revelation from Seattle

"If a crowd is peaceful it isn't a police issue."
You stop and think Dennis. I'm being quite clear here. It doesn't matter if one day you may wish to peacefully assemble for an issue you believe in. Rioting is still illegal. Vandalism is still illegal.
And there is a tangible difference between a crowd and a mob. It also doesn't matter what the people are wearing.
Yeah I guess I'm a hard-liner. I believe in public order. I believe foreign dignitaries should be able to meet here in our country without being assaulted. Even if we don't agree with what they may be discussing.
Even if a group is assembling to advocate the 2nd Amendment, said group may not vandalize surrounding properties or block streets and building entrances. Such a group should be dispersed. But by all means, feel free to argue against a stance I haven't taken. You might want to get that jerking knee checked out though.
Again, Mob, Crowd, two separate things.
 
What I am harping on, apparently ineffectively, is that there were not just two groups involved. It was not "protestors v. law and order".

There were violent troublemakers there. They should be punished. Everybody listen up, please, "The violent troublemakers there should be punished!!"

There were peaceful demonstrators there. They should NOT be punished, gassed, beaten, kicked, arrested, harrassed, jailed or unreasonably impeded from exercising their First Amendment Rights.

There were peaceful demonstrators who became violent when the police became violent against them. Here in Texas, resisting arrest is a misdemeanor even if the arrest is faulty. I DO understand that.

But, if I peacefully protest and somebody gasses me, knocks me down and kicks me, I will try to protect myself (passive) and I understand the people who try to defend themselves (actively).

Lumping all protestors into "violent demonstrators" is just another form of "zero tolerance" which TFLers bad-mouth on other threads!

No cop, no time, nowhere, has the right or the need to kick people when they are down and not resisting. And if I see it, I will try to stop it (verbally) and I will do everything in my power to have the cop using unreasonable force prosecuted as the "jack-booted thug" he represents. (Some police would do the same; however, the thin blue line keeps a lot of thugs in law enforcement who should be in jail.)

Yes, I will defend the police. I have done so verbally, monetarily, with training, and with a shotgun.

But don't label all protestors "violent demonstrators" unless you also label all gun owners "violent criminals".

Gotta stop for now.

------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.

Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
 
Dennis,

No one here that I am aware of has labeled all of the protestors as violent. I have stated many times that the majority of protestors were legally and peacefully excercising there First Amendment rights. The union members and main stream environmental groups are examples of some of these peaceful protestors. At no time were these people hassled by the police. I do not necessarily support their position, but I support their right to protest. I also applaud their behaviour during the protests.

On the other hand, the thousands of people who vandalized property, threw rocks and bottles at police and who blocked access to delegates and others in Seattle are not peaceful. I include in this description the people who sat in front of buildings or intersections with locked arms. This is civil disobedience and is subject to arrest. If they resist, it is then resisting arrest. It does not matter if they resist by simply sitting with locked arms or by throwing objects. I am sure that many of the resistors who did not throw rocks were tear gassed, it's difficult to aim the gas. To the best of my knowledge, at no time in our nations history has this been considered peaceful protest.

As for the protestor who was kicked in the groin, I will reserve judgement on the police officer until all of the facts are known. We do not know what, if any, provication this officer received. Was he hit with rocks or bricks? Urine or feces? Did he have a knife thrown at him? Was he threatened or assaulted? We just don't know! At this time, this officer has been suspended pending investigation. If this officer attacked this protestor without provication, then he should be punished. However, to judge this officer on the basis of a ten second snipet of video tape is unfair. Sitting here in a nice warm house, it is easy to say that no person on the ground should be kicked. It is not such an easy determination if one considers that this officer may have been on duty for 12 or more hours without a break, under constant stress from threats and violence, being outnumbered 10 to 1 and not knowing if you may be killed or injured.
 
Since it seems necessary, I will state the obvious: violent people need to be arrested, and most of the LEOs in Seattle did their job well.

Now, on to the fun. Tonite I saw video shot by two female art students in Seattle. They were sitting in their car, which was stopped, taping footage of the mob scene, when a gas-masked cop approached, knocked on the driver's window, and gestured for her to roll it down. She immediately complied, whereupon the cop sprayed her full in the face with pepper spray. You can say, "wrong place, wrong time" all you want, this is police brutality and frightening behavior. If an LEO can't make an arrest on a college girl without the help of chemical irritants, then a new line of work is in order. Unless, of course, there was nothing to charge her with...

We pro-gun folks are justifiably proud of our no-compromise position on the 2nd amendment, yet many of us are willing to let other parts of the BoR slip in the name of "public order" and "clearing the streets". The Bill of Rights is not a smorgasbord; it's a package deal, you get them all for one very high price. I don't care if there is an angry mob engaged in mayhem; simply because I am in the area does not mean I am guilty of committing any crime. Whatever happened to the idea of arresting the folks who are actively committing mayhem? Isn't there a saying from the Texas Rangers about only needing one Ranger per mob?

Further, we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty in this country, although it seems that many of us are only satisfied with that standard if we agree politically with the alleged perpetrator. All this talk about "leftists" and "anarchists" is demonization and serves no real purpose. Maybe we should call them "cultists" or "religious wackos" or "gun-nuts". People are entitled to their opinions no matter how stupid they are.

I also saw the video of that cop kicking and attempting to shoot a bean bag at a protestor. The guy was backing away from the cop, arms spread wide, and he received a kick in the groin and a graze from a bean bag fired from about 2 feet range for his compliance. Luckily the officer's aim was on par with his judgment. "Maybe he threw feces at the poor LEO." How does that scale of punishment work, spit on a cop and get punched, throw feces and get kicked and shot with bean bags, resist arrest and get bludgeoned? I thought our police were expected to uphold the law, including in the face of extreme provication. The police are supposed to arrest alleged criminals so they can be tried, and if found guilty, punished.

At least, that's the way I thought the system worked.

------------------
"In many ways we are treated quite like men." Erich Maria Remarque
 
I think this thread has out lived it's usefulnes... It's ended up splitting hairs.
It's Moot.

------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
We, the people, are tired of being taxed, penalized, supervised, harassed,
and subjugated by a federal government which exceeds the powers
enumerated in the U.S. Constitution.
 
Ipecac.
Picking out specific instances of individual officers going too far in order to condem the entire police responce is silly. No one is saying little girls in a car need to be maced, and you know that.
And I already said, several times, that it doesn't matter who is demonstrating. If they turn into a mob they need to be dispersed!
Here. For your benefit: If a crowd is peacfull it is not a police issue. If it becomes, violent and disruptive, damaging public and private property, it must be dispersed. I don't care if they're The American Socialist Party or the TFL anual "March for Freedom".
False arrests...No one's been harping who was arrested or not. we've been talking crowds and riot control. And no one was tried and sentenced on the streets of Seattle.
You seem to think that once the crowd turned into a hostile mob officers should have actualy waded into that mob and pick and choose inividuals who are being bad. Oh, that'd be good. You want to do that?
You demmand the police over specify in a riot sit and not condem many because of the actions of a few, then you condem the many police because of the actions of a few.
The crowd had turned into a violent mob. It had to be dispersed.

Record, Broken. See also Ipecac.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top