Recent comments in /f/newhampshire

thenagain11 t1_jdctpv0 wrote

I'm confused. Did they arrest her, or did they take her into protective custody? Because those aren't the same and the article doesn't clarify.

Protective custody would mean they took her in for observation overnight because they were concerned about her mental/inebriated state. The article makes it sound like the woman might have other issues - says her house was dirty and she hadn't cleaned in 10 years. I could see why officers would be concerned, but I dont know what our state laws are about hoarders and such. I do think they are legally allowed to take people overnight if they feel they are in danger to themslves or others, and there wasn't like another legal adult around to make sure she was ok. But arresting her for drinking would be some real bullshit. Hard to tell cause this article seems to be missing some info.

2

nixstyx t1_jdcjt3k wrote

Well, yes, that's literally how the law works. The legislative branch passes the law and the judicial branch interprets the law. If you'd sincerely like to know where the line is, I suggest studying case law. Lots of decisions and precedent to read through here: https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/encyclopedia/case/63/libel-and-slander

5

nixstyx t1_jdcjcz9 wrote

>Deshaies states in his response that he never tried to get Sorens fired from any job. He contacted Saint Anselm to ask if Sorens was teaching from his Free State Manifesto, which advocates for seceding from the United States and calls for abolishing all government.

So the guy is upset that people are learning who he is and what he stands for? It's not slander if you're just sharing something he wrote. That's the thing about free speech. You can say or write (pretty much) whatever you want, but that doesn't make you immune from the consequences of your own actions.

7