If the homeowner's assoc. objected to the sign (of the dog-lady), why don't they object to the huge sign the Anthony's parked in front of their home in order to block protesters?
*They did object to the huge sign and that is why the Anthony's removed it - after getting permission to leave it up for a cuople of hours.
The HOA can't regulate signs being held in the public domain--it's a 1st Amendment right. But maybe if the sign is on an easel on the ground, would that then give them the authority to say the lady's sign was out of order?
Still, Lee had no right to touch the sign and especially not the dog's water!
That was deliberate and intentional destruction of property.
*HOA's DO have the right to regulate signs anywhere in the subdivision - there are communities where home owners can't even put for sale signs up - but I agree that Lee should not have done that.
As a number of posters have said, if the Anthonys would not engage the protesters they would be better off, but they just can't help themselves, can they?
The more I see about the protesters, the more disgusted I get at them. The woman with the St. Bernard - ok, she would go looking for here dog right away if he were missing, but she also is keeping him out in the hot sun for how many hours??? That in itself is cruel - I don't care if she had water there - you don't keep a dog out in the hot sun any length of time! From the looks of it, she has been there at least an hour. Does anyone know exactly how long she has been there?
I am truly worried that someone is going to be seriously hurt out there at some point. This is a dangerous situation for everyone involved.