• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police clear out Oakland protest camp

j-mac said:
What in the video that is out there for public consumption is troubling enough to you that you feel the need to question the police actions in this matter?

j-mac
Click to expand...

The use of government force against the rights and liberties of the individual.
 
Ikari said:
The use of government force against the rights and liberties of the individual.
Click to expand...

Do the people have the rights and liberties of squatting on public land?
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I don't have a problem with people protesting, I have a problem with people squatting.
Click to expand...

Don't have a problem with either. Remember those tents vets put up during the great depression? it was a shame, a disgrace that they were removed by force.
 
Ikari said:
Fair enough. Though I still do not know if it was just to have moved them out originally. That was the original government intervention to which response was made.
Click to expand...


Why is that? Did the protesters have a permit to be there? Was the space that they were occupying set aside specifically for them at that time, or did they just come in and take over using the force of a mob?

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Why is that? Did the protesters have a permit to be there? Was the space that they were occupying set aside specifically for them at that time, or did they just come in and take over using the force of a mob?

j-mac
Click to expand...

I do not believe permits necessary for the exercise of rights. Assembly and protest are right up there with gun rights and privacy rights. They are an absolute and must be upheld to their maximum possible.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
You don't have a right to camp in a public park or on someone else's property.
Click to expand...

Public land such as public parks should be open game for protest and assembly. Private property, of course you don't have the right to occupy it.
 
Boo Radley said:
Don't have a problem with either. Remember those tents vets put up during the great depression? it was a shame, a disgrace that they were removed by force.
Click to expand...

I don't care.
A public park, is for the public at large, not for OWS people, not for vets, but for everyone.

They are not intended to, nor do they have the facilities present to be a place to camp.
 
Ikari said:
I do not believe permits necessary for the exercise of rights.
Click to expand...


Ah, you don't believe eh? Well, who are you? We live in a civil society where we have elected representatives to enact laws on our behalf. One of those laws is that in order to hold a rally you must in most municipalities in this country you must obtain a permit. You don't like it, well, tough, you can't just ignore the law when it suits you.

Your right to be free, does not supersede my right to be free from you.

j-mac
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I don't care.
A public park, is for the public at large, not for OWS people, not for vets, but for everyone.

They are not intended to, nor do they have the facilities present to be a place to camp.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. It's not camping, but protest. Continued protest. So while i don't put OWS in the same category as the vets, who were seriously wronged, a national disgrace, the fact remains, peaceful protest, even when sitting and staing on public land, doesn't bother me much.
 
j-mac said:
Ah, you don't believe eh? Well, who are you? We live in a civil society where we have elected representatives to enact laws on our behalf. One of those laws is that in order to hold a rally you must in most municipalities in this country you must obtain a permit. You don't like it, well, tough, you can't just ignore the law when it suits you.

Your right to be free, does not supersede my right to be free from you.

j-mac
Click to expand...

You have no right to be free from me. That's like saying we have a freedom FROM religion; but that's not true. I have no right to not hear people run their mouths about their gods. Proper law is constructed to uphold, protect, and proliferate our rights; not infringe upon them.
 
Boo Radley said:
I respectfully disagree. It's not camping, but protest. Continued protest. So while i don't put OWS in the same category as the vets, who were seriously wronged, a national disgrace, the fact remains, peaceful protest, even when sitting and staing on public land, doesn't bother me much.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if it bothers you much.
Squatting is not legal, no matter the intent behind it.

You don't have a right to squat on public or private property.
 
Ikari said:
You have no right to be free from me. That's like saying we have a freedom FROM religion; but that's not true. I have no right to not hear people run their mouths about their gods. Proper law is constructed to uphold, protect, and proliferate our rights; not infringe upon them.
Click to expand...

So if you are a protester doing his thing in the park across from my home, I absolutely have the right to call authorities and remove you from direct proximity from my home, for any number of violations you are committing.

j-mac
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
It doesn't matter if it bothers you much.
Squatting is not legal, no matter the intent behind it.

You don't have a right to squat on public or private property.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but reasonable people can decide that it is better to allow it than to esculate the violence. It is far more likely they will tirer and move on if left alone than if you esculate the violence. We should ahve learned in the 60's that too much resistence increases the resolve and doesn't lessen it. From a sheer practical POV, trying to remove them causes more problems then it solves in most cases.

BTW, my daughter and son-in-law have been involved in some of this, and they report respect for the police, who where they are have both ahered to law and negoitated an acceptable compromise. It appeared to me the law there acted reasonably, and found better solutions.
 
j-mac said:
So if you are a protester doing his thing in the park across from my home, I absolutely have the right to call authorities and remove you from direct proximity from my home, for any number of violations you are committing.

j-mac
Click to expand...

You are more than free to call the authorities.
 
Ikari said:
You are more than free to call the authorities.
Click to expand...

Yep, and when they require the crowd to disburse, then it is your protest trampling my rights, not the police trampling yours.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Yep, and when they require the crowd to disburse, then it is your protest trampling my rights, not the police trampling yours.


j-mac
Click to expand...

The police are restricted in the way they can act and if the group is assembling and protesting, then they do not, from that alone, have enough to disburse the crowd.
 
Boo Radley said:
Perhaps, but reasonable people can decide that it is better to allow it than to esculate the violence. It is far more likely they will tirer and move on if left alone than if you esculate the violence. We should ahve learned in the 60's that too much resistence increases the resolve and doesn't lessen it. From a sheer practical POV, trying to remove them causes more problems then it solves in most cases.
Click to expand...

Not really.
If you let some people get away with breaking the law, then others may jump on the bandwagon.
Not a very good image to project.

They had their chance to camp and protest, they were asked to leave and they should of acted reasonable and left.

Boo Radley said:
BTW, my daughter and son-in-law have been involved in some of this, and they report respect for the police, who where they are have both ahered to law and negoitated an acceptable compromise. It appeared to me the law there acted reasonably, and found better solutions.
Click to expand...

See your acting as if the police were the problem.
The police don't come into this, until someone breaks the law.

They shouldn't compromise with people breaking the law, that's not their job.
 
Ikari said:
I do not believe permits necessary for the exercise of rights. Assembly and protest are right up there with gun rights and privacy rights. They are an absolute and must be upheld to their maximum possible.
Click to expand...

So.... anything in the name of assembly right?

How about I assemble for the purpose of painting graffiti on City Hall?

My assembly rights dude!
 
Ikari said:
Public land such as public parks should be open game for protest and assembly. Private property, of course you don't have the right to occupy it.
Click to expand...

I think you missed the keyword....

C A M P
 
Caine said:
So.... anything in the name of assembly right?

How about I assemble for the purpose of painting graffiti on City Hall?

My assembly rights dude!
Click to expand...

You are free to assemble, you are free to discuss graffiti as well. Defacing property perhaps not so much. If you want to draw specific reference to the property damage that occurred in isolated cases, that could then be construed as enough to find those people responsible for said property damage and arrest them.

However, in any ability for the government to act against our rights; it must be properly controlled and restricted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom