"Occupy" Protests

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Catcher10 wrote: They have collected almost $600,000 in donations and have over half of that still available in the bank......Seems like maybe OWS is moving into the 1%.........   And the guy holding the American flag upside down with spray paint on it.......what a doosh! And I suppos he is wondering why he has no job. I am all for freedom of speech...but not that.   What a complete joke. What about desecrating the royal symbol of a government offends you as a person?

Equality 7-2521 wrote: JJLehto wrote:   Maybe I'm way off base here, but IMHO right to protest/assemble/FoS means acceptance of that. When I see "Damn hippies, quit bitching and get a job!" it feels kind of like you're not really accepting their rights. Acceptance doesn't mean agreement. I accept someone's right to shoot up heroin 24 hours a day on their front step. I don't agree with the decision. I would recommend that the person seek help, get a job, or at the very least do his practice inside so as to not influence the children in the neighborhood. I would never suggest that he not be allowed to do those things though.

I should've specified a bit more.
I often see it linked a picture of a solider, with some text box along the lines of "They fight for your rights, so quit bitching" and it blows my mind people actually think "Yeah they fight for your right to express yourself, so don't express yourself!"

And that many of these people would lose their sh*t if they see someone protesting a military funeral, or hurting someone protesting abortion. OR they flip a lid when a mosque is to be constructed in the vicinity of ground zero.
God forbid people are protesting about something they dont agree with though!
The hypocrisy just makes me crazy.


Also goes without saying, any expression/protest should not damage others property and/or hurt others.
Which always ends up happening with any protest.


Edited by JJLehto - November 21 2011 at 16:18

Occupy Wall St. was relevant for a lot longer than the others. But that still descended into stupid riots.

JJLehto wrote: I should've specified a bit more. I often see it linked a picture of a solider, with some text box along the lines of "They fight for your rights, so quit bitching" and it blows my mind people actually think "Yeah they fight for your right to express yourself, so don't express yourself!"

Gotcha. Yeah that's just a technique to stifle dissenting opinions a la Stalin.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: topographicbroadways wrote: Occupy Wall St. was relevant for a lot longer than the others. But that still descended into stupid riots. I was talking about the international ones that i've seen more of. Did anybody see Occupy Melbourne and Sydney? If you did nobody can even begin to argue that anybody there knew what they were doing.  Though judging by the response this is just a Libertarian Thread anyway so i'll keep my none-radical opinions to myself. I shudder to think that you consider the proposition that people standing peacefully shouldn't be beaten to half to death by armed assailants a radical opinion.

topographicbroadways wrote: Occupy Wall St. was relevant for a lot longer than the others. But that still descended into stupid riots. I was talking about the international ones that i've seen more of. Did anybody see Occupy Melbourne and Sydney? If you did nobody can even begin to argue that anybody there knew what they were doing.  Though judging by the response this is just a Libertarian Thread anyway so i'll keep my none-radical opinions to myself.

That was inevitable. I told people I knew personally who believed "THIS IS IT" that nothing would come of this and it would descend into violence.
Note I've not heard from them in a while now.....can't imagine why they seem to have shut up
And yeah, I was hoping this would simply be a discussion of the protests and general argument (that would've lasted a few pages) but this is PA so naturally this would become the libertarian thread #701. I am shocked it's still going though

I wish that was the case Pat, sadly I figured it's just people being stupid.

Not really here to talk about the acts themselves but yeah Scott, like flag burning...IMO a symbol is just a symbol. As powerful as it may be.
Shooting a solider on the street or setting off a bomb in some federal building to me would be far more offensive then some people burning a piece of cloth.

The Doctor wrote: topographicbroadways wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: topographicbroadways wrote: Occupy Wall St. was relevant for a lot longer than the others. But that still descended into stupid riots. I was talking about the international ones that i've seen more of. Did anybody see Occupy Melbourne and Sydney? If you did nobody can even begin to argue that anybody there knew what they were doing.  Though judging by the response this is just a Libertarian Thread anyway so i'll keep my none-radical opinions to myself. I shudder to think that you consider the proposition that people standing peacefully shouldn't be beaten to half to death by armed assailants a radical opinion. Exaggeration is obviously lost on you.  But it stopped being a peaceful protest when they  started rioting and smashing shop windows.  Damaging property, while illegal, is not violence.  Someone who breaks a shop window does not deserve to be beaten, pepper-sprayed, kicked or in any other way physically attacked.  Not by armed cops on a power trip.

Certainly not beaten and such by the police but to be fair...something needs to be done.
If I am enjoying a day in NYC, and come back to find my car has been set on fire, I don't want em gassed and beaten by police but I do want them arrested.

The Doctor wrote: topographicbroadways wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: topographicbroadways wrote: Occupy Wall St. was relevant for a lot longer than the others. But that still descended into stupid riots. I was talking about the international ones that i've seen more of. Did anybody see Occupy Melbourne and Sydney? If you did nobody can even begin to argue that anybody there knew what they were doing.  Though judging by the response this is just a Libertarian Thread anyway so i'll keep my none-radical opinions to myself. I shudder to think that you consider the proposition that people standing peacefully shouldn't be beaten to half to death by armed assailants a radical opinion. Exaggeration is obviously lost on you.  But it stopped being a peaceful protest when they  started rioting and smashing shop windows.  Damaging property, while illegal, is not violence.  Someone who breaks a shop window does not deserve to be beaten, pepper-sprayed, kicked or in any other way physically attacked.  Not by armed cops on a power trip.

I agree with the latter statement, but damaging property is certainly violence.

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Henry Plainview wrote: Yeah, people who think that desecrating your own flag should be illegal scare me. I do think, however, that tent cities are not free speech. That's just wanting the rules of society to not apply to you. Tent cities are not free speech, but standing on public property is not grounds for violence.