You're right, but I don't think you will get through these people's skulls. The problem is that we live in an ignorant, spoiled society where everything is taken for granted. We live among people who expect government spending and programs to run perfectly, yet complain when it's time to pay taxes. We live among people who trick the system because they think it's the right thing to do. And all they do is complain. That's what the protests are. Don't protest, act. Start with yourself.
I don't think you're against the grain, man. I thought I might be too but I'm glad to realize that I think plenty more people than not are with you! Well said.
!00% agree with you. The Police didn't do anything wrong; the protestors violated the law(California Penal Code 148). As a result, the Police, IMO, handled the situation with extreme patience and approached the situation in the most logical, safest way possible.
This has good intentions, but you mentioned the law breaking actions of the protesters and not those laws broken by the officer..I might make a response vid with all that stuff later. For now, I have to study for finals.
@gangstamind187 I'm. Quite interested in hearing your argument. I'm curious as to what point, a Veteran officer of the law, in a day and age where nearly everyone has instant access to a video recording device and videos go viral in mere hours, would jeopardize his job, his reputation, his safety and the safety of his family...just to be a dick
@dawimythnotolo you'll never hear me say there aren't problems. You'll. Never hear me say there don't need to be changes. As a matter or fact, I made that pretty clear. My argument is that you can't break the law just because You don't like it or agree with it. If that were the case, it would be ok to rob, murder and rape. The perpetrator could simply say "I was angry", and the rest of the world is supposed to say "oh, well then that makes it ok"?
@TattsDeej No, your not quite getting the vision I'm painting... What I'm saying is what if it was perfectly legal for one class of citizen to rob, murder, and rape another class of citizen? What if, the LAW itself was what was corrupt, and appealing to the lawmakers is futile because they benefit from the corruption? How do you protest that WITHOUT breaking the laws that frankly, are there mostly in place to protect the victimizers against retaliation from their victims?
Good sir, if you do happen to have a script for the perfect society where there exists no possible method for legal matters to be corrupted then by all means please publish it. I am confident it will gain movement should it prove to be an improvement to what we have now. But until then, the rest of us are content to deal with life's problems in a way that doesn't piss off the other 80% of the population.
@davefromguam The kind of change that will piss off 80% of Americans would please 90% of the world... But that's not something I expect Americans to understand. Nor would I expect them to understand the concept of taking a BIG RISK, with HIGH UPFRONT COSTS for the possibility of a HUGE RETURN LATER. In other words, the situation that would piss off 80% of Americans NOW could please 100% of Americans AND the world later...
@hoyj4111 I'm suggesting that choosing a successful strategy to fight against the problems entirely depends on what you think the problems are:
1) If you think the problems are some bad apples, a few bad laws/policy - PROTEST
2) If you think the problems are the entire govt and economic system, almost all the participants with twisted agendas, and the ensuing society that has been build up around it - REVOLT
And mind, revolution does not have to be violent...
@hoyj4111 And mind, revolution does not have to be violent...
To believe otherwise is based on the incorrect assumption that breaking the law = violence which simply is not true. Successful non-violent revolution will involve A LOT of NON-VIOLENT law breaking. How is that not obvious to everyone else?
@davefromguam "...you are against capitalism... May I suggest communism as an alternative?"
No, what I am against is the illusion of capitalism aka neo-capitalism. I oppose the reality of what economic system actually exists in this nation, which is a mixed Corporatist Keynesian economy. What I am advocate is PURE capitalism aka an ACTUALLY free market...
It's precisely that things that are NOT capitalist that I oppose, like the excessive collusion between business and govt...
@TattsDeej i've spent the last hour or so commenting on the original video. I can not believe the people that live in our society today. more people should see your response video. like seriously.
Your logic is 100% These wannabe revolutionist, hipster, self righteous pukes are so delusional. Check out the vid of the UC Davis pepper spray "victim". What a joke. Its especially amusing how he and the like try to twist things to make them look like they are completely innocent and they clueless audience is eating it up. Who's the sheeple?
I like what you have to say here! The Constitution guarantees the right to peaceful assembly. However, most localities require a permit. Let's be honest, these students didn't think this out. They should never have expected tell people they can leave then block their way out. Once someone is under arrest, the police are not likely to just let them go.
@Gancanna Thank you for Your opinion and the view. I don't think many of these protests were particularly well thought out. Or, perhaps they were. Like I said in the video, those folks in that line had to have known it was going to escalate.
@TattsDeej They should have known, yes. They should also have realized that people have died in protests, too. (American Revolution, anyone?) Aren't they teaching history at U of C anymore?
I think they were fortunate that the officers at the scene and/or their superiors learned from what happened at Kent State in 1970 and only used pepper spray and handcuffs. Pepper spray is nasty, but it rarely if ever has caused death.
The tea party movement had Koch industries behind it. The occupy movement has nobody behind it and all the corporate lobby's against it. Your video about the "real" side of the Davis incident is misleading and patently offensive. None of your conclusions in the video are accurate and none of your conclusions here are accurate.
TattsDeej, you keep rockin'! I'm tired of this hippy crap that's going around. It's ignorance in abundance and I'm sicking of these "protestors'" lack of consideration for the law and those not involved in this daft protest. As you said, they need to get their shit together and do things the right way. Keep at it man, you're not alone in your thoughts on this matter!
@KoroshiyaMHX thanks! I think I made it pretty clear that I agree, there need to be major changes. I agreement with the ideals, not the methods. People should protest, they should be heard. Especially now, when things are so screwed up. But there's a better way
What i don't understand is that when any person with authority speaks, whether you like him or not, YOU LISTEN. i did go to the occupy L.A. the day it was raided just to see the seen, and when officers issued the warning like in Davis they continued to shout. Also provoking the cops, blocking their path? to them it seems like nothing, and they should know better...
@AnalyticAsian exactly! Having the right to assemble and protest does NOT give You the right to blatantly disobey a legal order to disperse. Someone posted earlier that the right to assemble supersedes the law, seems like peoples understanding of their rights are more than a little askew
I think you missed one major point in your video. There wasn't going to be ANY violence, or pepper spray, until they "peacefully" retaliated against the police after the police arrested people. By surrounding them.
If they wanted to get a point across, they should have just refused to leave and let the people who got arrested be arrested. Why? Because they police COULDNT arrest all of them. If they had 150 people get arrested for refusing to leave, that would have made headlines.
@dantarionX Actually, cause and effect was very much the point of the video. This was a failure at several levels, but figuring causality, when the owners of a private property ask you to leave, you leave. What happened afterwards is all effect
The one thing is that they were asked to leave on more than one occasion. If they continued to protest then the police would have just been called back until the protest was finally broken up. You are right that they should have let the police leave because at that point they are breaking the law.
I feel that if you cannot make your statement without breaking the law then what is the message that you are really trying to say.
@Buddha681 7 thumbs up 6 thumbs down, for a 54% percentage. Apparently more people than I are impressed with common sense and logic. I'm sorry, who's the ass? Evidently, the pandering sympathizer
@Buddha681 He has just as much a right to post this video as you do to whine about it. If you're going to attack the video, atleast say something productive and I dont know maybe explain what is wrong with the video rather than saying something retarded that is just a waste of people's time. By the way @TattsDeej I couldnt have said it better.
@Katfellow They surrounded the officers and prevented them from leaving. They broke the law several times, and they were each WARNED that force would be used. You have to be stupid to complain about being "attacked" when you were legally warned. Those people knew what they were in for and they just mocked the police, as if they believed they were bluffing. That wasn't a protest. It even had nothing to do with Occupy at that point. They were blatantly breaking the law and mocking authority.
100% correct sir. Besides I hate it when people take over parks. We had that going on in our neighborhood in the 80's and it totally sucked. Keep your politics out of the park!
@XtremeWeed Well, I'll give you an "E" for effort because your heart is in the right place. Technically, we asked the British to leave, when they refused, we FORCED them out. A little argument we like to call "The Revolutionary War". Thanks for trying. Puff puff pass
@TattsDeej Technically they wanted us to leave as well you know by killing us. Yes a great Revolutionary War it was too besides the death, but at least back than death meant something unlike getting shot in Iraq for an evil cause. Anyways I'm ready for another revolution, are you? The word revolution runs deep threw America's roots.
Peaceful protest supersedes the law. If the people are peaceful, they have a right to say what they want when & where they want. Pepper spray is excessive force, especially when force wasn't necessary. Why were the police called? "Oh no! There are angry people yelling on our property. Call the police, tell them to bring the people spray!" The people have been angry for years. They have a right to be angry anywhere & any time they want. All of the "laws" were created to oppress"legally".
@PoliticalLee by your reasoning, I am allowed to stand on your lawn, hell, in your house, and yell and scream and curse at you and you can't do anything about it. Don't get me wrong, I fully believe people have the right to assemble and to exercise free speech. But when it is on private property, they have to vacate said property if the owner says. If they fail to do so, then they are breaking the law. NO ONE should be above the law, be it a protester or the president.
@3BallJosh Apparently, trespassing in the name of "protest" is legal. As long as its not on MY property. (Insert sarcasm). How quickly the double standard sets in
@3BallJosh - On someone's property or inside their house is a true violation which I wouldn't agree with. On the public sidewalk in front of their house or even in the street if the anger is contagious enough? That's ok with me, as long as it's peaceful. What most of the cops & those who sympathize with their actions don't realize is that when the protest is confronted with violence, it only gets bigger. If you don't want protests, don't make the people angry, but don't beat them if you do.
@PoliticalLee And yes, there are many cases where excessive force is used, but any time law ENFORCEMENT officers do anything other than saying "please" over and over, everyone wants to accuse them of excessive force. Sometimes "please" just doesn't get the job done. For the record, I am not some monkey who thinks everything the government/people in power do or say is right, but sometimes they do have to do things that are unpopular with the masses. It's the facts of life
@PoliticalLee The students were told three times to leave property (where they were not welcomed by the private owners, mind you), and resorted to surrounding the police officers. They were each, individually, (which took a long time) that they would be subjected to use of force, and they laughed at the officers. Peaceful protest? I don't think that's a justified defense. They acted immaturely, they mocked police officers, prevented them from even leaving, and broke multiple laws.
No, I'm sorry, I don't know who put this in your mind, but that's simply incorrect. It's called civil *DISOBEDIENCE* and the consequence is being arrested. The purpose of civil disobedience is to make yourself seen and heard and to actually BE arrested. Somewhere along the lines, protestors seem to have forgotten this. EXPECT to be arrested, that's the POINT. The 99 ppl that were arrested at the last OWS march across Bklyn Bridge did it right b/c they ASKED for it.
@PoliticalLee Peaceful protest does not supercede the law, period. You have a right to be seen and heard but not to infringe on other people's rights in the process of doing so. The people banging drums all night at OWS is not okay. Taking over Zucotti Park to the exclusion of others is not okay. Blocking vehicular traffic on the Bklyn Bridge is not okay. People doing that should be arrested, period, regardless of what message they want to voice.
You're right, but I don't think you will get through these people's skulls. The problem is that we live in an ignorant, spoiled society where everything is taken for granted. We live among people who expect government spending and programs to run perfectly, yet complain when it's time to pay taxes. We live among people who trick the system because they think it's the right thing to do. And all they do is complain. That's what the protests are. Don't protest, act. Start with yourself.
Murchik1985 3 months ago
I think your absolutely correct, as I like to say, "If you want to be a revolutionary, expect to be treated like one."
svisionguy 3 months ago
I don't think you're against the grain, man. I thought I might be too but I'm glad to realize that I think plenty more people than not are with you! Well said.
goofypaul 3 months ago
Amen, sir. I wholeheartedly agree with your argument.
zarch619 3 months ago
The police were doing their job.. they were doing what they needed to do get paid, and support their families and their kids.
dbzuunior 3 months ago
!00% agree with you. The Police didn't do anything wrong; the protestors violated the law(California Penal Code 148). As a result, the Police, IMO, handled the situation with extreme patience and approached the situation in the most logical, safest way possible.
fantastik916 3 months ago
This has good intentions, but you mentioned the law breaking actions of the protesters and not those laws broken by the officer..I might make a response vid with all that stuff later. For now, I have to study for finals.
gangstamind187 3 months ago
@gangstamind187 I'm. Quite interested in hearing your argument. I'm curious as to what point, a Veteran officer of the law, in a day and age where nearly everyone has instant access to a video recording device and videos go viral in mere hours, would jeopardize his job, his reputation, his safety and the safety of his family...just to be a dick
Best of luck to you
TattsDeej 3 months ago
100% correct
MnrRugby24 3 months ago
100% correct!!
MnrRugby24 3 months ago
Very nice reply! You managed to summarise my thoughts exactly!
rephlexe 3 months ago
Good stuff, I'm glad there are still sensible people out there willing to look at it from a practical viewpoint.
davefromguam 3 months ago
Let's say you are protesting:
1) A corrupt govt that is bought out by corporations
2) The corrupt corporations doing the buying out
3) The police force paid for, trained, and employed by the government that has been bought off by corrupt corporations
4) Therefore, a police force that does the bidding of corrupt corporations under the guise of "keeping the peace"
5) A circumstance you cannot change because the legislative process serves the highest bidder
HOW, pray tell, do you protest that?
dawimythnotolo 3 months ago
@dawimythnotolo you'll never hear me say there aren't problems. You'll. Never hear me say there don't need to be changes. As a matter or fact, I made that pretty clear. My argument is that you can't break the law just because You don't like it or agree with it. If that were the case, it would be ok to rob, murder and rape. The perpetrator could simply say "I was angry", and the rest of the world is supposed to say "oh, well then that makes it ok"?
TattsDeej 3 months ago 4
@TattsDeej No, your not quite getting the vision I'm painting... What I'm saying is what if it was perfectly legal for one class of citizen to rob, murder, and rape another class of citizen? What if, the LAW itself was what was corrupt, and appealing to the lawmakers is futile because they benefit from the corruption? How do you protest that WITHOUT breaking the laws that frankly, are there mostly in place to protect the victimizers against retaliation from their victims?
dawimythnotolo 3 months ago
@dawimythnotolo
Good sir, if you do happen to have a script for the perfect society where there exists no possible method for legal matters to be corrupted then by all means please publish it. I am confident it will gain movement should it prove to be an improvement to what we have now. But until then, the rest of us are content to deal with life's problems in a way that doesn't piss off the other 80% of the population.
davefromguam 3 months ago
@davefromguam The kind of change that will piss off 80% of Americans would please 90% of the world... But that's not something I expect Americans to understand. Nor would I expect them to understand the concept of taking a BIG RISK, with HIGH UPFRONT COSTS for the possibility of a HUGE RETURN LATER. In other words, the situation that would piss off 80% of Americans NOW could please 100% of Americans AND the world later...
dawimythnotolo 3 months ago
@dawimythnotolo If you are suggesting combat/making threats to the police...WRONG!
hoyj4111 3 months ago
@hoyj4111 I'm suggesting that choosing a successful strategy to fight against the problems entirely depends on what you think the problems are:
1) If you think the problems are some bad apples, a few bad laws/policy - PROTEST
2) If you think the problems are the entire govt and economic system, almost all the participants with twisted agendas, and the ensuing society that has been build up around it - REVOLT
And mind, revolution does not have to be violent...
dawimythnotolo 3 months ago
@hoyj4111 And mind, revolution does not have to be violent...
To believe otherwise is based on the incorrect assumption that breaking the law = violence which simply is not true. Successful non-violent revolution will involve A LOT of NON-VIOLENT law breaking. How is that not obvious to everyone else?
dawimythnotolo 3 months ago
@dawimythnotolo
Sooo basically you are against capitalism... May I suggest communism as an alternative?
davefromguam 3 months ago
@davefromguam "...you are against capitalism... May I suggest communism as an alternative?"
No, what I am against is the illusion of capitalism aka neo-capitalism. I oppose the reality of what economic system actually exists in this nation, which is a mixed Corporatist Keynesian economy. What I am advocate is PURE capitalism aka an ACTUALLY free market...
It's precisely that things that are NOT capitalist that I oppose, like the excessive collusion between business and govt...
dawimythnotolo 3 months ago
your statements are my exact feelings. Thank you for bring hope to humanity
azntranceboi3131 3 months ago
@azntranceboi3131 there is always hope, my friend
TattsDeej 3 months ago
@TattsDeej i've spent the last hour or so commenting on the original video. I can not believe the people that live in our society today. more people should see your response video. like seriously.
azntranceboi3131 3 months ago
@azntranceboi3131 thank you. I'd love for more people to see it.
TattsDeej 3 months ago
Your logic is 100% These wannabe revolutionist, hipster, self righteous pukes are so delusional. Check out the vid of the UC Davis pepper spray "victim". What a joke. Its especially amusing how he and the like try to twist things to make them look like they are completely innocent and they clueless audience is eating it up. Who's the sheeple?
hoyj4111 3 months ago 22
I like what you have to say here! The Constitution guarantees the right to peaceful assembly. However, most localities require a permit. Let's be honest, these students didn't think this out. They should never have expected tell people they can leave then block their way out. Once someone is under arrest, the police are not likely to just let them go.
Gancanna 3 months ago 10
@Gancanna Thank you for Your opinion and the view. I don't think many of these protests were particularly well thought out. Or, perhaps they were. Like I said in the video, those folks in that line had to have known it was going to escalate.
TattsDeej 3 months ago
@TattsDeej They should have known, yes. They should also have realized that people have died in protests, too. (American Revolution, anyone?) Aren't they teaching history at U of C anymore?
I think they were fortunate that the officers at the scene and/or their superiors learned from what happened at Kent State in 1970 and only used pepper spray and handcuffs. Pepper spray is nasty, but it rarely if ever has caused death.
Gancanna 3 months ago
The tea party movement had Koch industries behind it. The occupy movement has nobody behind it and all the corporate lobby's against it. Your video about the "real" side of the Davis incident is misleading and patently offensive. None of your conclusions in the video are accurate and none of your conclusions here are accurate.
MikeatUCSD 3 months ago
@MikeatUCSD here's a novel idea, how about explaining why I'm "inaccurate". Don't hurt yourself
TattsDeej 3 months ago
TattsDeej, you keep rockin'! I'm tired of this hippy crap that's going around. It's ignorance in abundance and I'm sicking of these "protestors'" lack of consideration for the law and those not involved in this daft protest. As you said, they need to get their shit together and do things the right way. Keep at it man, you're not alone in your thoughts on this matter!
KoroshiyaMHX 3 months ago
@KoroshiyaMHX thanks! I think I made it pretty clear that I agree, there need to be major changes. I agreement with the ideals, not the methods. People should protest, they should be heard. Especially now, when things are so screwed up. But there's a better way
TattsDeej 3 months ago
What i don't understand is that when any person with authority speaks, whether you like him or not, YOU LISTEN. i did go to the occupy L.A. the day it was raided just to see the seen, and when officers issued the warning like in Davis they continued to shout. Also provoking the cops, blocking their path? to them it seems like nothing, and they should know better...
AnalyticAsian 3 months ago
@AnalyticAsian exactly! Having the right to assemble and protest does NOT give You the right to blatantly disobey a legal order to disperse. Someone posted earlier that the right to assemble supersedes the law, seems like peoples understanding of their rights are more than a little askew
TattsDeej 3 months ago
I think you missed one major point in your video. There wasn't going to be ANY violence, or pepper spray, until they "peacefully" retaliated against the police after the police arrested people. By surrounding them.
If they wanted to get a point across, they should have just refused to leave and let the people who got arrested be arrested. Why? Because they police COULDNT arrest all of them. If they had 150 people get arrested for refusing to leave, that would have made headlines.
dantarionX 3 months ago
@dantarionX Actually, cause and effect was very much the point of the video. This was a failure at several levels, but figuring causality, when the owners of a private property ask you to leave, you leave. What happened afterwards is all effect
TattsDeej 3 months ago
@dantarionX
The one thing is that they were asked to leave on more than one occasion. If they continued to protest then the police would have just been called back until the protest was finally broken up. You are right that they should have let the police leave because at that point they are breaking the law.
I feel that if you cannot make your statement without breaking the law then what is the message that you are really trying to say.
jamkddr 3 months ago
This young man is certainly impressed with himself. Well, no one else is. What an Ass!
Buddha681 3 months ago
@Buddha681 7 thumbs up 6 thumbs down, for a 54% percentage. Apparently more people than I are impressed with common sense and logic. I'm sorry, who's the ass? Evidently, the pandering sympathizer
TattsDeej 3 months ago
@TattsDeej Maybe you should put a shirt on.
MikeatUCSD 3 months ago
@MikeatUCSD maybe you should use your brain, rather than sitting on it
TattsDeej 3 months ago
@Buddha681 He has just as much a right to post this video as you do to whine about it. If you're going to attack the video, atleast say something productive and I dont know maybe explain what is wrong with the video rather than saying something retarded that is just a waste of people's time. By the way @TattsDeej I couldnt have said it better.
PhilipMendozaImages 3 months ago
Pepper spray hurts like hell. Doing that to non-violent people is wrong.
Katfellow 3 months ago in playlist More videos from TattsDeej
@Katfellow They surrounded the officers and prevented them from leaving. They broke the law several times, and they were each WARNED that force would be used. You have to be stupid to complain about being "attacked" when you were legally warned. Those people knew what they were in for and they just mocked the police, as if they believed they were bluffing. That wasn't a protest. It even had nothing to do with Occupy at that point. They were blatantly breaking the law and mocking authority.
SploraDorali 3 months ago
@SploraDorali
As information has been made public, my opinions about the students have changed.
I still wish a way other than pepper spray, point blank range to the face, could have been used.
Katfellow 3 months ago
100% correct sir. Besides I hate it when people take over parks. We had that going on in our neighborhood in the 80's and it totally sucked. Keep your politics out of the park!
Richmunnich 3 months ago
You know who els ''told us to leave''.
The British.
XtremeWeed 3 months ago
@XtremeWeed Well, I'll give you an "E" for effort because your heart is in the right place. Technically, we asked the British to leave, when they refused, we FORCED them out. A little argument we like to call "The Revolutionary War". Thanks for trying. Puff puff pass
TattsDeej 3 months ago
@TattsDeej Technically they wanted us to leave as well you know by killing us. Yes a great Revolutionary War it was too besides the death, but at least back than death meant something unlike getting shot in Iraq for an evil cause. Anyways I'm ready for another revolution, are you? The word revolution runs deep threw America's roots.
XtremeWeed 3 months ago
@TattsDeej LOL. You know who else "told us to leave"
The Native Americans: A little argument we call syphilis blankets and exterminating their food supply (buffalo)...
The Colombians: A little argument called the War on Drugs
The middle east: A little argument called the War on Terror
The North Vietnamese: A little argument called Democracy > Communism
Yes, the US is full of "little" lies and hypocrisy...
xD
dawimythnotolo 3 months ago
Peaceful protest supersedes the law. If the people are peaceful, they have a right to say what they want when & where they want. Pepper spray is excessive force, especially when force wasn't necessary. Why were the police called? "Oh no! There are angry people yelling on our property. Call the police, tell them to bring the people spray!" The people have been angry for years. They have a right to be angry anywhere & any time they want. All of the "laws" were created to oppress"legally".
PoliticalLee 3 months ago 2
@PoliticalLee by your reasoning, I am allowed to stand on your lawn, hell, in your house, and yell and scream and curse at you and you can't do anything about it. Don't get me wrong, I fully believe people have the right to assemble and to exercise free speech. But when it is on private property, they have to vacate said property if the owner says. If they fail to do so, then they are breaking the law. NO ONE should be above the law, be it a protester or the president.
3BallJosh 3 months ago
@3BallJosh Apparently, trespassing in the name of "protest" is legal. As long as its not on MY property. (Insert sarcasm). How quickly the double standard sets in
TattsDeej 3 months ago
@3BallJosh - On someone's property or inside their house is a true violation which I wouldn't agree with. On the public sidewalk in front of their house or even in the street if the anger is contagious enough? That's ok with me, as long as it's peaceful. What most of the cops & those who sympathize with their actions don't realize is that when the protest is confronted with violence, it only gets bigger. If you don't want protests, don't make the people angry, but don't beat them if you do.
PoliticalLee 3 months ago
@PoliticalLee And yes, there are many cases where excessive force is used, but any time law ENFORCEMENT officers do anything other than saying "please" over and over, everyone wants to accuse them of excessive force. Sometimes "please" just doesn't get the job done. For the record, I am not some monkey who thinks everything the government/people in power do or say is right, but sometimes they do have to do things that are unpopular with the masses. It's the facts of life
3BallJosh 3 months ago
@PoliticalLee The students were told three times to leave property (where they were not welcomed by the private owners, mind you), and resorted to surrounding the police officers. They were each, individually, (which took a long time) that they would be subjected to use of force, and they laughed at the officers. Peaceful protest? I don't think that's a justified defense. They acted immaturely, they mocked police officers, prevented them from even leaving, and broke multiple laws.
SploraDorali 3 months ago
@PoliticalLee
So I can peacefully protest on your private property and my ability to do that should supersede your lawful ability to have me removed?
No.
Simply No.
SlaytanicPOWER 3 months ago
Comment removed
invar1 3 months ago
No, I'm sorry, I don't know who put this in your mind, but that's simply incorrect. It's called civil *DISOBEDIENCE* and the consequence is being arrested. The purpose of civil disobedience is to make yourself seen and heard and to actually BE arrested. Somewhere along the lines, protestors seem to have forgotten this. EXPECT to be arrested, that's the POINT. The 99 ppl that were arrested at the last OWS march across Bklyn Bridge did it right b/c they ASKED for it.
invar1 3 months ago
@PoliticalLee Peaceful protest does not supercede the law, period. You have a right to be seen and heard but not to infringe on other people's rights in the process of doing so. The people banging drums all night at OWS is not okay. Taking over Zucotti Park to the exclusion of others is not okay. Blocking vehicular traffic on the Bklyn Bridge is not okay. People doing that should be arrested, period, regardless of what message they want to voice.
invar1 3 months ago