ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 2 of 11
< 12 3456 > Last »
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Police, National Guard sweep protesters from Lafayette Square ahead of curfew
RodeoPants2 06:08 PM 06-01-2020
I welcome all libertarians and lovers of freedom and our first amendment rights to the resistance. Those of you who think looting is a capital offense or that the right to assemble is subject to the whims of the government are welcome to move to Russia or China.

Originally Posted by :
With 20 minutes left until the District’s 7 p.m. curfew, authorities set off a series of explosions in the middle of a crowd in Lafayette Square, some landing right at protesters’ feet, before forcing demonstrators from the park. President Trump later walked across the area to visit historic St. John’s Episcopal Church, which was damaged in a fire set Sunday.

Trump said he was taking “swift and decisive action to protect our great capital, Washington, D.C. What happened last night was a total disgrace. As we speak, I am dispatching thousands and thousands of heavily armed soldiers, military personnel and law enforcement officers to stop the rioting, looting, vandalism, assaults and the wanton destruction of property. We are putting everybody on warning, our 7 o’clock curfew will be strictly enforced.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md...d-white-house/
[Reply]
frozenchief 06:56 PM 06-01-2020
Well, as a libertarian, I would say that since the government owns the roads, the government gets to say who can access the roads and who cannot. Same with the parks. That is a good argument to me for private ownership of parks and roads, but I don't make the rules. And in times of national crisis, governments have typically had some extra leeway to protect the general populace. In WWII, for example, we had limits on lights after dark. In times of disease, as we have just seen, government can impose a quarantine.*

Because of widespread violence, including attacks, robberies and arson, municipalities have imposed a curfew. Municipalities have likewise limited the access to public parks. This is not made based upon park visitors being a member of a group or expressing any opinion. That is, the rule is not "If you don't like Trump, you can't be in the park." Rather, it is very broad: after this time, no one can be in the park. Considering that: the government owns the park, and that local governments frequently impose curfews during times of riots or other emergencies when emergency services might be strained (after an earthquake or hurricane, for example), it is not too big of a leap that the government can shut down the park. Again, these are typical measures imposed during riots. I would have a hard time arguing that such rules are outside of the legitimate police powers of local governments.

I'm reading that there were several notices - messages broadcast over loudspeaker - prior to the park being closed that tear gas would be used. Not a real big fan of tear gas, but it is a non-lethal way of breaking up riots so I would rather have tear gas than bullets.

Those efforts are, at a minimum, not unreasonable. For these reasons, the efforts to clear out Lafayette Park in this particular time and under these particular circumstances does not seem to me to be the second coming of the Third Reich.



* whether they should have with covid-19, or whether they made it go on too long, or other similar questions are not the issue here. Put another way, government has the general authority although reasonable people can disagree with whether they abused that authority.
[Reply]
Easy 6 06:56 PM 06-01-2020
You’re leaking, go change your cotton pony
[Reply]
RodeoPants2 06:58 PM 06-01-2020
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
I support the right to protest, but I'll be honest. Shooting looters and vandals on sight seems like a pretty good idea.

On my neighborhood site in Denver, people up north of me reported that a gang of 50 to 60 young men (all white, by the way) were organized and working in unison to vandalize and loot last night. Just mow 'em down and society will be better off. My only concern would be making sure that no stray bullets hit nearby residents who aren't criminals.
Sounds like you should re-read the constitution. Specifically the 5th and 14th amendments.
[Reply]
RodeoPants2 06:59 PM 06-01-2020
Originally Posted by frozenchief:
Well, as a libertarian, I would say that since the government owns the roads, the government gets to say who can access the roads and who cannot. Same with the parks. That is a good argument to me for private ownership of parks and roads, but I don't make the rules. And in times of national crisis, governments have typically had some extra leeway to protect the general populace. In WWII, for example, we had limits on lights after dark. In times of disease, as we have just seen, government can impose a quarantine.*

Because of widespread violence, including attacks, robberies and arson, municipalities have imposed a curfew. Municipalities have likewise limited the access to public parks. This is not made based upon park visitors being a member of a group or expressing any opinion. That is, the rule is not "If you don't like Trump, you can't be in the park." Rather, it is very broad: after this time, no one can be in the park. Considering that: the government owns the park, and that local governments frequently impose curfews during times of riots or other emergencies when emergency services might be strained (after an earthquake or hurricane, for example), it is not too big of a leap that the government can shut down the park. Again, these are typical measures imposed during riots. I would have a hard time arguing that such rules are outside of the legitimate police powers of local governments.

I'm reading that there were several notices - messages broadcast over loudspeaker - prior to the park being closed that tear gas would be used. Not a real big fan of tear gas, but it is a non-lethal way of breaking up riots so I would rather have tear gas than bullets.

Those efforts are, at a minimum, not unreasonable. For these reasons, the efforts to clear out Lafayette Park in this particular time and under these particular circumstances does not seem to me to be the second coming of the Third Reich.



* whether they should have with covid-19, or whether they made it go on too long, or other similar questions are not the issue here. Put another way, government has the general authority although reasonable people can disagree with whether they abused that authority.
Sounds like you should give the ol' constitution a re-read.
[Reply]
Rain Man 07:16 PM 06-01-2020
Originally Posted by RodeoPants2:
Sounds like you should re-read the constitution. Specifically the 5th and 14th amendments.
You mean the fifth amendment that says this?

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;

I'd say that roving gangs of criminals sweeping through urbanized areas is a public danger.

And it looks like the 14th amendment will prevent the roving mobs from running for Congress, which is good even though they probably steal less than the typical congressman.
[Reply]
mlyonsd 07:27 PM 06-01-2020
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
You mean the fifth amendment that says this?

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;

I'd say that roving gangs of criminals sweeping through urbanized areas is a public danger.

And it looks like the 14th amendment will prevent the roving mobs from running for Congress, which is good even though they probably steal less than the typical congressman.
Dave Lane gets punched in the dick. Wish there was film at 11.
[Reply]
RodeoPants2 07:34 PM 06-01-2020
Originally Posted by Rain Man:
You mean the fifth amendment that says this?

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger;

I'd say that roving gangs of criminals sweeping through urbanized areas is a public danger.

And it looks like the 14th amendment will prevent the roving mobs from running for Congress, which is good even though they probably steal less than the typical congressman.
Sounds like someone stopped reading, and missed the good part, which doesn't have that qualification.

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
[Reply]
RodeoPants2 07:34 PM 06-01-2020
Originally Posted by mlyonsd:
Dave Lane gets punched in the dick. Wish there was film at 11.
Oh sad, if you weren't illiterate you would have read the whole text before getting out over your skis like this
[Reply]
Merde Furieux 07:36 PM 06-01-2020
Rodeo meanie has his hands balled up into fists! REEEE!
[Reply]
RunKC 07:44 PM 06-01-2020
If you are assaulting, looting or destroying property, you deserve to be thrown in jail. You have a right to peacefully protest, not endanger other people or their businesses/property.
[Reply]
JohnnyHammersticks 07:46 PM 06-01-2020
Originally Posted by RodeoPants2:
I welcome all libertarians and lovers of freedom and our first amendment rights to the resistance. Those of you who think looting is a capital offense or that the right to assemble is subject to the whims of the government are welcome to move to Russia or China.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md...d-white-house/
:-)


[Reply]
RodeoPants2 07:49 PM 06-01-2020

Bishop of Episcopal Diocese of Washington: “I don’t want President Trump speaking for St. John’s. Everything he has said and done is to enflame violence."

She called out Trump for using the church and Bible as a "prop."

Clergy were at the church all day supporting protesters. pic.twitter.com/rGclEq28rh

— Chris Lu (@ChrisLu44) June 2, 2020

[Reply]
JohnnyHammersticks 07:52 PM 06-01-2020
So she's accusing Trump of using the church as a "prop" but she has no problem with Antifa using the drug addict criminal as one. :-)

If it weren't for double-standards, they'd have no standards at all.
[Reply]
RodeoPants2 08:08 PM 06-01-2020
Originally Posted by RunKC:
If you are assaulting, looting or destroying property, you deserve to be thrown in jail. You have a right to peacefully protest, not endanger other people or their businesses/property.

Thrown in jail yes.

Shot? Fuck no this isn’t China. Lotta trumpers, and Wuhan Don himself, wish it was though.
[Reply]
RodeoPants2 08:15 PM 06-01-2020
Originally Posted by JohnnyHammersticks:
So she's accusing Trump of using the church as a "prop" but she has no problem with Antifa using the drug addict criminal as one. :-)

If it weren't for double-standards, they'd have no standards at all.
lol what?

Also what is antifa? What does it stand for? Who is its leader? Where could I visit antifa headquarters
[Reply]
Page 2 of 11
< 12 3456 > Last »
Up