Thursday, November 10, 2016

Protests In The Street, You Say?






fillyjonk said...

I'm okay with protesting, but I draw the line three places:

1. (This is what I'd be most flexible on, though I'd be peeved if it happened in my vicinity): being so loud late into the night that residents in the area cannot sleep or get their children to sleep.

2. Vandalizing others' property. How many G8 protests have we seen that involve trash cans thrown through storefront windows? The dude who owns the store is just a dude trying to make a living; he is not your enemy

3. Calling for assassination or plotting assassination. That is a level of chaos we do not want. Even beyond that fact that I tend to believe that I don't have the right to kill people that I even deeply disagree with over stuff or maybe think are "bad" people.

Roberta X said...

The last two are well beyond mere protest.

fillyjonk said...

Yeah, but I've heard people coming up with justifications for them.

rickn8or said...

"Do you intend to let them do so without proper supervision?"

I've made that mistake once. Why I ever thought leaving a building full of lawyers unsupervised is beyond me.

"Sly and devious creatures that bear close watching at all times."

Roberta X said...

"Yeah, but I've heard people coming up with justifications for them." I have, too, and yet no matter how much I study, "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances," that word "peaceably" stubbornly remains. Smash a few windows and -- hey, presto! -- you're not peaceably assembled, you're a vandal at least, and your petition isn't going to be nearly so loud as the crash of glass or the clink of the handcuff locks.

Sit there in the "wrong" section of the bus and say, "No," that's pretty peaceable and may be just what it takes to get the sign-wavers noticed. Stop the bus, push it over and set it on fire, not peaceable.

We remember MLK's speech to a vast assembly of people on the Mall; we remember the Days of Rage, too, but not proudly. Which event prompted the more lasting changes?

one_of_many said...

Presidents do make 'laws,' or at least their administrations do. They make them through the vast numbers of regulations issued by the various executive departments because Congress delegated the power to the executive. It shouldn't be this way, but it arguably has a greater negative effect on the country than most real laws.