• Standoff ends between police, Occupy DC protesters
    54 replies, posted
[QUOTE] Washington (CNN) -- An hours-long standoff between police and Occupy DC protesters ended Sunday night after officers forcibly removed several people clinging to a wood structure erected earlier in the district's McPherson Square. A total of 31 people were arrested over the course of the day, according to U.S. Park Police spokesman Sgt. David Schlosser. The standoff started shortly before 11 a.m. as park police surrounded the structure built overnight as a place where protesters could stay warm in the winter and hold their daily general assembly meetings, according to Wade Simmons, one of the Occupy demonstrators. Police ordered the structure taken down around noon Sunday, a post on the Occupy DC website reported, but some people remained perched on top of or inside the building, which was donated by a father-son architect team. As many as 200 people gathered at the park to watch the standoff. Schlosser said the protesters had not gone through proper permitting procedures for the structure and "police had safety concerns regarding structural integrity." A city inspector was brought in to examine the building and deemed it unsafe, posting orange "danger" signs on its shell. Shortly before 7 p.m., police pulled an armored truck alongside the structure and two officers standing on the vehicle's roof could be seen negotiating with six remaining protesters -- down from a high of 22 earlier in the day. After several minutes of discussions, two of the protesters voluntarily jumped from the structure onto an inflatable pad brought in by authorities. A third was brought down willingly by an officer in a police cherrypicker. Two others were forcibly pulled into the cherrypicker after two officers tied a safety rope around them. The last remaining protester was eventually removed in an effort that involved the efforts of four officers to get him to release his grip on the structure's beams. Onlookers chanted "Let him go!" and "The whole world is watching." Earlier, police put up barriers around the structure and cordoned off nearby streets with yellow tape as protesters chanted, "This is a nonviolent movement," and, "Put the pepper spray away." Fifteen of the 31 people detained by police were arrested for crossing the police line. The other 15 were charged with disobeying a lawful order after police ordered them to vacate the structure. The last protester removed from the building was charged with resisting arrest, indecent exposure and urinating in public. Maintenance crews dismantled the structure about an hour after the standoff ended. "This is the first major problem we've had with park police," said Simmons, who has been participating in the protest at McPherson Square since November 1. The Occupy Wall Street movement that began in New York in September has spread across major cities worldwide as a call to action against what protesters consider the unequal distribution of wealth. In recent weeks, cities have begun clearing encampments, citing economic, health and public safety concerns. The Occupy DC website called for supporters of the movement to show their "solidarity to the movement by coming down the McPherson Sq. and defend our and yours freedom of speech that is being threatened in this nation for so long."[/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/04/us/occupy-dc/index.html?hpt=hp_t2[/url]
Arrested for peacefully protesting? So much for Democracy.
[img]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2011/12/4/1323035553165/Occupy-DC-protesters-sit--007.jpg[/img] Picture of the building.
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;33576222][img]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2011/12/4/1323035553165/Occupy-DC-protesters-sit--007.jpg[/img] [/QUOTE] Protest's closed.
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;33576222][img]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2011/12/4/1323035553165/Occupy-DC-protesters-sit--007.jpg[/img] Picture of the building.[/QUOTE] Why did I think that sign said "Occupy Dick"
Yet again the police evict these protestors. What do they hope to gain from it? Do they or does anyone part of the administration believe that evicting them will cause their disdain for the status quo to go away?
[QUOTE=Miskav;33576261]Why did I think that sign said "Occupy Dick"[/QUOTE] Because DC is one letter short of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIC_Entertainment"]Dic[/URL]
... Why are they focusing on evicting protestors ..
[QUOTE]citing economic, health and public safety concerns.[/QUOTE] Health and public safety I can understand, but economic? What are they sowing fields with salt or something?
I know the whole "Your not supposed to build permanent structures on public property" argument, but what about in the learly 1930's when the bonus army built shanty towns [b]infront of the Whitehouse.[/b]
[QUOTE=Lanopo;33576385]I know the whole "Your not supposed to build permanent structures on public property" argument, but what about in the learly 1930's when the bonus army built shanty towns [b]infront of the Whitehouse.[/b][/QUOTE] The rich just don't enjoy seeing what their greed costs, so if they can't view it from their office penthouses it doesn't exist, right?
[QUOTE=Hidole555;33576368]Health and public safety I can understand, but economic? What are they sowing fields with salt or something?[/QUOTE] They're threatening the prosperity of the 1%.
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;33576222][img]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2011/12/4/1323035553165/Occupy-DC-protesters-sit--007.jpg[/img] Picture of the building.[/QUOTE] Heh They said no tents so we obliged!
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33576296]Yet again the police evict these protestors. What do they hope to gain from it? Do they or does anyone part of the administration believe that evicting them will cause their disdain for the status quo to go away?[/QUOTE] Maybe because it is a [i][b]public[/i][/b] park, and by erecting huge wooden buildings in said park, the [i][b]public[/i][/b] ("public" meaning every person not a part of an "Occupy" protest) cannot use the public park. It isn't very fair for one group of people to hold a piece of land hostage and block everyone else from using it. At one point does preferential treatment infringe on everyone elses rights? [editline]5th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Hidole555;33576368]Health and public safety I can understand, but economic? What are they sowing fields with salt or something?[/QUOTE] Street vendors, food trucks, lemondae stands, the types of things that you'd expect to see in a public park that can no longer operate due to the protests.
[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;33576516] Street vendors, food trucks, lemondae stands, the types of things that you'd expect to see in a public park that can no longer operate due to the protests.[/QUOTE] Or, they are making bank because of the quantity of protesters needing food.
[QUOTE=Lanopo;33576385]I know the whole "Your not supposed to build permanent structures on public property" argument, but what about in the learly 1930's when the bonus army built shanty towns [b]infront of the Whitehouse.[/b][/QUOTE] Didn't that end with the army forcibly removing them?
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;33576222][img]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2011/12/4/1323035553165/Occupy-DC-protesters-sit--007.jpg[/img] Picture of the building.[/QUOTE] This photo is priceless.
[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;33576516]Maybe because it is a [i][b]public[/i][/b] park, and by erecting huge wooden buildings in said park, the [i][b]public[/i][/b] ("public" meaning every person not a part of an "Occupy" protest) cannot use the public park. It isn't very fair for one group of people to hold a piece of land hostage and block everyone else from using it. At one point does preferential treatment infringe on everyone elses rights? [editline]5th December 2011[/editline] Street vendors, food trucks, lemondae stands, the types of things that you'd expect to see in a public park that can no longer operate due to the protests.[/QUOTE] If you can't converge en masse in a public area to protest because it will effective block off said public area from the rest of the public, and you can't protest on private property, where CAN you protest?
The public safety and health concerns are bullshit. Honestly I think we should start building hoovervilles again.
[QUOTE=sltungle;33576639]If you can't converge en masse in a public area to protest because it will effective block off said public area from the rest of the public, and you can't protest on private property, where CAN you protest?[/QUOTE] who said protesting required building a half-completed wooden shed in the middle of the public area?
[QUOTE=sltungle;33576639]If you can't converge en masse in a public area to protest because it will effective block off said public area from the rest of the public, and you can't protest on private property, where CAN you protest?[/QUOTE] I think the only form of protest that would be okay with SPESSMEHREN is the kind where you leave at 8pm every day, don't come back until at least the start of working hours, and keep to the sidewalk so as not to disturb any of the things you may be protesting.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33576976]I think the only form of protest that would be okay with SPESSMEHREN is the kind where you leave at 8pm every day, don't come back until at least the start of working hours, and keep to the sidewalk so as not to disturb any of the things you may be protesting.[/QUOTE] That would actually look really freaking creepy, just driving down the road to see hundreds of silent people on a sidewalk staring at you.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33576454]Heh They said no tents so we obliged![/QUOTE] Next time get permits or at least build them to code. Regardless of what you think of the protests what they did was illegal. Also how could that building help with the cold? It only has two walls.
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;33577113]Next time get permits or at least build them to code. Regardless of what you think of the protests what they did was illegal. Also how could that building help with the cold? It only has two walls.[/QUOTE] They didn't break anything, and there was no violence.. (from what I see), breaking laws is was people do to get attention for a cause, sure there are other ways but this way it gains momentum quicker.
[QUOTE=Kinversulath;33576584]Didn't that end with the army forcibly removing them?[/QUOTE] Yea, but I meen they got to stay there for about a month or so. This is only one shelter and they are trying to destroy it after day one.
[QUOTE=Lanopo;33576385]I know the whole "Your not supposed to build permanent structures on public property" argument, but what about in the learly 1930's when the bonus army built shanty towns [b]infront of the Whitehouse.[/b][/QUOTE] General Patton razed it with no mercy, that's what happened
The armored truck was totally nessesary
[QUOTE=Broseph_;33577723]General Patton razed it with no mercy, that's what happened[/QUOTE] Patton was an ass.
Where's the structure in these protests? It's fairly unorganized and there is no clear leader of the protest. Everyone single protest across the nation seems to be doing their own thing. there is no way to weed out any who's there to cause chaos and are just there to fuck with the cops
[QUOTE=Mio Akiyama;33577922]Where's the structure in these protests? It's fairly unorganized and there is no clear leader of the protest. Everyone single protest across the nation seems to be doing their own thing. there is no way to weed out any who's there to cause chaos and are just there to fuck with the cops[/QUOTE] It's got no formal leader because it's not supposed to be about figureheads, it's supposed to be about the citizenry as one. The second you put up a leader, the second it becomes easier to take over.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.