• Local family's emergency trip to hospital interrupted by protestors
    261 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Iago;41497008][img]http://media-3.web.britannica.com/eb-media/46/7546-004-7F54297C.jpg[/IMG] Yea it's like they are magically teleported there or something, it's not like they MARCHED to washington or anything. If you are going to act like a smartass atleast know your history.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but they didn't block a highway, they walked through streets. I can guarantee nobody was lashing out at passing cars and pedestrians like evil dead zombies.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41498394]working for a private enterprise is to subject yourself to the domination of others, which goes against anarchist philosophy. pm me for more info :)[/QUOTE] Good luck NEVER getting a job.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41496214]wow could this headline be more sensationalist? no "traybots"(can this be bannable now plz) tried to prevent a family from getting to a hospital. they were protesting, blocked a highway, and a family trying to get to the hospital ended up getting caught up in it. there wasn't an intent to hurt anyone. as unfortunate as it might be, it isn't really a valid reason criticize the protests.[/QUOTE] Wild street closing from protests are actually usually considered a crime in most countries. That's not the same as blocking protests alltogether. On top of that most protests can get a permit to permit on streets as well. The street closing is due to how it might have a huge impact on emergency services, people in emergencies and a lot of other stuff. And if you can't prepare at least slightly the damage done can be huge.
[QUOTE=Altimor;41497943]There's a difference between disagreeing with the ruling and causing public disturbance because you disagree with it[/QUOTE] Where were you when the country was throwing a shitfit over Casey Anthony's ruling
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;41499984]Where were you when the country was throwing a shitfit over Casey Anthony's ruling[/QUOTE] I really don't remember Casey Anthony causing riots.
If people are purposefully blocking a road and are fully aware of it (and not for a helpful reason like a charity run/whatever), you should be legally allowed to not stop or try to avoid them.
[QUOTE=TheAdmiester;41500144]If people are purposefully blocking a road and are fully aware of it (and not for a helpful reason like a charity run/whatever), you should be legally allowed to not stop or try to avoid them.[/QUOTE] I'd almost want to very slowly roll the car forward and just nudge them out of the way but knowing them they'd probably attack your car and throw themselves at it
[QUOTE=TheAdmiester;41500144]If people are purposefully blocking a road and are fully aware of it (and not for a helpful reason like a charity run/whatever), you should be legally allowed to not stop or try to avoid them.[/QUOTE] Yes, I too believe that running over people with my car should be legal if they are standing in front of it.
[QUOTE=TheAdmiester;41500144]If people are purposefully blocking a road and are fully aware of it (and not for a helpful reason like a charity run/whatever), you should be legally allowed to not stop or try to avoid them.[/QUOTE] what is vehicular manslaughter
[QUOTE=katbug;41499694]Yeah, but they didn't block a highway, they walked through streets. I can guarantee nobody was lashing out at passing cars and pedestrians like evil dead zombies.[/QUOTE] These guys got it, you have to show you are better than people think to gain their respect. The people out there now are doing nothing to earn respect, and frankly the Martins should be disgusted that Trayvons name is being associated with this hooliganism. Why the fuck jeep-eep rated that dumb is beyond me. [QUOTE=TheAdmiester;41500144]If people are purposefully blocking a road and are fully aware of it (and not for a helpful reason like a charity run/whatever), you should be legally allowed to not stop or try to avoid them.[/QUOTE] We should ask [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Reginald_Denny"]Reginald[/URL] about slowing down for morons in the street.
[QUOTE=benwaddi;41500257]These guys got it, you have to show you are better than people think to gain their respect. The people out there now are doing nothing to earn respect, and frankly the Martins should be disgusted that Trayvons name is being associated with this hooliganism. Why the fuck jeep-eep rated that dumb is beyond me. We should ask [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Reginald_Denny"]Reginald[/URL] about slowing down for morons in the street.[/QUOTE] Jeep-eep thankfully expresses his opinion through ratings rather than posting. And yes, acting like savage thugs and reacting violently is the last thing you should do in response to "unfair stereotypes" of the black community. How many people have died so far in attacks related to Trayvon? Four? Five? If you're trying to set a peaceful image, you don't achieve that by acting like a prison break.
[QUOTE=katbug;41500055]I really don't remember Casey Anthony causing riots.[/QUOTE] a protest march is now a riot
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;41500921]a protest march is now a riot[/QUOTE] You do realize that in protest march's, the main goal is to walk forward and not to sprint forward, jumping on cars, and pummeling on anybody that you see.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;41500921]a protest march is now a riot[/QUOTE] A riot is now a riot.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;41496625]yea and i think it's quite unfortunate someone's life was put in danger because of it. it would be nice if people could figure out a way of disrupting society without ever endangering lives, because that's totally not a good thing. my point is that this is textbook protest stuff. people have been doing this for years including feminists and civil rights protesters. you can't just call out this protest group for tactics that have been used by movements that we now generally identify as being good.[/QUOTE] Endanger lives and get fucked, if you want to protest, you better damn well be sure that shit like this doesn't happen or the riot police can come in and gas you all out for all I care. "Social change" (which they aren't even arguing for) < the lives of normal people who have no part in that movement. [editline]18th July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;41496848]btw guys "civil disobedience", nowadays a major part of any social movement, requires the action to be illegal and disruptive in order to fit the definition. civil disobedience is what gandhi and mlk jr. are both famous for. rosa park's refusal to move from her seat was an act of civil disobedience. [editline]17th July 2013[/editline] so "it's illegal" is a weak fucking argument against the validity of any protester's actions.[/QUOTE] It blocks the paths of emergency services and potentially gets people killed is a good argument, though. And if being disruptive means causing danger to anyone, well, you and your cause can go sit down and pout.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;41496765]Oh a guy reached towards the door handle. That means that everyone in the protest was trying to stop them from getting to the hospital. That means that everyone who goes to any protest is a rioter who is up to no good. That means that I can dismiss the humanity of everyone who disagrees with me about the Zimmerman case and by calling them "Traybots". But I also better make as many threads as I can about this so everyone around me knows, too.[/QUOTE] Holy crap you need a title
[QUOTE=TheAdmiester;41500144]If people are purposefully blocking a road and are fully aware of it (and not for a helpful reason like a charity run/whatever), you should be legally allowed to not stop or try to avoid them.[/QUOTE] You realize how abused this law would be? Allowing that also wouldn't have helped in this case. People have morals and ambulances are not exactly tanks.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;41516895]You realize how abused this law would be? Allowing that also wouldn't have helped in this case. People have morals and ambulances are not exactly tanks.[/QUOTE] Ambu-Tanks yes
I am divided on an issue like this. When I first read the title I thought "wow that is fucked up", but people are right on the fact that only disruptions actually bring forth change. Now I don't know and I cannot understand what change the people are protesting for at this point, a verdict is given and protesting the outcome of what is supposed to be a fair trial seems counter productive. But this all being said, if someone is hurt because of these protests that brings it up to a whole different level. The right to protest is fundamental and rightly so, but no one has the right to rob me or someone I know access to healthcare and therefore robbing me of my health and well-being. The problem is whether a protest will lead to such an outcome cannot be predicted beforehand and hindsight is a bitch. Blocking highways, while highly disruptive, is a perfectly valid and effective form of getting your point across and making news. Until someone gets hurt. I am not sure what the solution to this would be, maybe making it a planned protest that the public is well informed about before actually blocking a vital highway. That way it would both make the news and be disruptive but at the same time not as dangerous to innocent people. The way it stands now, I just cannot side with the protestors. I don't care about their sense of outrage and their right to protest when someone who had nothing to do with the trial, the verdict, the racial and political background and history was hurt.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.