I don’t want all protests to stop. It’s a way to express your view publicly.
What does need to stop is the childish selfishness of this civel disobedience to forcibly impose your will over others. The cause doesn’t matter; civilized society can’t exist if every activist for every cause uses this to make a point.
You just don’t want them to be inconvenient. So you can ignore them. So nothing will change. Like you want.
In my city, there is a guy with a megaphone shouting into traffic nearly every day. Annoying, but I support his right to be there. In another nearby, there is a section known for protests and signs every weekend with dozens of participants. I support their right to assemble. There is a diehard Trumper who absolutely plastered their front yard with signs. I recognize their right as an American. And I have written 3 letters to my local government this year. I have signed ballot initiatives brought forth by organizations I support. This is how you change a democracy.
Yeah, who do people who want cops to stop shooting them think they are?
That’s a great argument until you substitute in a cause you don’t support. Hmm, what would people be saying if some pro-January 6th-ers took over the bridge?
Certainly never to you. You love the status quo and never want it to change.
We’re always changing. It is natural. However, I refrain from emotional decisions and tend to break problems down to their cores. The “cause”, whatever it may be, is an emotional trigger employed to justify a course of illegal action. I am entirely unaffected. I have, instead, viewed this event from the perspective of rational logic. This is unacceptable behavior. Period.
Also, side note, thanks for the debate. I really enjoyed it, but I got to sleep. :)
That’s a great argument until you substitute in a cause you don’t support. Hmm, what would people be saying if some pro-January 6th-ers took over the bridge?
It happened in my town. Remember the Trump Trains? Blocked traffic for miles.
I get that you don’t like people wanting to do something effective that might draw attention to their cause and are trying to use trumpists as an excuse, but here’s the thing: Cops won’t enforce this consistently. Trumpists will still be allowed to march, but people cops disagree with won’t. I have no doubt that this is the only reason you support making protesters felons, nor do I think that this will stop with protests in the street.
We’re always changing.
And you’re fine with that as long as it keeps being for the worse and no one adds any minutes to your precious commute. You want to make people felons on the off chance that you might have to choose an alternate route one day. Your commute is not that important.
I am entirely unaffected.
Then act like it and stop supporting making protesting in a way that hurts your feelings a felony.
I think you should address their question. What happens when the other side imitates the tactic? Do you still support it or only when your side does it?
I support the right of people to vote and know that I strongly disagree with how many people vote.
Compare what happened with the BLM protests to what cops did at the insurrection.
Cops choose to treat the causes I don’t support with kid gloves and causes I do support with brutality already. Making protesting in the streets a felony will only de facto criminalize the behavior for one side.
So because a law is enforced badly anarchy should rule?
I agree there is uneven enforcement and it wouldn’t surprise me at all if people have produced studies showing that. The solution is not to have no laws. The solution is to fix how laws are enforced.
The solution is also not additional laws for police to abuse against those who want police accountability. Fix the police first, then we can talk about how you want to equate a lack of new laws with lawlessness.
If you want protests to stop, address the issues being protested.
You cheer for dogs and firehoses and rubber bullets and tear gas instead.
I don’t want all protests to stop. It’s a way to express your view publicly.
What does need to stop is the childish selfishness of this civel disobedience to forcibly impose your will over others. The cause doesn’t matter; civilized society can’t exist if every activist for every cause uses this to make a point.
You just don’t want them to be inconvenient. So you can ignore them. So nothing will change. Like you want.
Yeah, who do people who want cops to stop shooting them think they are?
Certainly never to you. You love the status quo and never want it to change.
In my city, there is a guy with a megaphone shouting into traffic nearly every day. Annoying, but I support his right to be there. In another nearby, there is a section known for protests and signs every weekend with dozens of participants. I support their right to assemble. There is a diehard Trumper who absolutely plastered their front yard with signs. I recognize their right as an American. And I have written 3 letters to my local government this year. I have signed ballot initiatives brought forth by organizations I support. This is how you change a democracy.
That’s a great argument until you substitute in a cause you don’t support. Hmm, what would people be saying if some pro-January 6th-ers took over the bridge?
We’re always changing. It is natural. However, I refrain from emotional decisions and tend to break problems down to their cores. The “cause”, whatever it may be, is an emotional trigger employed to justify a course of illegal action. I am entirely unaffected. I have, instead, viewed this event from the perspective of rational logic. This is unacceptable behavior. Period.
Also, side note, thanks for the debate. I really enjoyed it, but I got to sleep. :)
It happened in my town. Remember the Trump Trains? Blocked traffic for miles.
I get that you don’t like people wanting to do something effective that might draw attention to their cause and are trying to use trumpists as an excuse, but here’s the thing: Cops won’t enforce this consistently. Trumpists will still be allowed to march, but people cops disagree with won’t. I have no doubt that this is the only reason you support making protesters felons, nor do I think that this will stop with protests in the street.
And you’re fine with that as long as it keeps being for the worse and no one adds any minutes to your precious commute. You want to make people felons on the off chance that you might have to choose an alternate route one day. Your commute is not that important.
Then act like it and stop supporting making protesting in a way that hurts your feelings a felony.
So when forced-birth activists block the road to an abortion clinic, then the best way to stop that is to address their issues?
There are already laws against harassment. We don’t need to make anyone who marches in the streets a felon.
I’m not talking about harassment. Simply protestors blocking all traffic on a street that has an abortion clinic.
Is it good for democracy when pregnant women can’t drive to their appointment?
While we’re at it, what about climate deniers blocking access to public chargers, thus stranding anyone using an EV?
Or right-wingers who block off access to bike lanes just to “pwn the libs.”
All of these have already happened, by the way. Were they good for democracy?
You’re making up hypotheticals that aren’t happening when the law is designed to silence civil rights protests.
All of them have already happened.
Abortion opponents block access to clinics. Right-wingers block access to charging stations and bike lanes.
Harassment, trespassing, and illegal parking, in that order.
Police will abuse their discretion if it’s made a felony, effectively outlawing only street protests that police don’t approve of.
And standing in the middle of traffic is jaywalking.
But I thought shutting down traffic was good for democracy. Should people who block access to abortion clinics be punished or not?
Then cops can issue tickets. There’s no reason to make it a felony except wanting to silence people cops don’t like.
I think you should address their question. What happens when the other side imitates the tactic? Do you still support it or only when your side does it?
I support the right of people to vote and know that I strongly disagree with how many people vote.
Compare what happened with the BLM protests to what cops did at the insurrection.
Cops choose to treat the causes I don’t support with kid gloves and causes I do support with brutality already. Making protesting in the streets a felony will only de facto criminalize the behavior for one side.
So because a law is enforced badly anarchy should rule?
I agree there is uneven enforcement and it wouldn’t surprise me at all if people have produced studies showing that. The solution is not to have no laws. The solution is to fix how laws are enforced.
The solution is also not additional laws for police to abuse against those who want police accountability. Fix the police first, then we can talk about how you want to equate a lack of new laws with lawlessness.