Protesters, or Rioters - that is the question.

[Wry Catcher]

I'm fed up with the network news calling those who commit arson and theft protesters. What do you think, are they protesting, or rioting? Is there action protected expression by the first amendment or cirminal?

 

[BlackSand]

I am not sure if we could prove their activity was directly related to a protest or riot associated with Officer Wilson's Grand Jury decision. It might be more appropriate to identify them as opportunistic thieves.

.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

I am not sure if we could prove their activity was directly related to a protest or riot associated with Officer Wilson's Grand Jury decision. It might be more appropriate to identify them as opportunistic thieves.

.

That's pretty much what the news accounts are saying.

The protesters are peaceful and have a legit gripe. The looters are taking advantage of the mess.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I'm fed up with the network news calling those who commit arson and theft protesters. What do you think, are they protesting, or rioting? Is there action protected expression by the first amendment or cirminal?

I'm with you on this one. I have no problem with protesting that doesn't involve destruction of private or public property. OTOH, I have no problem with national guard tanks rolling over rioters who destroy property.

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

I prefer to call these animals what they are: terrorists.

 

[BlackSand]

I am not sure if we could prove their activity was directly related to a protest or riot associated with Officer Wilson's Grand Jury decision. It might be more appropriate to identify them as opportunistic thieves.

.

That's pretty much what the news accounts are saying.

The protesters are peaceful and have a legit gripe. The looters are taking advantage of the mess.

Yeah ... But then again that is in reference to the looters. I think the remaining portion could be described as rioters or protestors according to their activities. I believe both were present.

At what point does a protestor decide that their activities are not consistent with others who choose to riot? If they remain on the scene, would it be negligent to express they are at least supporting the riot?

.

 

[Vigilante]

I prefer to call these animals what they are: terrorists.

I'm sure Natalie would agree!

 

[Wry Catcher]

I am not sure if we could prove their activity was directly related to a protest or riot associated with Officer Wilson's Grand Jury decision. It might be more appropriate to identify them as opportunistic thieves.

.

Good point, clearly some are.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I'm fed up with the network news calling those who commit arson and theft protesters. What do you think, are they protesting, or rioting? Is there action protected expression by the first amendment or cirminal?

Protests that breakout into riots because of the mob mentality.

 

[Wry Catcher]

A protest is, or must be peaceful; a riot is violent and criminal. How does or should the criminal justice system respond?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

A protest is, or must be peaceful; a riot is violent and criminal. How does or should the criminal justice system respond?

Prosecute to the fullest extent of the law.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I'm fed up with the network news calling those who commit arson and theft protesters. What do you think, are they protesting, or rioting? Is there action protected expression by the first amendment or cirminal?

Is the ‘network news’ indeed calling those who are violating the law ‘protesters.’

Reports from credible sources have been careful to distinguish between criminals who are participating in riots from those engaged in lawful protest, where the former are subject to criminal prosecution and the latter entitled to First Amendment protections.

The problem is there are those who refuse the acknowledge the difference for some perceived partisan gain by seeking to portray those engaged in lawful protest as ‘criminals.’

 

[Pop23]

I'm fed up with the network news calling those who commit arson and theft protesters. What do you think, are they protesting, or rioting? Is there action protected expression by the first amendment or cirminal?

There were actual protesters there, regrettably, most were rioters and theives.

 

[Treeshepherd]

"I had a vision last night
That I was walking on a street of pure gold
This street that I saw
Is where I and I should have been
So why don't we stand up and fight for our rights

Dreadlocks the time is now
Stand up fight for your rights
Or you ain't gonna get your culture man
Roots natty, don't give up - hold on

If I am wrong, be not afraid to say so
Is there any difference between the black and white?
We are all of one skin - same blood , same soul
But there are some who think dreadlocks don't count

Dreadlocks the time is now..."



The Gladiators - Roots Natty Roots - YouTube

 

[Treeshepherd]

Fuck the law

 

[Treeshepherd]

rest in peace, Pac

 

[Shrimpbox]

This is a perfect example of how radicals coopt our system, supposedly peacefully but with anarchy as a goal. The litmus test here seems to be violence. If there is no violence it is alright, but if there is violence not so good. Protesters who curse and antagonize the police hoping to provoke a confrontation seem to be ok. People who hide their identity with masks seem to be ok. People who only show up(al sharpton) to rant and rabble rouse are so ok they get repeatedly invited to the White House even though they bring nothing to the party. But we should judge these acts not by the color of,their constitutionality but the content of their protest.

Radical leftism wants to so disrupt your life that they provoke you to anger. They have no interest in the issue but rather in the manipulation. One of our employees made a great point, here in tallahassee we've had shootings of cops and blacks and whites and no one really ever made a national issue out of it. Now something of dubious flavor has happened a thousand miles away and everyone is up in arms about it. What gives? People are protesting in LA, Atlanta, New York, and Macys parade for god sake. Same as with the gay rights issue, they are going to shove it down your throat whether you like it or not. You will not be allowed peace , harmony, brotherhood or happiness unless you bend to our will, and we are only exercising our right to peacefully protest!

Before we give blanket endorsements to peaceful protesters let's realize that there are many wolves in sheeps clothing among these protesters who do not,wish our country and constitution well.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

They need to protest against the rioters.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I'm fed up with the network news calling those who commit arson and theft protesters. What do you think, are they protesting, or rioting? Is there action protected expression by the first amendment or cirminal?

Is the ‘network news’ indeed calling those who are violating the law ‘protesters.’

Reports from credible sources have been careful to distinguish between criminals who are participating in riots from those engaged in lawful protest, where the former are subject to criminal prosecution and the latter entitled to First Amendment protections.

The problem is there are those who refuse the acknowledge the difference for some perceived partisan gain by seeking to portray those engaged in lawful protest as ‘criminals.’

Of course, the Occupy Movement is a prime example, the few law breakers led some to define the entire movement as criminal/violent. This is why all of us need to apply critical thinking and not react emotionally to such events.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I'm fed up with the network news calling those who commit arson and theft protesters. What do you think, are they protesting, or rioting? Is there action protected expression by the first amendment or cirminal?

Is the ‘network news’ indeed calling those who are violating the law ‘protesters.’

Reports from credible sources have been careful to distinguish between criminals who are participating in riots from those engaged in lawful protest, where the former are subject to criminal prosecution and the latter entitled to First Amendment protections.

The problem is there are those who refuse the acknowledge the difference for some perceived partisan gain by seeking to portray those engaged in lawful protest as ‘criminals.’

Of course, the Occupy Movement is a prime example, the few law breakers led some to define the entire movement as criminal/violent. This is why all of us need to apply critical thinking and not react emotionally to such events.

Unfortunately there are those who seek to politicize events and portray the tiny minority who are law breakers as representative of those engaged in legitimate, lawful protest.