205
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2024
205 points (98.1% liked)
politics
19145 readers
2288 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Did they break the law?
I'm a pretty strong free speech advocate but if you're going to engage in protest speech you should take the time to learn about well-established time/place/manner restrictions and not break other obvious laws.
Sidewalks are generally established free speech forums (there are others as well) and you should be able to say pretty much anything there. But you can't stand on the sidewalk and smash car windows and assault people and complain about your speech being silenced when you're arrested. I know that's not at all what happened here, just an illustration.
That said, even if you're doing everything correctly sometimes police will try to stop your speech if they don't like it. Always record such police interactions.
Edit I'm not advocating blind obedience. Civil disobedience is necessary and good, but don't be surprised when you get arrested. And if you think the laws they "broke" need to change, pressure your representatives to change it. But spoiler alert, both parties like being protected from protest inside the statehouses.
You know that black chick who refused to go to the back of the bus a few gens ago? Believe it or not, ILLEGAL!
Was she a criminal who should have "learned" to protest at the well-established time/place/manner? If no, check your conformism. Needing "approval" to protest is anti-democratic.
If you're still not getting it — On a scale of peaceful to genocide, how "criminal" is sitting inside a building without approval?
I also believe in civil disobedience but everyone gets all surprised picachu face when people get arrested for breaking the law. Go ahead and do it, just don't be surprised.
I find there's often an agreement bias. If hundreds of Trump supporters had sat in the same time/place/manner on Jan 6 rather than what happened, would you have agreed with their arrest?
Fuck no. And they didn't.
Great response and I agree with you on both. People who showed up peacefully and broke no laws didn't get arrested on Jan 6. But neither party is going to change the law to allow protests in our statehouses.
If they had sat around the building chanting, without beating police or any violence? Then it would've been a slightly larger nothing burger. Despite being a significantly dumber, unjustifiable, cause, the only legitimate concern is security for the people who have to work there and damage to property. Luckily anti-genocide protestors are 1000x less violent than insurrectionist fascists, so it's not even a remotely valid comparison.
Getting arrested for doing nothing but decrying oppression and existing in the presence of Congress is kinda the point. Makes a bigger scene, catches media attention, gets shared, support grows.
Hell, I think peta is a clever marketing tactic to shift the Overton window. "I'm all for treating animals better, but those guys are assholes!" Same for the climate protestors who fuck up artwork. "we should absolutely fix the climate, but don't fuck with van Gogh!" It gets people to support the ideas of the cause but unifies against the extreme actions taken, while those same extreme actions facilitate further sharing.
FWIW, they didn't fuck up artwork - certainly not van gogh's or whatever. The art is covered in glass cases to protect it, so the glass just had to be replaced (which, well, is relatively cheap compared to the paintings. they probably have a fund to cover that cost as the cost of doing business.)
Oh, I absolutely know that. But I think the principle of my argument stands.
it makes it even better, because the paintings are just fine.