< 1 2 3 4 > 
 
   
 

Peaceful Protests

 
DEGENERATEON
 
Avatar
 
 
DEGENERATEON
Total Posts:  569
Joined  14-09-2017
 
 
 
28 July 2020 10:15
 
mapadofu - 28 July 2020 09:37 AM
DEGENERATEON - 28 July 2020 08:32 AM
Nhoj Morley - 27 July 2020 11:06 PM

When folks want to exercise their right to peacefully protest, should they stop and consider what other activities they might be seen as endorsing?

When folks want to gather together and combine their voice, they’re probably gonna want to march or parade in the street to the local seat of authority. They’ll need something to sing or chant or shout at if only symbolically. We’ve all seen enough historic protests on TV to know what to do to be a part of one.

If an individual protester in the parade spots someone fire-bombing a building, why should their first thought be that the perp is sullying the meaning of their participation? Should they drop their sign and go tackle someone armed with fire-bombs while shouting “citizens arrest!”? Should they all shut up and go home before they are held responsible for more fires? Why should the protesters believe that they have brought this on?

Their parade will attract pick-pockets and disrupt prostitution. Lost signage may impede drainage. Comprehensive auto insurance will go way up. Folks should weigh all these things against their desire to peacefully protest. Right?

Consider the recent videos from Liverpool after their whatzit team became champs. Or what happens to Detroit when the Red Wings win the cup-thingie. A civically minded coach should rein in the team if they’re winning the playoffs before they are responsible for costly civic mayhem. Consider the volley of gunfire that heralds in the New Year. There is an underlying boil of hooliganism that almost anything can prick. Are fans of proportionality noticing the tilt in gender?

I could put on a lab coat and say, as a social scientist, that this could have more to do with discouraging masturbation than anyone’s political aspirations.

The fact that men flood the prison system must have an explanation.  Some would say it’s sexism.  Nearly all of these police shootings and acts of brutality involve male victims.  Why are men targeted for this treatment?

Why doesn’t Portland have a curfew?  From what I decipher, most of the hooliganism is happening after the sun goes down.  It’s not the responsibility for a citizen to tackle someone with a fire-bomb, that’s the police function.  Why would the peaceful protesters have anything against these bad actors being brought to justice? 

It seems your position is “Hey I’m just peacefully protesting, these violent and destructive folk aren’t my concern.  I don’t endorse that behavior, but I’m not going to head back home because of it.  This hooliganism is inevitable.”
If that’s a fair enough summation, then you should expect that the police will have a response.  And you may get caught up in the tear gas.

 

 

Why do peacefully protesting Americans just have to accept violence from the government just because some people are committing crimes?

In my opinion you’re looking at this completely backwards.  If I’m not committing a crime, the law shouldn’t fuck with me.
Isn’t this the land of Liberty?

 

Let’s say I take the family to the movie theater to have some nice family time.  The movie starts, and someone in the theater throws a firework near the screen and it explodes.  Some people leave and then the lights come on and the movie stops.  We’re sitting in the back as some cops come in.  They are making their way around the theater when they stop by us.  I tell them where I think the firework came from and my wife shows them her purse contents.  I want the police to find the person responsible.  Am I looking at this completely backwards?
If so, I could yell at the officers “leave me the fuck alone!  We’re just here to watch a goddamn movie, quit fucking with me!  I don’t have to accept your questioning - we’re doing nothing wrong!”

Now it’s true, we were just there to peacefully watch a movie.  And in my case, I really had no expectation for someone to light a firework in the theater.  In the case of the peaceful protesters, they KNOW that people are going to do some bullshit and they should expect that they may be caught up in some of the response.  The law isn’t fucking with you personally.  If they tell you to clear the area and shoot tear gas, it’s not your fault.  But don’t blame them, blame the guys f’ing it up for everyone.

 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7382
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
28 July 2020 10:43
 
DEGENERATEON - 28 July 2020 10:15 AM

Let’s say I take the family to the movie theater to have some nice family time.  The movie starts, and someone in the theater throws a firework near the screen and it explodes.  Some people leave and then the lights come on and the movie stops.  We’re sitting in the back as some cops come in.  They are making their way around the theater when they stop by us….

...and immediately start with billy-clubs and tear gas because you were in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Your wife gets clubbed because they interpret her reaching for her purse as a weapon threat, and you get clubbed because your move to clarify and intervene is viewed as resisting arrest/questioning police authority.  Your kids start to cry, and your wife moves to comfort them, and she gets knocked down and put into a submission hold - cuffed and an officer is kneeling on her neck.  You try to face her to comfort her, and are shot in the leg because, clearly, you are physically resisting arrest and have become a violent threat.

 
 
weird buffalo
 
Avatar
 
 
weird buffalo
Total Posts:  465
Joined  19-06-2020
 
 
 
28 July 2020 10:51
 

I think you should take some personal responsibility for the life choices that led you to a theater where fireworks are set off inside.

 
DEGENERATEON
 
Avatar
 
 
DEGENERATEON
Total Posts:  569
Joined  14-09-2017
 
 
 
28 July 2020 11:12
 
weird buffalo - 28 July 2020 10:51 AM

I think you should take some personal responsibility for the life choices that led you to a theater where fireworks are set off inside.

And so should the people slain and injured by James Holmes in Aurora, CO - right?  They should take some personal responsibility for going to the theater where a guy murders 12 people.  Nice.

 
mapadofu
 
Avatar
 
 
mapadofu
Total Posts:  938
Joined  20-07-2017
 
 
 
28 July 2020 11:46
 
DEGENERATEON - 28 July 2020 10:15 AM
mapadofu - 28 July 2020 09:37 AM
DEGENERATEON - 28 July 2020 08:32 AM
Nhoj Morley - 27 July 2020 11:06 PM

When folks want to exercise their right to peacefully protest, should they stop and consider what other activities they might be seen as endorsing?

When folks want to gather together and combine their voice, they’re probably gonna want to march or parade in the street to the local seat of authority. They’ll need something to sing or chant or shout at if only symbolically. We’ve all seen enough historic protests on TV to know what to do to be a part of one.

If an individual protester in the parade spots someone fire-bombing a building, why should their first thought be that the perp is sullying the meaning of their participation? Should they drop their sign and go tackle someone armed with fire-bombs while shouting “citizens arrest!”? Should they all shut up and go home before they are held responsible for more fires? Why should the protesters believe that they have brought this on?

Their parade will attract pick-pockets and disrupt prostitution. Lost signage may impede drainage. Comprehensive auto insurance will go way up. Folks should weigh all these things against their desire to peacefully protest. Right?

Consider the recent videos from Liverpool after their whatzit team became champs. Or what happens to Detroit when the Red Wings win the cup-thingie. A civically minded coach should rein in the team if they’re winning the playoffs before they are responsible for costly civic mayhem. Consider the volley of gunfire that heralds in the New Year. There is an underlying boil of hooliganism that almost anything can prick. Are fans of proportionality noticing the tilt in gender?

I could put on a lab coat and say, as a social scientist, that this could have more to do with discouraging masturbation than anyone’s political aspirations.

The fact that men flood the prison system must have an explanation.  Some would say it’s sexism.  Nearly all of these police shootings and acts of brutality involve male victims.  Why are men targeted for this treatment?

Why doesn’t Portland have a curfew?  From what I decipher, most of the hooliganism is happening after the sun goes down.  It’s not the responsibility for a citizen to tackle someone with a fire-bomb, that’s the police function.  Why would the peaceful protesters have anything against these bad actors being brought to justice? 

It seems your position is “Hey I’m just peacefully protesting, these violent and destructive folk aren’t my concern.  I don’t endorse that behavior, but I’m not going to head back home because of it.  This hooliganism is inevitable.”
If that’s a fair enough summation, then you should expect that the police will have a response.  And you may get caught up in the tear gas.

 

 

Why do peacefully protesting Americans just have to accept violence from the government just because some people are committing crimes?

In my opinion you’re looking at this completely backwards.  If I’m not committing a crime, the law shouldn’t fuck with me.
Isn’t this the land of Liberty?

 

Let’s say I take the family to the movie theater to have some nice family time.  The movie starts, and someone in the theater throws a firework near the screen and it explodes.  Some people leave and then the lights come on and the movie stops.  We’re sitting in the back as some cops come in.  They are making their way around the theater when they stop by us.  I tell them where I think the firework came from and my wife shows them her purse contents.  I want the police to find the person responsible.  Am I looking at this completely backwards?
If so, I could yell at the officers “leave me the fuck alone!  We’re just here to watch a goddamn movie, quit fucking with me!  I don’t have to accept your questioning - we’re doing nothing wrong!”

Now it’s true, we were just there to peacefully watch a movie.  And in my case, I really had no expectation for someone to light a firework in the theater.  In the case of the peaceful protesters, they KNOW that people are going to do some bullshit and they should expect that they may be caught up in some of the response.  The law isn’t fucking with you personally.  If they tell you to clear the area and shoot tear gas, it’s not your fault.  But don’t blame them, blame the guys f’ing it up for everyone.

Whether you try to help, or refuse to help (but not actively impede), the police shouldn’t mess with you.  Don’t you want to live in a free country?

 
DEGENERATEON
 
Avatar
 
 
DEGENERATEON
Total Posts:  569
Joined  14-09-2017
 
 
 
28 July 2020 12:10
 
mapadofu - 28 July 2020 11:46 AM
DEGENERATEON - 28 July 2020 10:15 AM
mapadofu - 28 July 2020 09:37 AM
DEGENERATEON - 28 July 2020 08:32 AM
Nhoj Morley - 27 July 2020 11:06 PM

When folks want to exercise their right to peacefully protest, should they stop and consider what other activities they might be seen as endorsing?

When folks want to gather together and combine their voice, they’re probably gonna want to march or parade in the street to the local seat of authority. They’ll need something to sing or chant or shout at if only symbolically. We’ve all seen enough historic protests on TV to know what to do to be a part of one.

If an individual protester in the parade spots someone fire-bombing a building, why should their first thought be that the perp is sullying the meaning of their participation? Should they drop their sign and go tackle someone armed with fire-bombs while shouting “citizens arrest!”? Should they all shut up and go home before they are held responsible for more fires? Why should the protesters believe that they have brought this on?

Their parade will attract pick-pockets and disrupt prostitution. Lost signage may impede drainage. Comprehensive auto insurance will go way up. Folks should weigh all these things against their desire to peacefully protest. Right?

Consider the recent videos from Liverpool after their whatzit team became champs. Or what happens to Detroit when the Red Wings win the cup-thingie. A civically minded coach should rein in the team if they’re winning the playoffs before they are responsible for costly civic mayhem. Consider the volley of gunfire that heralds in the New Year. There is an underlying boil of hooliganism that almost anything can prick. Are fans of proportionality noticing the tilt in gender?

I could put on a lab coat and say, as a social scientist, that this could have more to do with discouraging masturbation than anyone’s political aspirations.

The fact that men flood the prison system must have an explanation.  Some would say it’s sexism.  Nearly all of these police shootings and acts of brutality involve male victims.  Why are men targeted for this treatment?

Why doesn’t Portland have a curfew?  From what I decipher, most of the hooliganism is happening after the sun goes down.  It’s not the responsibility for a citizen to tackle someone with a fire-bomb, that’s the police function.  Why would the peaceful protesters have anything against these bad actors being brought to justice? 

It seems your position is “Hey I’m just peacefully protesting, these violent and destructive folk aren’t my concern.  I don’t endorse that behavior, but I’m not going to head back home because of it.  This hooliganism is inevitable.”
If that’s a fair enough summation, then you should expect that the police will have a response.  And you may get caught up in the tear gas.

 

 

Why do peacefully protesting Americans just have to accept violence from the government just because some people are committing crimes?

In my opinion you’re looking at this completely backwards.  If I’m not committing a crime, the law shouldn’t fuck with me.
Isn’t this the land of Liberty?

 

Let’s say I take the family to the movie theater to have some nice family time.  The movie starts, and someone in the theater throws a firework near the screen and it explodes.  Some people leave and then the lights come on and the movie stops.  We’re sitting in the back as some cops come in.  They are making their way around the theater when they stop by us.  I tell them where I think the firework came from and my wife shows them her purse contents.  I want the police to find the person responsible.  Am I looking at this completely backwards?
If so, I could yell at the officers “leave me the fuck alone!  We’re just here to watch a goddamn movie, quit fucking with me!  I don’t have to accept your questioning - we’re doing nothing wrong!”

Now it’s true, we were just there to peacefully watch a movie.  And in my case, I really had no expectation for someone to light a firework in the theater.  In the case of the peaceful protesters, they KNOW that people are going to do some bullshit and they should expect that they may be caught up in some of the response.  The law isn’t fucking with you personally.  If they tell you to clear the area and shoot tear gas, it’s not your fault.  But don’t blame them, blame the guys f’ing it up for everyone.

Whether you try to help, or refuse to help (but not actively impede), the police shouldn’t mess with you.  Don’t you want to live in a free country?

I don’t want to live in a country so free that people are allowed to light off fireworks at the theater.  I want the police to come and deal with that bullshit.  And I’m not going to blame police for doing their job, even if it interrupts my peaceful movie experience.  Now if they came in and started busting heads, I obviously wouldn’t accept that.  You’re basically saying the police aren’t trying to get these bad actors, they’re just busting peaceful protesters heads open.  I don’t agree with that.  And I’m not saying there’s no instances of police overstepping their authority.  The general picture is this - peaceful protesters with a few bad actors.  As night falls, the ratio turns to more bad actors who are more emboldened by anonymity.  Police and property are attacked, they shoot tear gas and clear the area.  Rinse and repeat.

 
mapadofu
 
Avatar
 
 
mapadofu
Total Posts:  938
Joined  20-07-2017
 
 
 
28 July 2020 12:34
 

You’re not going to blame the police if they get violent with someone who didn’t commit a crime?
Why not? 

How does the police messing with innocent people help them get to the bottom of the fireworks incident?

[ Edited: 28 July 2020 12:42 by mapadofu]
 
weird buffalo
 
Avatar
 
 
weird buffalo
Total Posts:  465
Joined  19-06-2020
 
 
 
28 July 2020 13:06
 
DEGENERATEON - 28 July 2020 11:12 AM
weird buffalo - 28 July 2020 10:51 AM

I think you should take some personal responsibility for the life choices that led you to a theater where fireworks are set off inside.

And so should the people slain and injured by James Holmes in Aurora, CO - right?  They should take some personal responsibility for going to the theater where a guy murders 12 people.  Nice.

This is YOUR argument.  I think it’s bullshit.  You are the one who uses victim blaming as a strategy to defend the government using violence against its people.

 
weird buffalo
 
Avatar
 
 
weird buffalo
Total Posts:  465
Joined  19-06-2020
 
 
 
28 July 2020 13:12
 

Lets be clear about the events of the Navy vet who got beat.

1. He walks up and talks to an officer.
2. Several officers rush to surround him.
3. An officer shoves him.
4. An officer hits him 5 times with a baton.
5. Another officer sprays him with a chemical in the face.
6. The Navy vet flips them off, and turns to leave.
7. The officers let him leave.

They didn’t arrest him.  The beat him, and then they let him walk away.  And currently you are attempting to justify this.  You are attempting to justify giving law enforcement the right to beat people on the street, even if those people have not committed a crime.  Because if those officers had observed him committing a crime, they should have arrested him.  If they observed him breaking the law and didn’t arrest him, then they are not doing their job as law enforcement.

 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  3162
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
28 July 2020 14:18
 

Yep.

How messed up is your mind if you think that it is okay for Law Enforcement to me more violent than Protesters?

 
 
DEGENERATEON
 
Avatar
 
 
DEGENERATEON
Total Posts:  569
Joined  14-09-2017
 
 
 
28 July 2020 15:34
 
mapadofu - 28 July 2020 12:34 PM

You’re not going to blame the police if they get violent with someone who didn’t commit a crime?
Why not? 

How does the police messing with innocent people help them get to the bottom of the fireworks incident?

“Now if they came in and started busting heads, I obviously wouldn’t accept that.”

 
DEGENERATEON
 
Avatar
 
 
DEGENERATEON
Total Posts:  569
Joined  14-09-2017
 
 
 
28 July 2020 15:37
 
Twissel - 28 July 2020 02:18 PM

Yep.

How messed up is your mind if you think that it is okay for Law Enforcement to me more violent than Protesters?

I didn’t say that.  I said it’s possible in the navy-sweatshirt guys case.  Weird buffalo might have the general story straight- but there may be more to it.

 
weird buffalo
 
Avatar
 
 
weird buffalo
Total Posts:  465
Joined  19-06-2020
 
 
 
28 July 2020 17:32
 

What behavior in your mind justifies law enforcement officers breaking someone’s bones but NOT arresting them?  What could this man have done to deserve that specific reaction (beating, and NOT arresting)?

We know the broke his hand.
We know they didn’t arrest him.

Please tell me why law enforcement SHOULD behave this way.

If I get a speeding ticket, I get to contest the punishment for my behavior in court.  That is how our system is supposed to work.
If this man was doing something illegal, he should have been taken to court to stand charges.  But he wasn’t.  Therefore, these officers punished him with no form of judicial review.

If he was threatening the officers, that would be illegal and justify arresting him.
If he attacked an officer, that would be illegal and justify arresting him.

They didn’t arrest him though.  This has to be made really clear.  Officers don’t get to punish people.  They are to arrest them, and present evidence for prosecutors to press charges in a court of law.  That is how our system works.  If he did something wrong, the officers had a DUTY to arrest him.  It is literally their job.  Literally.

Your argument right now rests on this man committing a crime, but the officers failing to do their actual job.

[ Edited: 28 July 2020 17:40 by weird buffalo]
 
Cheshire Cat
 
Avatar
 
 
Cheshire Cat
Total Posts:  1636
Joined  01-11-2014
 
 
 
28 July 2020 18:33
 

From an article in todays Politico:

PORTLAND, Ore. — The Wall of Moms — a group of self-described mothers — and the Don’t Shoot Portland group filed the lawsuit late Monday against Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf and other federal officials.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. after Portland’s mayor and the leaders of five other major U.S. cities appealed to Congress to make it illegal for the U.S. government to deploy agents to cities that don’t want them.

“This administration’s egregious use of federal force on cities over the objections of local authorities should never happen,” said the letter sent to U.S. House and Senate leaders from the mayors of Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Kansas City, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Washington.

https://tinyurl.com/yygsg6gt

Strange.

If there is out of control “rioting,” why would the mayors of five major cities send a letter to congress demanding federal officers leave their cities?

Is it because these federal troops were sent by a weak president to specifically stir up trouble so that he could frighten and enrage his white base in an attempt to look like the “Law & Order President”?

Perhaps if the federal officers simply left, and let local police authorities take care of the situation, then things would become peaceful again?

 
 
DEGENERATEON
 
Avatar
 
 
DEGENERATEON
Total Posts:  569
Joined  14-09-2017
 
 
 
28 July 2020 19:28
 
weird buffalo - 28 July 2020 05:32 PM

What behavior in your mind justifies law enforcement officers breaking someone’s bones but NOT arresting them?  What could this man have done to deserve that specific reaction (beating, and NOT arresting)?

We know the broke his hand.
We know they didn’t arrest him.

Please tell me why law enforcement SHOULD behave this way.

If I get a speeding ticket, I get to contest the punishment for my behavior in court.  That is how our system is supposed to work.
If this man was doing something illegal, he should have been taken to court to stand charges.  But he wasn’t.  Therefore, these officers punished him with no form of judicial review.

If he was threatening the officers, that would be illegal and justify arresting him.
If he attacked an officer, that would be illegal and justify arresting him.

They didn’t arrest him though.  This has to be made really clear.  Officers don’t get to punish people.  They are to arrest them, and present evidence for prosecutors to press charges in a court of law.  That is how our system works.  If he did something wrong, the officers had a DUTY to arrest him.  It is literally their job.  Literally.

Your argument right now rests on this man committing a crime, but the officers failing to do their actual job.

The video I linked in the other thread shows the interaction.  It also shows several other scenes where you can hear over megaphone or PA system “this is the Portland Police, this area has been deemed a riot.  Move out of this area.  If you do not move out of this area you will be subject to arrest and or use of force.”
Do the police have the authority to use force on people who refuse to leave the area?  Is it within the realm of possibility that this warning preceded the interaction with navy-shirt guy?  Is it possible that protocol is to remove the person from the area using less-lethal means, and if that is not successful to then make an arrest?

 
 < 1 2 3 4 >