Police rip 'clothes' (tent) off female ‘Occupy Melbourne’ protester
357 replies, posted
[QUOTE=lil_n00blett;33609259]watch the video, they offered a change of clothes and she refused. she also refused to leave. are the cops supposed to just say "oh well, she said no" and walk away? and boo hoo, her hair got a little tangled when they pulled the tent off her. it's not like they pulled out a chunk of her hair. police are authorized to use force, and besides the hair (which could not have hurt that badly) they weren't unnecessarily harmful at all.[/QUOTE]
I don't know man, getting your hair pulled hurts.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;33609245]And she had pitched the tent while wearing it, or what?
I think you mean they prohibited tents in general because there's nothing anybody sane is going to do with a tent other than pitch it.
My point is, removing a stealthily removed tent-dress mid-pitch probably ain't difficult enough to merit yanking it off a lady preemptively. It's not like she was wearing a bra made out of crack and guns, where there's an issue just by having it present, it was a fucking [I]tent.[/I] They are easy to deal with, as proven by, you know, the police dealing with it easily (when it was a moving target, no less).
I'm not seeing the harm here, and it's clear you guys' autistic IT WAS LEGAL FUCK DA HIPPIES shit ain't going to provide a rational reason for removing it.[/QUOTE]
they prohibited tents in parks because they don't want people setting up tent cities like the occupy movement has done in other cities' parks and causing damage to the parks, costing the cities money to repair them. what's so hard to understand about that? she had a tent where she wasn't supposed to have it, and they took it from her according to the law, and after asking her to leave and offering her a change of clothes.
[editline]7th December 2011[/editline]
and yes, watch the video, she didn't just wrap some tent cloth around her as a dress, it was a pitched tent with some holes in it where she put her limbs through.
[QUOTE=macerator;33609229]giving her a rope to put on over her[/QUOTE]
I like the sound of that.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;33609245]I'm not seeing the harm here, and it's clear you guys' autistic IT WAS LEGAL FUCK DA HIPPIES shit ain't going to provide a rational reason for removing it.[/QUOTE]
HAHAHA THE IRONY BURNS.
First of all, you use 'autistic' as an adjective and insult, which is completely offensive, then you ignore all our rational reasons.
Rational reason for removing tent from person: They're not allowed to have it.
[b]It's not the police's fault she wasn't wearing clothes, it was hers. The police offered clothes and offered to go to a private area. She's the idiot.[/b]
Firstly, to those who are saying that leaving her in her underwear was leaving her open to being fined for indecent exposure - this isn't America. You're allowed to walk around in your underwear here (not that people do).
Having said that, it's clear this wasn't consensual, and by the fact that she was clearly exposed, I'd call this sexual assault (don't confuse that with rape). I'm going to echo Doctor Zedacon in this thread and say that it's clear that she was using civil disobedience, which is recognized as a valid way of protesting in Australia.
For example, a pretty famous case of civil disobedience is a man who kept his hardware shop open on Sundays when it was illegal to do so. He was arrested for doing so. I mention this because her wearing a tent as clothing was, in my opinion, about as unreasonable as keeping a hardware store open on Sundays. Yes, technically she was disobeying the law. However, many of you seem to be ignorant of the fact that a great deal of laws in Australia and the US have come about as a result of civil disobedience. Just because something is a law does not mean it should be followed (take segregation as an extreme example. Or, up until 1997, it was illegal to engage in same-sex sexual activity in Tasmania. A less extreme and slightly off-topic example is that it's technically illegal to change a lightbulb in Australia unless you're a licensed electrician).
Yes, what she did was stupid. But she was likely not expecting the police - who are supposed to be employed to assist her and the community from harm - to forcibly cut her coverings off her, and leave her without help, in her underwear in a public place. She was clearly not a threat, and this was not the correct way for the police to handle this. She has a valid complaint.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;33609188][URL="http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/clothing"]Definition of CLOTHING
: garments in general; also : covering[/URL]
Garment unfortunately has a circular definition, but the root of the word being close to "equip" gives you a clue what the word means.
I always thought we made fun of her because her clothing was shit, not because it magically was not a thing that covered her body because of its material content.[/QUOTE]
also, if you're really going to use that definition for clothing, then she was fully clothed even after they took the tent off, given her underwear still being on her and all.
[QUOTE=lil_n00blett;33609275]and yes, watch the video, she didn't just wrap some tent cloth around her as a dress, it was a pitched tent with some holes in it where she put her limbs through.[/QUOTE]
This is pretty much the main point. It literally was a fully functional tent, which aren't allowed. She wasn't wearing it like a flag, it was a fucking tent.
[editline]7th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=devotchkade;33609294]words[/QUOTE]
If I own a property that people can be at, and I say no tents, WHY THE FUCK SHOULD PEOPLE BE ALLOWED TO HAVE TENTS ON IT?
[QUOTE=Jookia;33609300]
If I own a property that people can be at, and I say no tents, WHY THE FUCK SHOULD PEOPLE BE ALLOWED TO HAVE TENTS ON IT?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, it's a public garden, so that's entirely irrelevant.
But thanks for trying to reduce my argument to something that fucking simplistic. Totally shows that you read my post thoroughly and took your time to come up with a well-thought, considerate reply.
[QUOTE=Jookia;33609300]
If I own a property that people can be at, and I say no tents, WHY THE FUCK SHOULD PEOPLE BE ALLOWED TO HAVE TENTS ON IT?[/QUOTE]
Why is it up to the police to decide what people can wear?
here's your valid response:
[QUOTE=devotchkade;33609294]Yes, what she did was stupid. But she was likely not expecting the police - who are supposed to be employed to assist her and [B]the community from harm[/B] - to forcibly cut her coverings off her, and leave her without help, in her underwear in a public place. [B]She was clearly not a threat,[/B] and this was not the correct way for the police to handle this. She has a valid complaint.[/QUOTE]
she was a threat to the community that the police are there to protect from harm. they set the rule in place that you can't pitch tents in the public parks because they didn't want a tent city being set up like the parks used by other occupy movements, which were usually quite damaged and vandalized. they forcibly took her tent because it was prohibited and she refused both to leave and to change her clothing. besides being covered up, she needed no other help. it's not like she was dangling from a high wire, she was just sitting on the ground in her underwear for a few seconds before someone got her a banner to wrap around her body.
[QUOTE=sp00ks;33609600]Why is it up to the police to decide what people can wear?[/QUOTE]
the police weren't deciding what she could or couldn't wear here, they were enforcing the rule that you can't pitch a tent in public parks, which she did. what she was wearing was a completely functional, real, pitched tent, with holes cut for her to limbs to fit through.
The way I see it, nobody is entirely at fault; the girl was being silly thinking wearing a tent was a valid protest, but the cops didn't need to just leave her naked. Get her a towel at the least.
So, in my opinion, it was a dumb idea that was punished in an equally dumb fashion. Everybody here is stupid.
she wasn't left completely naked, her private parts were covered, and she was left in her underwear for only a few seconds before someone gave her a banner to cover up.
[QUOTE=lil_n00blett;33609671]she wasn't left completely naked, her private parts were covered, and she was left in her underwear for only a few seconds before someone gave her a banner to cover up.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, but the police left her naked. They evidently didn't care about what happened - as far as they were concerned, she could stay without clothes for the rest of the evening.
And when I say naked, I mean "naked except for undies". It's kind of pedantic to say she was left with underwear, but I see your point.
"i'm going to be a smartass and dress myself up as a tent to circumvent previously stipulated tent laws so the pigs will have to deal with it, i'm the bosslady here and nothing can go wrong"
yep. i believe she sort of deserved it.
I think the argument that "You're allowed to wear costumes, so they had no right to take her tent" is flawed. If I walk around wearing a costume made of cocaine even though I have no intent of using it, I'm still walking around wearing something the police have full right to confiscate.
Most expensive costume ever.
[QUOTE=Zero Ziat;33609791]Most expensive costume ever.[/QUOTE]
Totally worth it.
[editline]7th December 2011[/editline]
Feels like something Lady Gaga might do if she joined the protest.
Stop giving her ideas.
stupid hippy had it coming.
[QUOTE=lil_n00blett;33609620]
the police weren't deciding what she could or couldn't wear here, they were enforcing the rule that you can't pitch a tent in public parks, which she did. what she was wearing was a completely functional, real, pitched tent, with holes cut for her to limbs to fit through.[/QUOTE]
It's a costume. Do you think she was going to sleep in it?
I have mixed feelings about this.
It could have been an authority abuse, but she's an idiot for not wearing anything but bra and panties under a tent-costume. If she had something under it (which is what the OH NO SO BRUTAL POLICE may have assumed) none of this mess would have happened.
[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;33603181]i'm sure it wasn't their real intent to upset her like that[/QUOTE]
God damn that's subtle.
[QUOTE=sp00ks;33610065]It's a costume. Do you think she was going to sleep in it?[/QUOTE]
Yes. Do you think she's going to buy a separate tent to sleep in.
[QUOTE=lapsus_;33610078]If she had something under it (which is what the OH NO SO BRUTAL POLICE may have assumed)[/QUOTE]
I believe it was posted earlier in the thread that a female officer checked to see if she had anything on underneath before it was removed.
Fucking lol at that idiot shouting "SHAAME!" in the second video.
Its perfectly fucking obvious that is was a tent and not "clothing".
Also the cops were really chilled considering all of those people provoking them and trying to get a reaction from them.
The police shouldn't be allowed to destroy someones costume. Arrest them with, or leave them alone.
How fucking idiotic.
All of those cops should be fired, fucking damnit.
Firing might be a bit too harsh.
I hope those cops and their families are kidnapped, taken to an old warehouse and tied down with no chance of escape. Then, tent lady comes along and draws the blade across their throats in front of the children.
Their families are forced to watch as they slowly bleed to death, gurgling, choking and spluttering on their own blood as their life slowly fades out of their eyes.
I like there police hats.
I am scared to read the youtube comments because I know how idiotic they will be. The lady had it coming and should of know better. Also someone please tell me why we have OWS protests here in Australia?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.