For being so gung-ho for the troops, you sure are willing to throw them under a bus whenever they do something you disagree with (attend this rally).
I said being a veteran doesn't make you above the law. Which is absolutely true. If the crowd is doing something that requires police to act in the manner that they did, the police aren't going to look into the crowd, see a veteran(not that they'd know what he was by looking into a sea of faces) and then pick up their basketball and go home. I'm not saying the veteran did ANYTHING. I don't know what he did or didn't do, like i also don't know that the police hit him on purpose or not. There is every chance the guy was innocent. Just like there was every chance he was guilty.
I don't care what they rally for mayo, they have the absolute right to do it PEACEFULLY. If the cops get called out in what looks like riot gear, chances are there's already shit going down, and someone who was a bit too tense got trigger happy. It would be unfortunate for ANYONE to get hit in the dome with whatever it was that hit that guy. The fact that he's a veteran(when the same people would be spitting on him for serving when he was still in) just brought all the more media attention to it.
TLDR shit happened, guy got unlucky, media went crazy cuz he's a vet even though it has nothing to do with what's going on, aestu can't grasp simple concepts.
Post subject: Re: Breaking News: Peaceful Protesters in DC pepper sprayed
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:44 am
Obama Zombie Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:48 pm Posts: 3149 Location: NoVA
Aestu wrote:
Guilty until proven innocent
How about guilty according to local laws?
Quote:
"The state of California, hereby commands those assembled here at 14th and Broadway to immediately leave. If you do not leave now you may be arrested. If you do not leave now you may be subject to force, if necessary, which may result in serious injury. Section 409, California Penal Code, unable to remain present at an unlawful assembly. If you remain in the area just described, 14th and Broadway, regardless of your purpose, you will be in violation of Penal Code Section 409. The following route, eastbound 14th street, is available for immediate disbursement now. If you refuse to move now, you will be arrested. If you refuse to move now, chemical agents will be used."
I guess if Occupy Oakland pulled a permit and followed the legal process for assembling protest in public streets (which I'm not sure if they did or didn't, but considering the cops said it was 'unlawful', then I'm going with it was unlawful) then I'd think the response would've been different. The police gave the protesters fair warning of the consequence for their actions and they refused to move, despite being told to.
Doing a bit more reading as to what sparked the police response, I read this article...
Quote:
"We are committed to allowing free speech," he said, "but the First Amendment doesn't allow violence or endangering the public or property." ~ Oakland Police Chief Howard Jordan
A couple people get violent!? At an Occupy protest!? Never...
Quote:
When Tuesday's protest devolved into a volley of rocks and tear gas, some organizers took to bullhorns. "If you throw something, you're as bad as a cop," one speaker said to the applause of several hundred people.
A chant followed, conveying the same message, but then someone from the back of the crowd lobbed a glass bottle that shattered on police helmets. Officers responded, lobbing tear gas again.
Occupy Oakland protester Casey Jones, 28, wore a T-shirt Wednesday reading "thrash and burn," and skateboarded up and down Broadway yelling, "Bring it on!"
"I'm all about the riot - we need to be violent," he said. "We need more numbers. We'll just keep marching on."
So, from what I gather... 1) The protest was allegedly in violation of the law and those who didn't move were guilty of a misdemeanor. 2) The vet was among the crowd, therefore guilty of a misdemeanor. 3) The police gave fair warning of the consequences and they responded with non-lethal force to move the crowd; vet took a can to the head... shit happens, should've moved when the cops said to. 4) Some of the protesters decided to get stupid and attack the police - the police responded with tear gas
If the crowd is doing something that requires police to act in the manner that they did
There is every chance the guy was innocent. Just like there was every chance he was guilty
If the cops get called out in what looks like riot gear, chances are there's already shit going down
Guilty until proven innocent
You are a Nazi
Quote:
aestu can't grasp simple concepts.
moving on.
you THINK I say the guy is obviously guilty without proof, but I'm not. But you are DEFINITELY saying the cops are guilty without proof, so who's the nazi? That's right, its the selfhating jew.
you THINK I say the guy is obviously guilty without proof, but I'm not. But you are DEFINITELY saying the cops are guilty without proof, so who's the nazi? That's right, its the selfhating jew.
You're wrong, shut up.
FACT: Guy got shot in the head. FACT: The cops shot him. FACT: The cops are guilty of shooting the guy in the head.
This is a case of "see sig".
BUT WE CAN'T REALLY KNOW IF ANYONE IS GUILTY OR INNOCENT SO LETS JUST SAY THAT THE COPS PROBABLY HAD A REASON FOR SHOOTING SOMEONE WHO WAS PROBABLY GUILTY SO THEY'RE PROBABLY INNOCENT BECAUSE WE CAN'T REALLY KNOW ANYTHING
Eturnal: you talk about self-serving legal fictions and government bureaucracy etc but the fact is they have no right to declare any "assembly" "illegal" because the Constitution explicitly says there is no such thing as an illegal assembly.
You're just another right-wing hypocrite who says government is the enemy of freedom...except when the "freedom" in question is someone else's.
Post subject: Re: Breaking News: Peaceful Protesters in DC pepper sprayed
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:48 am
Obama Zombie Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:48 pm Posts: 3149 Location: NoVA
Aestu wrote:
Eturnal: you talk about self-serving legal fictions and government bureaucracy etc but the fact is they have no right to declare any "assembly" "illegal" because the Constitution explicitly says there is no such thing as an illegal assembly.
You're just another right-wing hypocrite who says government is the enemy of freedom...except when the "freedom" in question is someone else's.
Pay attention to your underlined hurphurp. Then read the underlined portion of the First Amendment.
Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
The constitution doesn't protect violent protests, riots or any gathering that could cause harm to other people... kinda like what the police officer said in my other post.
The City of Oakland (like all other cities) have a process to file for a permit for a large protest (like the Occupy protests). A permit doesn't mean there is an out-right ban on protests because there is clearly a process for creating a safe, legal protest... and I'm not sure requiring a permit for protest is in violation of a persons Constitutional rights. The individuals still get to protest, right? I think the violation of Constitutional rights would arise from saying, "There is absolutely no tolerance for protesting in this city - oh, and you can't even file for a protest permit. PS: Fuck you." I'm not sure if these guys got a permit or not, but they lost their right to protest when they started throwing shit at the cops. At that point they threw their constitutional rights out the window because the protest was no longer peaceful.
Quote:
BUT WE CAN'T REALLY KNOW IF ANYONE IS GUILTY OR INNOCENT SO LETS JUST SAY THAT THE COPS PROBABLY HAD A REASON FOR SHOOTING SOMEONE WHO WAS PROBABLY GUILTY SO THEY'RE PROBABLY INNOCENT BECAUSE WE CAN'T REALLY KNOW ANYTHING
There's a 10 minute video that shows enough...
Last edited by Eturnalshift on Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
Constitution says nothing about the government having any such right to regulate assembly.
What is the process for declaring an assembly "violent" other than the cops saying so? And who was hurt...other than the guy shot in the head by the cops?
That's police dictatorship for you.
The right wing talks about democracy but what they really mean is doing whatever they want and using violence on anyone who doesn't agree.
Post subject: Re: Breaking News: Peaceful Protesters in DC pepper sprayed
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:02 am
Obama Zombie Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:48 pm Posts: 3149 Location: NoVA
Stop being obtuse. The states have the right to make laws that aren't explicitly stated within the Constitution and as long as those laws don't try to supersede Constitutional law. The Constitution says people can peacefully protest... and the states agree... you can protest if you file for a permit and if you keep it peaceful.
Quote:
That's police dictatorship for you.
Yep. If kids knew how to peacefully protest (or even take their trash out and not cross safety tape) all while not causing themselves or anyone else harm... then we wouldn't need cops to keep the immature fucks in line.
Stop being obtuse. The states have the right to make laws that aren't explicitly stated within the Constitution
No they don't. The Constitution is the law of the land. The right to peacefully assemble is defined in the Constitution.
Do I need to file with my state government to exercise my freedom of speech? Do I need to file with my state government to exercise my freedom of religion? No, because those rights aren't arbitrarily revocable because they're guaranteed.
Again: all this "states rights" bullshit is just a right wing shill for trying to undermine rule of law and democratic freedoms that they find inconvenient.
Also see: American Civil War
Eturnalshift wrote:
Quote:
That's police dictatorship for you.
Yep. If kids knew how to peacefully protest (or even take their trash out and not cross safety tape) all while not causing themselves or anyone else harm... then we wouldn't need cops to keep the immature fucks in line.
And we know that wasn't the case....because the cops say so.
The difference between a democracy and a police dictatorship is in a democracy, the police do what the law says; in a dictatorship, the law is what the police say it is.
Post subject: Re: Breaking News: Peaceful Protesters in DC pepper sprayed
Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:30 am
Obama Zombie Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:48 pm Posts: 3149 Location: NoVA
Quote:
No, because those rights aren't arbitrarily revocable because they're guaranteed.
Quote:
Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws, with the exception of obscenity, defamation, incitement to riot, and fighting words,[1] as well as harassment, privileged communications, trade secrets, classified material, copyright, patents, military conduct, commercial speech such as advertising, and time, place and manner restrictions.
Thanks Wikipedia, for educating Aestu on the limitations of his Constitutional rights.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
