Wall street protests continue, 80+ protestors arrested - Polidicks

You Americans are all getting shafted by the same rod, how much longer is it going to take before everyone realizes it. The corporations don't give a shit about the fears of a nation, they'll fuck your economy to death and make a fortune doing it.

[QUOTE=skeligandrew;32494699]You protesters seem to get your self so involved with being in a group that actually likes you you lose sight of what you are actually doing. You want to hold signs up and make a lot of noise in public? go for it But as soon as you start violence and blocking peoples path, YOU'RE the ones who are the real problem.[/QUOTE] Some groups lose sight of what they're arguing, and I agree. So what's your point? Oh no, someone has to go a different route. It's not like there's hundreds of different roads in any given area in NYC. Tourism causes more blockage then protesters. [editline]27th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Jawalt;32496434]The angry teenage dumbasses that have no jobs, a bleak future, and tons of student debt? Total dumbasses. No reason to be angry either. [/QUOTE] According to skeligandrew, they're just being "Butthurt" and should be thankful that their lives are so good.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESs4dYM2FIw[/media] If you haven't seen it yet, WATCH. MSNBC did a piece on this and called out the cops in spectacular fashion.

[QUOTE=barttool;32477703]fuck da police row row fight da powah[/QUOTE] hehe yeah dude everyone who doesn't blindly support authority is an edgy teen

[QUOTE=Fata;32477855]Quick funfact, Some of the people who were arrested weren't even part of the protest.[/QUOTE] Quick funfact - if you are inside of a group that starts throwing shit around and the police moves in, you will get arrested even if you were not part of the group. After that the evidence is reviewed and you might get away for free as there's no surveilance of you doing anything. It's essentially impossible to review everything on the spot since large groups of people are involved. Obviously at the end of the day it all depends on what the protesters were doing. Even long term blocking of a road, office entrances etc can easily lead to arrests.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;32501462]Quick funfact - if you are inside of a group that starts throwing shit around and the police moves in, you will get arrested even if you were not part of the group. [/QUOTE] oh look guilt by association (blatantly unconstitutional in the US and most other countries)

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zV9uZ00bqD8&feature=feedu[/media]

[url]http://www.thirteen.org/metrofocus/news/2011/09/observations-of-a-jailed-journalist/[/url] The police arrested a journalist who was trying to interview the women who were peppersprayed. Anyone else still want to say the police acted correctly here? I'm not going to mince words, what happened on Wall Street was a blatant act of tyranny.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;32502949]oh look guilt by association (blatantly unconstitutional in the US and most other countries)[/QUOTE] Well, how the hell are they going to know they aren't part of the protesters, they aren't fucking psychic.

[QUOTE=hoodoo456;32522204]Well, how the hell are they going to know they aren't part of the protesters, they aren't fucking psychic.[/QUOTE] "uh oh theres a bunch of angry (but peaceful) people protesting! i can't tell which ones are protesters so i guess we'll just have to pepperspray and bodyslam everyone."

[QUOTE=gamerman345;32475707]"[i]Hello, is it ok If I start a riot on wall street? [/i]"[/QUOTE] You'll need a permit for that shit man

This isn't some random disorganized event on Facebook. It's Anonymous.

[QUOTE=Mr.T;32527553]This isn't some random disorganized event on Facebook. It's Anonymous.[/QUOTE] It's backed by Anonymous, but it's not solely by them in any sense.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;32501397][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESs4dYM2FIw[/media] If you haven't seen it yet, WATCH. MSNBC did a piece on this and called out the cops in spectacular fashion.[/QUOTE] I'm not going to say what the cops did was right, but a lot of that can be construed as legal, considering the NY disorderly conduct statute includes: "violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior", "unreasonable noise", "abusive or obscene language", "obscene gestures", disturbing "any lawful assembly or meeting of persons", obstructing vehicular or pedestrian traffic, congregating "with other persons in a public place and refuses to comply with a lawful order of the police to disperse", or creating "a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose." That gives a cop leeway to arrest you for [I]existing.[/I] Being somewhere you aren't wanted, not leaving on command, and not having a compelling reason for being there is arrest worthy.

[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;32528865]I'm not going to say what the cops did was right, but a lot of that can be construed as legal, considering the NY disorderly conduct statute includes: "violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior", "unreasonable noise", "abusive or obscene language", "obscene gestures", disturbing "any lawful assembly or meeting of persons", obstructing vehicular or pedestrian traffic, congregating "with other persons in a public place and refuses to comply with a lawful order of the police to disperse", or creating "a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose." That gives a cop leeway to arrest you for [I]existing.[/I] Being somewhere you aren't wanted, not leaving on command, and not having a compelling reason for being there is arrest worthy.[/QUOTE] Hey yeah, you're right! Fuck the right to assemble peacefully, lets bash some skulls!

[QUOTE=Kopimi;32528893]Hey yeah, you're right! Fuck the right to assemble peacefully, lets bash some skulls![/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Xenocidebot;32528865]I'm not going to say what the cops did was right, but a lot of that can be construed as legal[/QUOTE] Is it possible I am talking about how the law facilitates such nonsense rather than personally supporting it???? Oh wait there's a hint in the absurd last sentence! ~rEaDiNg CoMpReHeNsIoN~ Holy shit, their loitering statute: [QUOTE]Being masked or in any manner disguised by unusual or unnatural attire or facial alteration, loiters, remains or congregates in a public place with other persons so masked or disguised, or knowingly permits or aids persons so masked or disguised to congregate in a public place;[/QUOTE] You can get arrested for [I]dressing funny.[/I] [QUOTE]except that such conduct is not unlawful when it occurs in connection with a masquerade party or like entertainment if, when such entertainment is held in a city which has promulgated regulations in connection with such affairs, permission is first obtained from the police or other appropriate authorities[/QUOTE] See, they should have filed with the city as a masquerade party. Clearly had they done so, this would not have happened, and the police would have been chill as hell.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;32528893]Hey yeah, you're right! Fuck the right to assemble peacefully, lets bash some skulls![/QUOTE] did you read any of his post at all [quote]I'm not going to say what the cops did was right, but a lot of that can be construed as legal[/quote] he was pointing out the laws are shit, the last line made that extremely obvious

[QUOTE=Spearman;32477905]protip: if you want to be taken seriously, say police officer, or even cop. Saying "fucking pigs!!!!" makes you sound like an angsty 13 year old anarchist[/QUOTE] By "pigs" he meant corporate fools, not the cops.

[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;32528865]I'm not going to say what the cops did was right, but a lot of that can be construed as legal, considering the NY disorderly conduct statute includes: "violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior", "unreasonable noise", "abusive or obscene language", "obscene gestures", disturbing "any lawful assembly or meeting of persons", obstructing vehicular or pedestrian traffic, congregating "with other persons in a public place and refuses to comply with a lawful order of the police to disperse", or creating "a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose." That gives a cop leeway to arrest you for [I]existing.[/I] Being somewhere you aren't wanted, not leaving on command, and not having a compelling reason for being there is arrest worthy.[/QUOTE] Pretty certain the US constitution trumps any of those little NY laws. You can't legislate away the first amendment with noise ordinances.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;32531199]Pretty certain the US constitution trumps any of those little NY laws. You can't legislate away the first amendment with noise ordinances.[/QUOTE] A constitution is only enforced as long as the government is willing to enforce it. In the case of protests it is in a governments best interest to break up the protests.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;32531199]Pretty certain the US constitution trumps any of those little NY laws. You can't legislate away the first amendment with noise ordinances.[/QUOTE] Vagueness doctrines should trump any of those, Constitution doesn't even need to get involved. But they don't. That's just how the law works here. And you'd have a hard time convincing anyone otherwise, because freedom of speech has always been considered fairly easy game to limit.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;32531480]A constitution is only enforced as long as the government is willing to enforce it. In the case of protests it is in a governments best interest to break up the protests.[/QUOTE] Tough shit, we already have freedom of assembly set down as a right. If that right is infringed upon, it's unconstitutional.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;32533175]Tough shit, we already have freedom of assembly set down as a right. If that right is infringed upon, it's unconstitutional.[/QUOTE] Sobotnik is right. A constitution is only as valuable as the people who enforce it. If no one is enforcing it, then for all intents and purposes we have no constitution or protected rights.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;32533838]Sobotnik is right. A constitution is only as valuable as the people who enforce it. If no one is enforcing it, then for all intents and purposes we have no constitution or protected rights.[/QUOTE] Hopefully then the people will enforce it. The people should not be afraid of their government, the government should be afraid of the people.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;32533838]Sobotnik is right. A constitution is only as valuable as the people who enforce it. If no one is enforcing it, then for all intents and purposes we have no constitution or protected rights.[/QUOTE] He's right in a sense of factuality, but not right in the sense of morality.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;32533838]Sobotnik is right. A constitution is only as valuable as the people who enforce it. If no one is enforcing it, then for all intents and purposes we have no constitution or protected rights.[/QUOTE] He's right about that in that regard, but he's advocating suppressing those rights when it's convenient for the state.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;32533954]He's right in a sense of factuality, but not right in the sense of morality.[/QUOTE] There is no "right" in the sense of morality. Morality is different for each person and no morality is more valid than another. Saying that he is "wrong" morally gets you nowhere because to him, he is "right". If he was factually right then he was right, it doesn't matter what his implied or stated moral leanings are, and his statement neither validates nor invalidates his perception. [editline]29th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Megafanx13;32534045]He's right about that in that regard, but he's advocating suppressing those rights when it's convenient for the state.[/QUOTE] Some are in favor of suppressing rights when it's convenient for the majority of people as well. I personally abhor the suppression of rights on any grounds, but the fact that he speaks is important. In fact you could learn from it, learn what these people think like so you can confront them when it's important to do so.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;32534074]There is no "right" in the sense of morality.[/QUOTE] You keep saying this as if it has a point. It does NOT fucking matter what morals some people may not agree with when you're dealing with the rule of law. The constitution, whether you like it or not, is the US' rule of law. If you break it, expect punishment. [editline]29th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;32534074] Some are in favor of suppressing rights when it's convenient for the majority of people as well. I personally abhor the suppression of rights on any grounds, but the fact that he speaks is important. In fact you could learn from it, learn what these people think like so you can confront them when it's important to do so.[/QUOTE] But what exactly ARE rights, and what you think are rights could be different from what another person thinks are rights.

[QUOTE=Soviet Bread;32534247]The constitution, whether you like it or not, is the US' rule of law. If you break it, expect punishment.[/QUOTE] Yeah, except that's not how it works. You kids are big on yelling CONSTITUTION any time anything even remotely relevant to it occurs, and yet there are dozens of blatant violations of it (and state constitutions, for that matter) sitting in statue books around the country because [I]nobody gives a shit.[/I] Ask almost any lawyer, the whole "supreme law of the land" thing isn't really a thing unless you're dealing with huge scale shit or cases in the public view.

In this case, they have to also have permission to be there. If you do not go through proper channels, it is not considered a "Peaceable Assembly" and is therefor not protected. If they had gone through proper channels, they could stand out there all they wanted and probably even get police protection if they wanted. And don't pull that "But they'd never get permission!" bullshit. It happens all the time. And if they deny it without a valid reason, then they are in violation of the constitution. So, here is the question: Did they even try to go through proper channels, or did they just start gathering up suddenly with no warning?