality on their sign ordinances. You may remove a sign if you are under a program with your municipality to do so. Otherwise, yes, you could be charged with stealing the sign if it’s your intention to “permanently deprive the owner” of the sign. In any case I ever saw, removing the sign to inside your own residence would be evidence of your intent to permanently deprive.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Crazy – is the porch public space? And you can’t peek into a window but you can into a door (like one with a storm door? It’s doubtful the door was “open” but rather pushed open … who would leave a door actually open?

          And if those signs were REALLY on public property then the person who put them there actually could take legal action … except in this case, they’d end up with charges against themselves also.

          Why do you folks think it’s okay to push the boundaries on things like this to start with? Some of ya’ll are probably going to end up in jail if you persist in this kind of behavior, no?

          You don’t take photos of the insides of people’s houses from their porches and claim it’s “okay” because you’re on public property unless you live in your own little world until the law brings you back to reality.

          If this were your home, your porch and your open door – would you really think it okay for that person to be there taking pictures? I bet not. I bet you’d be in his face with a weapon, no?

  23. cjbova Avatar
    cjbova

    No one here is going to end up in jail for discussing someone else’s actions.

    Larry, the original sign was illegal…but protected by the university. Remember the students who approached Mr. Ellis to prevent him from removing it under the university’s directive?

    From an earlier post: “The University could have enforced it when Ms. Azher breached it with her door sign, which is prohibited by both the contract and University fire regulations.” They didn’t as a matter of free speech.

    They not only allowed other Lawn residents to remove the I Love UVA signs, they supported their actions.

    Try considering only this, no diversions: Free speech for one and not the other isn’t free speech.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      No. This is confusing the idea that your “free speech” allows you to put signs on property you do not own because the resident living there did put signs up you disagree with and UVA did not sanction her.

      Then it gets even creepier than the guy who knocked on the door to confront the individual – this guy says the door was open so it was okay for him to come onto the porch and look inside.

      When you’re on that porch – you’re treaspassing unless you have permission.

      That’s why I say some folks are confused about what “free speech” actually means.

      You can’t put your own signs up on others property because you disagree with their signs!

      People have lost their frigging minds over some misguided notion that vigilante justice is how to right a perceived wrong.

      And in the end – if the original sign said “I love UVA” there would have been no complaints because, in the end, it was about the content of the sign – not it’s existence on the door.

      So I do disagree with you Carol.

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        Said student who occupied Lawn 38 doesn’t own that property, the University does. Equal application under the law.

        “Then it gets even creepier than the guy who knocked on the door to confront the individual – this guy says the door was open so it was okay for him to come onto the porch and look inside.”

        It’s public property, merely because you pay room and board doesn’t convey ownership.

        “When you’re on that porch – you’re treaspassing unless you have permission.”

        That is legally not the case, you do not own it. My dorm room was not my own and the property there within was subject to whatever the University so desired. That’s how they catch under age drinking Larry.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          People who rent do not have the same legal protections as owners?

          Can anyone who wants enter any rented space even a dorm to treaspass and invade privacy?

          I don’t know the specifics of the law but presumed (perhaps wrongly) that even renters have similar protections of privacy.

          I am not sympathetic to the woman by the way , her motivations or her way of expressing herself. I just think the response is also not appropriate.

          1. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            They aren’t renting anything, the dorm room is the property of the public university. They occupy it while they attend, the University still has a right to enter at any time (as is given by the clause in the Housing agreement).

            Anything in plan view is fair game.

            “I am not sympathetic to the woman by the way , her motivations or her way of expressing herself. I just think the response is also not appropriate.”

            She wasn’t expressing herself, she was complaining when she wasn’t coddled.

  24. cjbova Avatar
    cjbova

    No one here is going to end up in jail for discussing someone else’s actions.

    Larry, the original sign was illegal…but protected by the university. Remember the students who approached Mr. Ellis to prevent him from removing it under the university’s directive?

    From an earlier post: “The University could have enforced it when Ms. Azher breached it with her door sign, which is prohibited by both the contract and University fire regulations.” They didn’t as a matter of free speech.

    They not only allowed other Lawn residents to remove the I Love UVA signs, they supported their actions.

    Try considering only this, no diversions: Free speech for one and not the other isn’t free speech.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      No. This is confusing the idea that your “free speech” allows you to put signs on property you do not own because the resident living there did put signs up you disagree with and UVA did not sanction her.

      Then it gets even creepier than the guy who knocked on the door to confront the individual – this guy says the door was open so it was okay for him to come onto the porch and look inside.

      When you’re on that porch – you’re treaspassing unless you have permission.

      That’s why I say some folks are confused about what “free speech” actually means.

      You can’t put your own signs up on others property because you disagree with their signs!

      People have lost their frigging minds over some misguided notion that vigilante justice is how to right a perceived wrong.

      And in the end – if the original sign said “I love UVA” there would have been no complaints because, in the end, it was about the content of the sign – not it’s existence on the door.

      So I do disagree with you Carol.

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        Said student who occupied Lawn 38 doesn’t own that property, the University does. Equal application under the law.

        “Then it gets even creepier than the guy who knocked on the door to confront the individual – this guy says the door was open so it was okay for him to come onto the porch and look inside.”

        It’s public property, merely because you pay room and board doesn’t convey ownership.

        “When you’re on that porch – you’re treaspassing unless you have permission.”

        That is legally not the case, you do not own it. My dorm room was not my own and the property there within was subject to whatever the University so desired. That’s how they catch under age drinking Larry.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          People who rent do not have the same legal protections as owners?

          Can anyone who wants enter any rented space even a dorm to treaspass and invade privacy?

          I don’t know the specifics of the law but presumed (perhaps wrongly) that even renters have similar protections of privacy.

          I am not sympathetic to the woman by the way , her motivations or her way of expressing herself. I just think the response is also not appropriate.

          1. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            They aren’t renting anything, the dorm room is the property of the public university. They occupy it while they attend, the University still has a right to enter at any time (as is given by the clause in the Housing agreement).

            Anything in plan view is fair game.

            “I am not sympathetic to the woman by the way , her motivations or her way of expressing herself. I just think the response is also not appropriate.”

            She wasn’t expressing herself, she was complaining when she wasn’t coddled.

  25. VaNavVet Avatar
    VaNavVet

    Bacon identifies the I Love UVA student as our correspondent. Was this person a paid contributor and did BR actually pay a student to put up the signs and to keep the controversy going?

    1. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      No, the I-Love-UVa student is not a contributor to Bacon’s Rebellion, paid or otherwise. The student approached me with an email, and we have “corresponded” by email since. As for the idea that B.R. paid the student to “put up the signs and keep the controversy going,” the idea is absolutely absurd. I can categorically deny there is any truth to such a notion.

  26. VaNavVet Avatar
    VaNavVet

    Bacon identifies the I Love UVA student as our correspondent. Was this person a paid contributor and did BR actually pay a student to put up the signs and to keep the controversy going?

    1. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      No, the I-Love-UVa student is not a contributor to Bacon’s Rebellion, paid or otherwise. The student approached me with an email, and we have “corresponded” by email since. As for the idea that B.R. paid the student to “put up the signs and keep the controversy going,” the idea is absolutely absurd. I can categorically deny there is any truth to such a notion.

  27. Wahoo74 Avatar
    Wahoo74

    Reed Fawell 3rd, superb post!

  28. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    “I Love UVA” has received an email response from UVa President Jim Ryan, which I reproduce here:

    Hi,

    Thanks for writing. I so appreciate your efforts posting “I love UVA” signs, and I’m sorry to hear about their removal. The content of your signs is protected by the First Amendment just as much as the content of the signs posted on Lawn doors, and I admire your decision to use your voice in support of the University.

    Content aside, the key difference between your signs and the Lawn room door signs is their placement. We have various policies that govern where signs can be posted around Grounds, and I’m looping in our Assistant VP for Student Affairs, Marsh Pattie, who I know would be happy to talk through any questions you might have.

    Thanks again for reaching out and showing your support of the University.

    Best,

    Jim
    —
    James E. Ryan
    President

    1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
      Reed Fawell 3rd

      I wonder if “F_ck You signs” might be posted on the lawn of the UVA president’s two story home atop Carr’s Hill across the street, the one he’s just finished remodeling for himself at the cost of $14 million dollars of other people’s money.

      I wonder if if “F_ck You signs” might be posted on the lawn of the Rotunda housing the Board of Visitors Board Room with its underground designer cuisine kitchen and dumb waiter, remodeled by the Board of Visitors for their own benefit at cost of $60 million dollars of other people’s money?

      Imagine, all these newly remodeled opulent, yet small facilities, within a stone’s throw of the poor and aggrieved UVA students forced to reside in hovel housing (small, squalid, drafty unpleasant single rooms built by a racist white man) on the Lawn just down from the now opulent Rotunda and Uva. President’s house he remodeled into a mansion for himself atop Carr’s Hill.

      Riven this record of these UVa. leaders, I wonder if the citizens of Virginia will ever get an honest accounting of where all UVa’s money comes from, how its spent, and who benefits from it, including all those research dollars that line a few people’s pockets at, or related, to UVA, at the great expense of so many other citizens and taxpayers without their knowledge or consent, and who receive no benefit from those dollars that enrich the few who run UVa. or are its crony allies? Why can’t those who pay through the nose, ever get an honest accounting from those in charge who spend such vast sums of other people’s money, and gain such obvious benefit for themselves.

  29. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    “I Love UVA” has received an email response from UVa President Jim Ryan, which I reproduce here:

    Hi,

    Thanks for writing. I so appreciate your efforts posting “I love UVA” signs, and I’m sorry to hear about their removal. The content of your signs is protected by the First Amendment just as much as the content of the signs posted on Lawn doors, and I admire your decision to use your voice in support of the University.

    Content aside, the key difference between your signs and the Lawn room door signs is their placement. We have various policies that govern where signs can be posted around Grounds, and I’m looping in our Assistant VP for Student Affairs, Marsh Pattie, who I know would be happy to talk through any questions you might have.

    Thanks again for reaching out and showing your support of the University.

    Best,

    Jim
    —
    James E. Ryan
    President

    1. Reed Fawell 3rd Avatar
      Reed Fawell 3rd

      I wonder if “F_ck You signs” might be posted on the lawn of the UVA president’s two story home atop Carr’s Hill across the street, the one he’s just finished remodeling for himself at the cost of $14 million dollars of other people’s money.

      I wonder if if “F_ck You signs” might be posted on the lawn of the Rotunda housing the Board of Visitors Board Room with its underground designer cuisine kitchen and dumb waiter, remodeled by the Board of Visitors for their own benefit at cost of $60 million dollars of other people’s money?

      Imagine, all these newly remodeled opulent, yet small facilities, within a stone’s throw of the poor and aggrieved UVA students forced to reside in hovel housing (small, squalid, drafty unpleasant single rooms built by a racist white man) on the Lawn just down from the now opulent Rotunda and Uva. President’s house he remodeled into a mansion for himself atop Carr’s Hill.

      Riven this record of these UVa. leaders, I wonder if the citizens of Virginia will ever get an honest accounting of where all UVa’s money comes from, how its spent, and who benefits from it, including all those research dollars that line a few people’s pockets at, or related, to UVA, at the great expense of so many other citizens and taxpayers without their knowledge or consent, and who receive no benefit from those dollars that enrich the few who run UVa. or are its crony allies? Why can’t those who pay through the nose, ever get an honest accounting from those in charge who spend such vast sums of other people’s money, and gain such obvious benefit for themselves.

  30. Wahoo74 Avatar
    Wahoo74

    Reed Fawell 3rd, superb post!

Leave a Reply

Read More