Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No, they shouldn't be given a pass. But they also should not be attacked. Arrested, fine. Pepper sprayed, no.IMO, the cops should have dismantled and destroyed any tents that weren't taken down (and according to the article I linked, many of them were). And ignored the people staging the sit-in to protest the tents being taken down. IF and WHEN the protestors posed a threat, they could and should then arrest them.
The evidence is that people sitting on the ground are not a threat.
Non-threatening law-breakers should be given a pass by the police?
Nice to know, but I don't think it works that way.
And I'm curious to know what law they broke....I have no idea if the people sitting on the ground were the people that didn't remove their tents. It sounds otherwise, at this point.
He's been like this since his sleep schedule got disrupted. This makes me a sad panda, because up until very recently, he bought a lot of humor and wit to this board. I'm hoping the change is temporary.
I'm the messenger so it's okay to shoot me...........
So you're telling me you have no concept of what the human motivational factors are. They can be boiled down to two categories, ideology and self interest. Self interest can also be exhibited in the so called selflessness of acts since such acts generally provide the giver with a sense of well being.
It's basic psychology.
In that case, can any selfless act be truly devoid of self-interest?
I'm the messenger so it's okay to shoot me...........
So you're telling me you have no concept of what the human motivational factors are. They can be boiled down to two categories, ideology and self interest. Self interest can also be exhibited in the so called selflessness of acts since such acts generally provide the giver with a sense of well being.
It's basic psychology.
In that case, can any selfless act be truly devoid of self-interest?
Does the degree of personal self-interest actually matter?
When a baby is born it usually needs to be jarred into breathing and so even that move is not truly instinctive. It is a common prevailing view in psychology that the only human instinct is to suck, that all else is learned behavior, and that culturally prescriptive identity modeling is the human path.
In that case, can any selfless act be truly devoid of self-interest?
Does the degree of personal self-interest actually matter?
When a baby is born it usually needs to be jarred into breathing and so even that move is not truly instinctive. It is a common prevailing view in psychology that the only human instinct is to suck, that all else is learned behavior, and that culturally prescriptive identity modeling is the human path.
Hmmm...so is self-interest culturally prescriptive in our society?
It seems a bit sad really.
Does the degree of personal self-interest actually matter?
When a baby is born it usually needs to be jarred into breathing and so even that move is not truly instinctive. It is a common prevailing view in psychology that the only human instinct is to suck, that all else is learned behavior, and that culturally prescriptive identity modeling is the human path.
Hmmm...so is self-interest culturally prescriptive in our society?
It seems a bit sad really.
All of our societies and not just 'our' society. It is the human condition.
IMO, the cops should have dismantled and destroyed any tents that weren't taken down (and according to the article I linked, many of them were). And ignored the people staging the sit-in to protest the tents being taken down. IF and WHEN the protestors posed a threat, they could and should then arrest them.
The evidence is that people sitting on the ground are not a threat.
Non-threatening law-breakers should be given a pass by the police?
Nice to know, but I don't think it works that way.
IMO, the cops should have dismantled and destroyed any tents that weren't taken down (and according to the article I linked, many of them were). And ignored the people staging the sit-in to protest the tents being taken down. IF and WHEN the protestors posed a threat, they could and should then arrest them.
The evidence is that people sitting on the ground are not a threat.
Non-threatening law-breakers should be given a pass by the police?
Nice to know, but I don't think it works that way.
Sorry,don't like being The Good German. They work for us. It's not the other way around. 'TO PROTECT AND SERVE.' Somewhere along the line they forgot that. So you go ahead and be The Good German but i never will. Fuck em.
To protect and serve ALL OF US!!!! When the exercise of your rights violates mine, My rights trump yours.
not always... it depends.
What is the proper method of dealing with people who have repeatedly disobeyed lawful orders to disperse?
Do you think the OWS are intentionally pushing police to the point where the only way the police can enforce the law is to do things which make for "good" anti-cop TV?
Is physically dragging lawbreakers away more appropriate than pepper spray? Some in-the-know have said no, that physically carrying people away comes with its own set of risks and liabilities.
Governments have a responsibility to uphold the law.
Don't you agree with that?
If the protestors were protesting legally, there would not be a problem. When they are violating the law, there is a problem.
There are many many many legal public venues (and times) for protest. These protestors are making their point and garnering the attention they crave BY breaking the law and you want the government to abdicate its responsibility to the rest of its citizens by letting the law breaking go on.
I just don't understand.
At all.
Governments have a responsibility to uphold the law.
Don't you agree with that?
If the protestors were protesting legally, there would not be a problem. When they are violating the law, there is a problem.
There are many many many legal public venues (and times) for protest. These protestors are making their point and garnering the attention they crave BY breaking the law and you want the government to abdicate its responsibility to the rest of its citizens by letting the law breaking go on.
I just don't understand.
At all.
Since when did peaceful protests become illegal?
Immie
Governments have a responsibility to uphold the law.
Don't you agree with that?
If the protestors were protesting legally, there would not be a problem. When they are violating the law, there is a problem.
There are many many many legal public venues (and times) for protest. These protestors are making their point and garnering the attention they crave BY breaking the law and you want the government to abdicate its responsibility to the rest of its citizens by letting the law breaking go on.
I just don't understand.
At all.
Since when did peaceful protests become illegal?
Immie
I'm sorry you cant get past emoting and move towards objectivity. But whatchagonnado?
You're right. My bad.
Why did she apologize.
Never forget the Police work for us. I don't understand why so many have forgotten this. We don't need to fear them or bow to them. More people just need to start standing up. And always always have your own recording equipment handy. You'll likely need it. They wont hesitate to file a false police report. Don't let it be your word against their's. Because you'll lose that every time. Have your own recorded proof.
Do you have a link to that video?No, they shouldn't be given a pass. But they also should not be attacked. Arrested, fine. Pepper sprayed, no.Non-threatening law-breakers should be given a pass by the police?
Nice to know, but I don't think it works that way.
And I'm curious to know what law they broke....I have no idea if the people sitting on the ground were the people that didn't remove their tents. It sounds otherwise, at this point.
I guess you missed the follow up reports and video that shows the protesters had encircled the officers and wouldn't allow them to leave until those arrested were released, that's called interfering with a police officer in the performance of his/her duties. Not to mention the officers warned the protesters they would use pepper spray if they did not disperse and allow the officers to do their job.
Jesus would tear down the temple and throw away the money grubbers.imo, the pepper spray was wrong....period!
WWJD?
Never forget the Police work for us. I don't understand why so many have forgotten this. We don't need to fear them or bow to them. More people just need to start standing up. And always always have your own recording equipment handy. You'll likely need it. They wont hesitate to file a false police report. Don't let it be your word against their's. Because you'll lose that every time. Have your own recorded proof.
that is right.. the police work for us.
If idiots are having a hissy fit...and preventing ME from doing what i want...or from where i want to go... it is he polices job to move the illegal activity.
If I am not allowed to camp in the city because it is against the law... neither are "protesters" If MY tent would be pulled down... THEIR tents should be pulled down. That is the polices job..and that is them working for me.
