• 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!

What should protesters be removed or arrested for?

What things should protesters be removed or arrested for?

  • Shouting down speakers so that no one can hear the person speaking.

    Votes: 11 36.7%

  • Intimidation(Verbal threats,pointing weapons or projectiles at someone)

    Votes: 28 93.3%

  • Blocking entrances to buildings and events.

    Votes: 24 80.0%

  • Rioting.

    Votes: 29 96.7%

  • Throwing things at the opposition or anyone else.

    Votes: 29 96.7%
  • Total voters
    30
jamesrage

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,867
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
What things should protesters be removed or arrested for?
When I say arrested I mean charged with a criminal act and punished accordingly.When I say removed I mean security or police or someone else removing the individuals from the premises.





Shouting down speakers so that no one can hear the person speaking.

Intimidation(Verbal threats,pointing weapons or projectiles at someone)

Blocking entrances to buildings and events.

Rioting.

Throwing things at the opposition or anyone else.




The first one I am having mixed feelings about. I think your right to free speech is not is a right to try to prevent someone elses speech from being heard. However at the same time I am sure many of us like it when the patriot guard revs their engines up so that Phelps(the guy that protest at funerals with God hates fags signs) does not get his message heard. I also think this is one of those things that sounds like a good idea at first but it could easily be used to prevent or silence opposition protest. The rest of the things,not only should the be removed but they should be arrested as well.In my opinions protesters stop being protesters the second they start rioting,protesting does not give you a right to intimidate people,block entrances or throw things at someone.
 
Last edited:
Verbal threats, maybe not so much. But pointing a gun and threatening people with that or other projectiles is right out. Rioting, probably can't be doing that either. I would say, depends on what's being thrown since some could count as weapons/projectiles. But it it's like paper or whatever, then I'd take it on the individual basis. Blocking entrances and such I'm not so sure about. Definitely can be moved if it's private property.

There are things that you have to be careful about, because this could go both ways, right? If it's an automatic sort of thing, then people could claim a protest group is "blocking an entrance" or whatever and get some folk arrested. So mostly, it's always best to not put in automatic punishments and such and to keep things on an individual basis. Everyone has the right to free speech, a rally can and often does draw a counter-protest and those people need to be able to speak as well. But they can't use force to suppress the exercise of someone else's rights.
 
I think the last four should be all unquestionably removed.

I think 2, 4, and 5 should have charges looked into.

I think 1 is questionable in regards to removing them. I think those running something that has people doing this should attempt to peacefully ask them to respect those in the crowd and let people speak and if they continue doing such actions they should be removed by those RUNNING the matter not individuals at the event.
 
You forgot failure to bathe. If someone's in a public meeting, hygiene should be mandatory.
 
It depends to a certain extent. If the meeting that the protester is protesting at is private property, the owner should be allowed to ask any one to leave. On public property, I think for anything but the first one. I think that all the rest are actually illegal in some form, and protest is not a license to break the law.
 
A government should make sure arresting and removing protesters is the absolute last resort. I think in many cases that blocking buildings and events is a major part of a protest, to bring the voice and the whole points across. Unless its causing harm to a certain people, or placing the country under a national security risk, i do not believe they should be removed from the premises. If they are being threatening (and therefore inciting violence), rioting or throwing objects with the intention to harm, then action should be taken, but anti-riot police should take precaution and exercise tolerance.
 
village-idiots.jpg
 
Whip Comes Down said:
village-idiots.jpg
Click to expand...

As opposed to town halls before this, which were always populated by the best and brightest and were paragons of civility.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XWijwmvGU4"]YouTube - University of Florida Taser Incident (taser portion)[/ame]
 
Or:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaTkGgE-hXA"]YouTube - Tancredo at UNC[/ame]
 
kaya'08 said:
I think in many cases that blocking buildings and events is a major part of a protest, to bring the voice and the whole points across.
Click to expand...

What about people blocking an entrance to an abortion clinic or people blocking an entrance to a military recruiter office? Just a major part of the protest?
 
jamesrage said:
What about people blocking an entrance to an abortion clinic or people blocking an entrance to a military recruiter office? Just a major part of the protest?
Click to expand...

Ive named the exceptions already, i said there was exceptions of course, re-read my post please.
 
The poll options are a little flawed.

I think that protesters should be removed for all of the above (regardless of political persuasion)....I don't think they should be arrested for any of them (except perhaps throwing things...and only if they actually strike the person...that would constitute a "battery").
 
disneydude said:
The poll options are a little flawed.

I think that protesters should be removed for all of the above (regardless of political persuasion)....I don't think they should be arrested for any of them (except perhaps throwing things...and only if they actually strike the person...that would constitute a "battery").
Click to expand...

Yes. Removed. If I go to listen to a speaker and people begin shouting incoherently they are not adding to the public discourse at all. Arrest is a bit much though.
 
disneydude said:
The poll options are a little flawed.

I think that protesters should be removed for all of the above (regardless of political persuasion)....I don't think they should be arrested for any of them (except perhaps throwing things...and only if they actually strike the person...that would constitute a "battery").
Click to expand...

How is it flawed? The poll question asks-"What things should protesters be removed or arrested for?"
 
kaya'08 said:
Ive named the exceptions already, i said there was exceptions of course, re-read my post please.
Click to expand...

Would blocking abortion clinics and military recruiters constitute harm or a security risk? I do not think blocking entrances to abortion clinics harm anyone and it could be argued that if the military recruiters were only blocked every other day then there would be no harm to this nations security.
 
They should be removed for all of the options in the poll.

People should only be arrested for the Rioting and Throwing things option if they destroy public or private property and if the things they're throwing could potentially injure someone badly.
 
stupid poll.

the answer is none of the above - protesters should not be arrested.

protesters should be treated like everybody else. you punch somebody in the face - you get arrested. you don't punch anybody - you don't get arrested.
 
NEUROSPORT said:
stupid poll.

the answer is none of the above - protesters should not be arrested.

protesters should be treated like everybody else. you punch somebody in the face - you get arrested. you don't punch anybody - you don't get arrested.
Click to expand...


SO basically your saying that what ever of those 5 things are crimes then they should be arrested for those things that are crimes and not arrested for things that are not crimes?
 
All except the first probably are against the law already, and I'm not sure about the first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom