Page 16 of 37 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 361

Thread: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

  1. #151
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,173

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Wow..talk about a huge protest eh? Lets try and keep this in terms of the normal size of a protest that actually will grab the media's attention. You know...like the size of MLK's protests? Teaparty protests? OWS protests?
    I don't recall seeing a specification to the size of the protest. If I missed it, I apologize. Another point could be that protests don't have to be large or long. Looking back on this, we probably should have had our entrance on tape and we should have taken pictures of college students leaving the bar. Maybe we could have plastered the info all over campus. Heeheeeeee. Protests can come in all sizes and shapes. With that, I will leave you to your fine debate. :-)

  2. #152
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    I can't speak for other jurisdictions, but any time my county's Sheriff's department posts officers or deploys a task force to look for drunk drivers on the weekends, they never take it from the regular compliment -- they always add to it, because otherwise the guys left on patrol are at risk and the department as a whole is less effecient.

    My guess is that it's the same in any department involving more than a couple of guys.
    It is the same here and in any other town/city that I have lived in.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  3. #153
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I can see the delima here. However, in the end since this is the exerciese of a right; namely protest and assembly that we must accept this as a consequence of freedom. I fear too many people forget consequence.
    The right to protest does not mean you have the right to camp out, trash city parks,bogart public spaces, harass burger king employees and customers, harass school kids and other ****.Just like right to keep and bear arms means you do not have the right to shoot your gun off at 3am,shoot people for no reason or try to threaten people with your firearm.

    How much does gun ownership cost us? We have a lot of gun crime and a lot of legal, medical, and social dynamics which feed into it and cost us all money. Certainly there would always be some amount of gun crime; but if we took very authoratative measures to remove guns physically we could decrease that number greatly. Do we sue gun owners? Do we sue gun companies?
    I am pretty sure that if a gun owner shot up a city park he would criminal charged and be forced to pay for the damage. I am also sure that if someone with a gun shot someone in the leg or some other body part then that individual would be charged with a crime and possibly forced to pay for the medical bills of the person he shot. So it is acceptable to force gun owners to pay for the damage they cause but not protesters who cause damage?
    Last edited by jamesrage; 12-26-11 at 07:45 PM.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  4. #154
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    I don't recall seeing a specification to the size of the protest. If I missed it, I apologize. Another point could be that protests don't have to be large or long. Looking back on this, we probably should have had our entrance on tape and we should have taken pictures of college students leaving the bar. Maybe we could have plastered the info all over campus. Heeheeeeee. Protests can come in all sizes and shapes. With that, I will leave you to your fine debate. :-)
    There is no spcification to the size of a protest. However we are talking about the OWS, as such we have to use other protests of reletively equal or like size or the conversation becomes meaningless and semantical. Which ruins any good debate.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  5. #155
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    The right to protest does not mean you have the right to camp out, trash city parks,bogart public spaces, harass burger king employees and customers, harass school kids and other ****.Just like right to keep and bear arms means you do not have the right to shoot your gun off at 3am,shoot people for no reason or try to threaten people with your firearm.
    Where are you getting all this? I've never heard of this.

    As for "bogarting public spaces" get real. No one was stopped from entering those spaces.

    As for trash....do you really believe that no protest has not ever left trash behind? That public property was left unscathed? Now I agree that the OWS people should at least make an effort to clean up thier trash and keep the place decent. This does not mean that this isn't a natural consequence of protesting. I also agree that if they become violent like some have then they should be arrested. But not all OWS protesters do this.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I am pretty sure that if a gun owner shot up a city park he would criminal charged and be forced to pay for the damage. I am also sure that if someone with a gun shot someone in the leg or some other body then that individual would be charged with a crime and possibly forced to pay for the medical bills of the person he shot. So it is acceptable to force gun owners to pay for the damage they cause but not protesters who cause damage?
    A person shooting up an area or people is a hugely bad analogy. Apples and oranges type stuff. There is a reason that the 1st amendment specifically states "the right to peaceably assemble".
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  6. #156
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    1.)This has ZERO relevance to this conversation.
    2.)Cool conservative republican talking point
    3.)I'm not a liberal
    4.)What the ****?


    So you cant?


    So you are saying that curfews, sizes of protest are laws that dont go against this here amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    How is someone having a protest infringing upon your rights? I saw no one at any of the OWS protests stopping people from entering the parks that they occupied. If you didn't go because you didn't want to associate yourself with the OWS or didn't want to have to deal with the crowds that is your choice. No one stopped you or anyone else from entering the parks.
    So you two think that the Occutards in NYC should have been able to camp out in the park for as long as they wanted ? In quantities that they wanted ? With whatever sanitation mechanisms they thought were OK ?

    The laws say otherwise. Explain that .... please ?

    Secondly. Do you two think we live in a Democracy ? Or a Democratic Republic ?

    Do you know the difference ?

  7. #157
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    So you two think that the Occutards in NYC should have been able to camp out in the park for as long as they wanted ? In quantities that they wanted ? With whatever sanitation mechanisms they thought were OK ?

    The laws say otherwise. Explain that .... please ?
    As long as they stayed peaceful...yes. And all laws are trumped by the US Constitution. Sorry, thems the breaks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eighty Deuce View Post
    Secondly. Do you two think we live in a Democracy ? Or a Democratic Republic ?

    Do you know the difference ?
    Do you know the difference? It is obvious that we have a Democratic Republic. Hence the reason that we have the right to peaceably protest.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  8. #158
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Where are you getting all this? I've never heard of this.
    Oh, Good Grief… #Occupy LA Goons Shut Down Burger King (Video) | The Gateway Pundit
    'Occupy Wall Street' Protesters Chant 'Follow Those Kids!' As Small Children Try To Go To School On Wall Street CBS New York

    As for "bogarting public spaces" get real. No one was stopped from entering those spaces.
    How can anyone use a park when a bunch of dirty hippies are all crowded in and camping out?

    As for trash....do you really believe that no protest has not ever left trash behind?
    Seeing how camping out is not a 1st amendment right I seriously doubt the other protests were as trashed.

    That public property was left unscathed?

    You damage public property you should pay for it.

    A person shooting up an area or people is a hugely bad analogy. Apples and oranges type stuff.
    No its a perfect analogy because the right to keep and bear amrs means just that the right to own and posses firearms, it does not mean I can do what ever I want with my firearms.The right to peacefully assemble and free speech means just that it does not mean you can camp out,destroy and trash property or any thing else not related to 1st amendment rights.

    There is a reason that the 1st amendment specifically states "the right to peaceably assemble".
    Those protesters were no peaceful.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  9. #159
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    12-29-15 @ 10:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,747

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    As long as they stayed peaceful...yes. And all laws are trumped by the US Constitution. Sorry, thems the breaks.
    We are a country of Laws. And the Constitution is not the only one. Your current argument was ripped earlier in the thread. We have Codes. Statutes. Thousands of laws that do not violate the COnstitution, but which do put some sensible limits on how you exercise your rights without violating those of others.

    Do you know the difference? It is obvious that we have a Democratic Republic. Hence the reason that we have the right to peaceably protest.
    LOL .... I have forgotten more about the differences than many here remember.

  10. #160
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: L.A. might sue Occupy L.A. protestors for financial damages

    In the BK I think those people should have been arrested as despite it being open to the public it is still a privately owned property. And privacy is also protected in the Constitution.

    In the second one with the exception of the one guy following the guy and his daughter yes it should be allowed until the occupiers made it impossible for the students to get to school. The one guy should have been arrested for sure as that is harrassment. The rest should have been dispersed (and if they resisted that arrested) the moment they made it impossible for the parents to get thier kids to school.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    How can anyone use a park when a bunch of dirty hippies are all crowded in and camping out?
    Hey, its still your choice to go or not.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Seeing how camping out is not a 1st amendment right I seriously doubt the other protests were as trashed.
    Camping may not be but protesting is. And there is no limit on how long a protest may last.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    You damage public property you should pay for it.
    Was it damaged maliciously? If so then I agree. If it just became damaged because of protesting in a park..then no.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    No its a perfect analogy because the right to keep and bear amrs means just that the right to own and posses firearms, it does not mean I can do what ever I want with my firearms.The right to peacefully assemble and free speech means just that it does not mean you can camp out,destroy and trash property or any thing else not related to 1st amendment rights.
    No it is not. Our Constitution is based upon peace. Shooting up a park and people is not peaceful.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Those protesters were no peaceful.
    While those in your links were not these protesters certainly are...

    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

Page 16 of 37 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •