Police Reform

[Archy1221]

11 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

One of these was a founding principle of this nation. One isn't. 

 

Guess which one the laws are protecting. 

 

I’m sure harassing travelers and damaging their property while protesting was on the top of the founders minds when talking about that founding principal

 

 

[DevoHusker]

21 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

The Constitution disagrees.

 

In the few cases where a driver is surrounded and fears for their life, then we can have a debate on reasonable courses of action and what should and shouldn't be allowed. Running people over when no lives are threatened is murder.

 

What, specifically, does the Constitution/1st Amendment state that allows protests in the streets?

 

I agree with you on the bold.

[DevoHusker]

32 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

 

One of these was a founding principle of this nation. One isn't. 

 

Guess which one the laws are protecting. 

 

 

A "founding principal" of the Nation was not blocking major thoroughfares and attempting to overturn/damage someone's car under the guise of social protest. 

[knapplc]

Just now, DevoHusker said:

 

A "founding principal" of the Nation was not blocking major thoroughfares and attempting to overturn/damage someone's car under the guise of social protest. 

 

Protest. The word you're looking for is Protest. 

 

 

[DevoHusker]

1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

Protest. The word you're looking for is Protest. 

 

 

 

Peaceful ...the word you're looking for is peaceful.

[knapplc]

Just now, DevoHusker said:

 

Peaceful ...the word you're looking for is peaceful.

 

Peaceful like the Boston Tea Party? Peaceful like Bunker Hill? Peaceful like...? 

[BigRedBuster]

45 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

One's right to protest does not supersede someone else's right to travel on a public roadway without being stopped, surrounded, harrassed, or having  personal property damaged. 

The law doesn't say, you're not in trouble only if they stopped you, surrounded your car, harassing you and you are sustaining personal property damage.

[RedDenver]

12 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

Peaceful ...the word you're looking for is peaceful.

Yep. Blocking a road is peaceful.

[knapplc]

16 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

A "founding principal" of the Nation was not blocking major thoroughfares and attempting to overturn/damage someone's car under the guise of social protest. 

 

What do you mean by "under the guise?" That's specifically what they were doing - protesting George Floyd's murder, and other social injustices that affect Black Americans. 

[DevoHusker]

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

Yep. Blocking a road is peaceful.

 

And I said I agree. But peaceful is also letting folks that need to get through, through. And not surrounding/jumping on/hitting/kicking the vehicle, or screaming at the driver.

 

@teachercd said it best. If it happened to me I would be scared sh*tless and while we would like to think we would remain calm...who knows?

[DevoHusker]

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

Peaceful like the Boston Tea Party? Peaceful like Bunker Hill? Peaceful like...? 

 

You are using the exact same argument here that staunch 2A folks use regarding "shall not be infringed". And you are both off base.

 

The framers did not foresee multilane freeways with snarled traffic, just as they did not foresee semi-autos with 30 round clips. 

[RedDenver]

Just now, DevoHusker said:

 

And I said I agree. But peaceful is also letting folks that need to get through, through. And not surrounding/jumping on/hitting/kicking the vehicle, or screaming at the driver.

 

@teachercd said it best. If it happened to me I would be scared sh*tless and while we would like to think we would remain calm...who knows?

Being scared s#!tless is not a reason to commit murder. Nor is not being able to get down a road. You were already able to defend yourself under the law, so why did these states feel the need to allow drivers to mow down people? @knapplc has already spelled it out pretty well.

[DevoHusker]

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

What do you mean by "under the guise?" That's specifically what they were doing - protesting George Floyd's murder, and other social injustices that affect Black Americans. 

 

I mean exactly what I said. Burning down buildings, looting Nike stores and Target stores is not an effective way to protest social injustices. Those that excuse it as "messy but needed" are not helping the cause. 

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, RedDenver said:

Yep. Blocking a road is peaceful.

Can be.  Many times it’s not though

[knapplc]

Just now, DevoHusker said:

 

I mean exactly what I said. Burning down buildings, looting Nike stores and Target stores is not an effective way to protest social injustices. Those that excuse it as "messy but needed" are not helping the cause. 

 

No. You're conflating a lot of things here. The people being mowed down by right-wingers in their cars aren't looting or burning down buildings. 

 

These laws have nothing to do with what you're now trying to talk about. Let's focus.