Things not going well in Chicago - a thread to discuss Portland

[ztejas 43265]

5 hours ago, Captainant said:

Look, I don't think the protesters should be throwing fireworks at the feds and pointing laser pointers at them, BUT, people have been getting arrested just for standing NEAR someone else who did that. 

I have a very easy solution for this. Don't stand next to people that are pointing laser pointers at cops and setting things on fire.

[Captainant 27451]

7 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I have a very easy solution for this. Don't stand next to people that are pointing laser pointers at cops and setting things on fire.

This is making excuses for unlawful and unconstitutional arrests.

More authoritarians on this site than I would have thought. 

[Enchubben 5509]

22 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I have a very easy solution for this. Don't stand next to people that are pointing laser pointers at cops and setting things on fire.

You would think.  It also seems pretty reasonable to expect that if a buddy of mine throws a firework at a cop (or laser, molotov cocktail etc) and it's dark outside and can't figure out who did it, that the cops may round up the three or four of us next next to him to figure out who did it. 

I suppose if the peaceful protesters didn't accept/welcome/support the violent ones, and instead did some self-policing, we wouldn't be where we are. 

[ztejas 43265]

6 minutes ago, Captainant said:

This is making excuses for unlawful and unconstitutional arrests.

More authoritarians on this site than I would have thought. 

Being temporarily detained and questioned for loitering around a federal building that is a target of vandalism and arson while the worst pandemic in 100 years is going on is unconstitutional? Where in the bill of rights is that protection alluded to exactly?

Or maybe I missed the part where these people are "protesting" in favor of the US constituion. I thought that a lot of their greivances lie with systematic racism and oppression as established by the governing documents of this country. 

And I'm not speaking across the board here. There have been many excessive uses of force, unjustified arrests and denials of rights across the country during these protests.

I just don't feel that siding with these jack-offs in Portland is a necessary measure in preventing some illusive fascist takeover. I also don't feel that federal agents should be necessary to maintain law and order given the scale of what is occurring. But if Portland's mayor and Oregon's governor are going to keep their heads up their asses to appeal to their base ahead of reelection instead of actually solving anything, and, to come back to the topic, 15 people are going to get shot and killed every weekend in Chicago then what are the other alternatives?

 

[Js1 85109]

8 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Being temporarily detained and questioned for loitering around a federal building that is a target of vandalism and arson while the worst pandemic in 100 years is going on is unconstitutional? Where in the bill of rights is that protection alluded to exactly?

Or maybe I missed the part where these people are "protesting" in favor of the US constituion. I thought that a lot of their greivances lie with systematic racism and oppression as established by the governing documents of this country. 

And I'm not speaking across the board here. There have been many excessive uses of force, unjustified arrests and denials of rights across the country during these protests.

I just don't feel that siding with these jack-offs in Portland is a necessary measure in preventing some illusive fascist takeover. I also don't feel that federal agents should be necessary to maintain law and order given the scale of what is occurring. But if Portland's mayor and Oregon's governor are going to keep their heads up their asses to appeal to their base ahead of reelection instead of actually solving anything, and, to come back to the topic, 15 people are going to get shot and killed every weekend in Chicago then what are the other alternatives?

 

You wrote this without irony, right?

Right?

Seriously?

Maybe? 

[Captainant 27451]

22 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Being temporarily detained and questioned for loitering around a federal building that is a target of vandalism and arson while the worst pandemic in 100 years is going on is unconstitutional? Where in the bill of rights is that protection alluded to exactly?

Or maybe I missed the part where these people are "protesting" in favor of the US constituion. I thought that a lot of their greivances lie with systematic racism and oppression as established by the governing documents of this country. 

And I'm not speaking across the board here. There have been many excessive uses of force, unjustified arrests and denials of rights across the country during these protests.

I just don't feel that siding with these jack-offs in Portland is a necessary measure in preventing some illusive fascist takeover. I also don't feel that federal agents should be necessary to maintain law and order given the scale of what is occurring. But if Portland's mayor and Oregon's governor are going to keep their heads up their asses to appeal to their base ahead of reelection instead of actually solving anything, and, to come back to the topic, 15 people are going to get shot and killed every weekend in Chicago then what are the other alternatives?

Just so we're talking actual facts and about the same thing, I'll post an example of an illegal arrest. 

 

 

It is established case law that being adjacent to someone committing an unlawful act does not create probable cause for detainment, even temporary detainment. This is what's coming to Chicago and other cities that have arbitrarily been labeled as crime infested cities incapable of handling things themselves. 

[Enchubben 5509]

9 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Just so we're talking actual facts and about the same thing, I'll post an example of an illegal arrest. 

 

 

It is established case law that being adjacent to someone committing an unlawful act does not create probable cause for detainment, even temporary detainment. This is what's coming to Chicago and other cities that have arbitrarily been labeled as crime infested cities incapable of handling things themselves. 

There is zero background or context on that video you posted or what that person did or was thought to have done or what happened after putting said person into the vehicle. Regardless, I don't think anyone here is supporting the idea of abducting random people off the street.

But stand in a group of people intentionally trying to destroy others property (federal or otherwise) or hurt others expect to get questioned/detained etc.  Especially when it occurs at night, when people are wearing face coverings, when it becomes difficult to identify the specific perpetrators.  If local politicians and law enforcement won't do their jobs, then don't be surprised when the federal government steps in.

[Captainant 27451]

16 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

There is zero background or context on that video you posted or what that person did or was thought to have done or what happened after putting said person into the vehicle. Regardless, I don't think anyone here is supporting the idea of abducting random people off the street.

If you click through that thread, the person in question was later released by the feds because the fed's lawyers arrived and made the arresting agents let the detainee go because they did not have the legal standing to arrest him. 

1 hour ago, ztejas said:

Being temporarily detained and questioned for loitering around a federal building that is a target of vandalism and arson while the worst pandemic in 100 years is going on is unconstitutional? Where in the bill of rights is that protection alluded to exactly?

I disagree, this poster on this page is supporting the idea of "temporarily detaining and questioning for loitering".

16 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

But stand in a group of people intentionally trying to destroy others property (federal or otherwise) or hurt others expect to get questioned/detained etc.  Especially when it occurs at night, when people are wearing face coverings, when it becomes difficult to identify the specific perpetrators.  If local politicians and law enforcement won't do their jobs, then don't be surprised when the federal government steps in.

And you are bringing a whole shitload of bias into this discussion in claiming that every protester there was trying to destroy property. Those moms getting teargassed last night with arms linked and lullaby singing "hands up please don't shoot me" sure were violent, thank god the secret federal police are here to tear gas and shoot rubber bullets at them! This is nothing but escalation of violence by the feds. Local authorities did not want the feds in their community, since when do the feds get to unilaterally decide that a city is lawless and impose their violent kidnappings on the populace?

In your view if anything were to happen to any public property, does that justify the mobilization of military force against anyone in that region? Because it's reading like you're pretty ok with that.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Captainant

[Enchubben 5509]

17 minutes ago, Captainant said:

And you are bringing a whole shitload of bias into this discussion in claiming that every protester there was trying to destroy property. Those moms getting teargassed last night with arms linked and lullaby singing "hands up please don't shoot me" sure were violent, thank god the secret federal police are here to tear gas and shoot rubber bullets at them! This is nothing but escalation of violence by the feds. Local authorities did not want the feds in their community, since when do the feds get to unilaterally decide that a city is lawless and impose their violent kidnappings on the populace?

If you read my comment as everyone person there was trying to destroy property or be violent then you misread or I need to be more clear. I think there certainly are both groups represented.  It's a lesson learned in middle school for most people; associate with bad kids, and bad things tend to happen.  In an alternate universe, violent bad actors are called out by the peaceful protesters and people can continue their demonstrations without fear of tear gas and rubber bullets. Pretty apparent at this point that's not in the cards.

11 minutes ago, Captainant said:

In your view if anything were to happen to any public property, does that justify the mobilization of military force against anyone in that region? Because it's reading like you're pretty ok with that.

In your view, is it ok to firebomb a federal courthouse and seriously injure police officers if you intermingle with some peaceful protesters?

[ztejas 43265]

51 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Just so we're talking actual facts and about the same thing, I'll post an example of an illegal arrest. 

 

 

It is established case law that being adjacent to someone committing an unlawful act does not create probable cause for detainment, even temporary detainment. This is what's coming to Chicago and other cities that have arbitrarily been labeled as crime infested cities incapable of handling things themselves. 

Illegal does not mean unconstitutional. I'm not debating whether it's legal or not, and frankly I don't care. I've been unjustifiably arrested before. I spent the night in jail and had to pay a lawyer to get the case dismissed. I wasn't that incensed about the ordeal, however, since it was a result of me putting myself in a shitty situation. What is happening in the above video seems pretty analogous - except I believe the victims aren't even being charged with anything and they are being released hours later. Shit happens. Cops are dicks all the time. The person in that video is not being injured, killed, or deported to gitmo. There are risks involved when protesting. Being arrested is a big one. 

I can argue that our police system needs reform and demilitarization and better accountability and at the same time not act like it's a crime against humanity when a protester is picked up and questioned at night during a public health crisis.

[Captainant 27451]

Just to be clear here, these are the "VIOLENT ANARCHIST" offenses enumerated by DHS:

Spoiler

 

05/30/2020

• Violent anarchists graffitied the BPA Building.
• Violent anarchists graffitied the Hatfield Courthouse.
• Violent anarchists graffitied the Edith Green-Wenell Wyatt Building.
• Violent anarchists graffitied the Terry Schrunk Plaza.
• Violent anarchists graffitied the 911 Federal Building.
• Violent anarchists graffitied the Pioneer Courthouse.
• Violent anarchists graffitied the Gus J. Solomon Courthouse.

06/01/2020

• Violent anarchists graffitied the Hatfield Courthouse.
• Violent anarchists graffitied Terry Schrunk Plaza.
• Violent anarchists graffitied The Pioneer Courthouse.
• Violent anarchists graffitied The Gus J Solomon Courthouse.

06/02/2020

• Violent anarchists graffitied the U.S. Custom House.

06/06/2020

• Violent anarchists destroyed fencing surrounding federal property.

06/07/2020

• Violent anarchists damaged and breached the fence around the Hatfield Courthouse.
• Portland Police were forced to deploy crowd control spray to disperse a crowd that was throwing animal seed at officers.

06/08/2020

• Violent anarchists broke a window at the Hatfield Courthouse while pelting the building with objects.
• Violent anarchists cut a hole in the fence surrounding Hatfield Courthouse.

06/10/2020

• Violent anarchists removed the entire fence around Hatfield Courthouse and graffitied its front columns.
• Violent anarchists attempted to remove wooden barriers from a window on the Hatfield Courthouse.

06/11/2020

• Violent anarchists dismantled a section of the fence protecting the Edith Green-Wenell Wyatt Federal Building.

06/13/2020

• Violent anarchists destroyed the card reader at the Hatfield Courthouse by ripping it off its mount.
• Violent anarchists destroyed the fence at the Hatfield Courthouse.
• Violent anarchists threw metal pipes at the Hatfield Courthouse, causing Portland Police to issue a disbursal warning for unlawful assembly.

06/17/2020

• Violent anarchists graffitied the Hatfield Courthouse.

06/20/2020

• Among a group of over 400 protesters marching in front of the Pioneer Courthouse, violent anarchists attempted to cause eye damage to officers with commercial grade lasers.
• Violent anarchists graffitied the Gus J. Solomon Courthouse.

06/25/2020

• Violent anarchists vandalized an FPS camera at the Hatfield Courthouse.
• Violent anarchists breached the fence of the Justice Center, adjacent to the courthouse.

06/30/2020

• Violent anarchists ripped down plywood covering the windows at the Edith Green-Wenell Wyatt Building, before breaking the windows.

7/01/2020

• Violent anarchists graffitied new plywood covering the windows at the Hatfield Courthouse and ripped down plywood on the other side of the building.
• A group of over 200 violent anarchists blocked access to the building and proceeded to launch aerial fireworks at federal property.

07/02/2020

• Violent anarchists broke a front window to the Hatfield Courthouse and attempted to enter the building.
• Violent anarchists refused orders to vacate the Hatfield Courthouse area, and instead launched fireworks and threw objects at officers, while attempting to cause eye damage with lasers. One explosive firework was shot into the courthouse.
• FPS law enforcement officers were forced to utilized crowd control measures for safety.

07/03/2020

• After ongoing riots around the Hatfield Courthouse, crowds were dispersed only to make a return later into the night.
• Violent Anarchists broke the front window of the Hatfield U.S. Courthouse and shot fireworks into the building.
• Violent anarchists firebombed the building. Federal law enforcement extinguished the fire.

07/04/2020

• Around 1,000 violent anarchists spray painted, threw rocks, and shot fireworks (including mortar style fireworks) at the Hatfield Courthouse. They also destroyed a security camera at the facility.
  • A CBP team supporting FPS at the courthouse arrested suspects from the graffiti and camera vandalism incidents.
  • The mob continued to throw rocks and paint-filled balloons, while attempting to breach the doors.
  • Teams were forced to utilize crowd control measures for safety.
• Multiple individuals were seen carrying rifles, including the driver of a vehicle who attempted to strike a Portland Police Bureau officer with his car in front of the Hatfield Courthouse.

07/05/2020

• A hostile crowd of about 250 violent anarchists returned to the vicinity of Hatfield Courthouse to vandalize and attack numerous facilities and police, while failing to comply with dispersal order.
• Violent anarchists surrounded and blocked law enforcement from the area as extremists proceeded to attack police with thrown projectiles and large mortar style fireworks.
• Two Portland Police Bureau officers were injured by the crowd (possible concussion). 
• Portland Police Bureau took five into custody for directing lasers against aircraft.
• Violent anarchists set fires in front of Hatfield Courthouse and Chapman park.
• At the entrance of Hatfield Courthouse, Violent Anarchists fired large fireworks and threw other dangerous objects toward the entrance and the personnel protecting it.
• The mob was pushed completely out of the area of Hatfield Courthouse; FPS made two arrests during push.
• Portland Police made multiple arrests and found a loaded weapon on one subject.
• Two more violent anarchists were arrested, and one was found to be carrying what appears to be a pipe bomb.
• Violent anarchists assaulted construction crews by targeting them with fireworks while they repaired Hatfield Building.
• A joint team had to be deployed to create buffer between violent anarchists and construction crew to protect construction workers.

07/06/2020

• Violent anarchists attempted to cause vision damage to personnel with lasers. Five arrests were made for assaulting law enforcement.

07/07/2020

• Violent anarchists held a “Night of Rage,” in which a 400-500-person protest devolved into riots, assaulting law enforcement officers and federal property.
• Approximately 200 violent anarchists began pursuing law enforcement officers to disrupt enforcement actions, assaulting them with rocks and bottles.
• Around 150 violent anarchists in front of the Justice Center began attacking personnel with lasers and peppered the area with fireworks.
• Three violent anarchists were arrested for attacking law enforcement.

07/08/2020

• Approximately 200 violent anarchists attacked DHS law enforcement officers while apprehending a subject who was wanted for property damage.
• One arrest was made after three law enforcement officers were injured.
• Law enforcement officers’ personal information was publicly exposed, including FPS, ICE, and CBP personnel.
• Violent anarchists continued to attack officers with lasers. 

07/09/2020

• Violent anarchists attacked DHS law enforcement officers while apprehending a subject who was wanted for property damage.
• A violent anarchist graffitied the Hatfield courthouse.
• An unidentified subject fired several shots from a gun into the air from the rear seat of a passing white SUV. 

07/10/2020

• Crowds of approximately 300 violent anarchists vandalized federal property and cameras with spray paint, blocked roadways, and assaulted law enforcement officers.
• Three were arrested for Assault on a Federal Officer.
• Violent anarchists attempted to ambush Portland Police Department PD during their shift change, but a DHS team was deployed and able to prevent any attacks.

07/11/2020

• DHS law enforcement officers supported local police to help a violent anarchist who overdosed.
• Four violent anarchists were arrested, including one who attempted to assault an officer with a hammer.
• Violent anarchists sieged the barricade of the courthouse and tried to damage it with a large hammer.
• A law enforcement officer was assaulted with blows from a hammer. Violent anarchists fought officers while they were arresting those responsible.

07/12/2020

• Six violent anarchists were detained and cited.
• A mob of 300 refused to comply with directions not to trespass on federal property.
• Another mob of 200 individuals armed with sledgehammers, tasers and/or stun guns, gathered in Chapman Park across from the Hatfield Courthouse.
• Violent anarchists launched fireworks, threw fecal matter and large objects, and pointed lasers at federal law enforcement officers.
• Violent anarchists deployed a plywood blockade while graffitiing the Edith Green-Wenell Wyatt Federal Building, before firing wrist rockets at the facility.
• When an arrest team was deployed to apprehend a rioter who encroached on a police barrier and refused to leave, they were assaulted by violent anarchists.
• A rioter trespassed on the steps of the Hatfield Courthouse and was confronted by federal law enforcement Officers, then swallowed a large amount of narcotics. Law enforcement called medical services after the individual started to convulse.
• Despite more orders to stay off of federal property and to cease unlawful activity, FPS was forced to push back violent anarchists. The Portland Police Bureau declared the mob an unlawful assembly.

07/13/2020

• Violent anarchists released personal information of federal law enforcement officers to the public, publishing names of those in Portland.
• Violent anarchists continued to assault law enforcement officers with lasers, slingshots and fireworks. Others were armed with sledge hammers, tasers, and stun guns, and dragged flaming debris into the scene.

07/14/2020

• Violent anarchists set a container of liquid on fire at the Terry Schrunk Plaza.
• Violent anarchists jumped a fence and attempted to breach the Edith Green Federal Building.
• Violent anarchists assaulted federal law enforcement officers with cans and other hard objects while they attempted to unblock the entrance of the Edith Green Federal Building.

07/15/2020

• Violent anarchists doxed members of federal law enforcement.
• Violent anarchists attempted to damage the Hatfield Courthouse by throwing objects at it and spray painting it. Numerous fireworks were also lit.
• Violent anarchists trespassed on federal property and destroyed a card reader at the Justice Center.

Those offenses are uniformly: graffiti, fireworks, and laser pointers, along with the destruction of some fencing and card readers. There some instances of officers getting hit with hard objects, and as for the so-called "firebombing" I'll let you use your own eyes to see what the feds are hanging their hat on. 

Look, I'm not saying that the protesters are uniformly peaceful. I am saying that the feds are using the actions of a few people to justify collective punishment against that group. It's not the feds job to act as property guards, it's to enforce the law. They have been taking actions outside of the law. Posters in this thread are openly glad to see law enforcement break the law to persecute free speech and assembly. Fascism is on the rise.

[BabaYaga 15212]

28 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Look, I'm not saying that the protesters are uniformly peaceful. I am saying that the feds are using the actions of a few people to justify collective punishment against that group. It's not the feds job to act as property guards, it's to enforce the law. They have been taking actions outside of the law. Posters in this thread are openly glad to see law enforcement break the law to persecute free speech and assembly. Fascism is on the rise.

Which would be fine, but your entire point if one of conflating this

With this.  They are not the same thing.  They may have started out identical, but what we are seeing in Portland for weeks now is unfettered rioting, destruction, violence, and mayhem.  None of which are legal.  The local police was directly told to STAND DOWN.  To do nothing, leading to attacks on federal buildings (attempted arson) and precipitating federal involvement.  

 

 

[Captainant 27451]

Ah yes, unsourced and unattributed photos. Care to post some from the ukraine democracy protests in 2015 as well to solidify the narrative of unhinged violence? Attribution of information is a pretty key and important thing these days.

The same folks who were enamored with the brutality against peaceful protesters in DC for a photo op with a bible are here excusing and defending fascism in action.

3 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

And to bring this back on topic, no doubt in response to the unbridled destruction we are seeing in Portland, Chicago has agreed to let the Feds come in and maintain some semblance of order (and conveniently wash their hands if/when things go sideways and shift the blame)

 And not to pop your false equivalency, but per the article you linked, the federal resources are going to be working at the direction of local control with the threat of legal action if they step outside their bounds

Quote

“Mayor Lightfoot maintains that all resources will be investigatory in nature and be coordinated through the U.S. Attorney’s office,” the statement said. “The Mayor has made clear that if there is any deviation from what has been announced, we will pursue all available legal options to protect Chicagoans.”

So we'll see how long until the veneer wears away and we get another portland. I give it under a week.

[Captainant 27451]

Mods are cowards. Extrajudicial arrests by unmarked irregular military forces is a fucking notable current event, and the persistent move to push anything sensitive into the CR is making the DT an unchallenged right-wing safe space for any topic that remotely involves trump.

[BabaYaga 15212]

5 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Ah yes, unsourced and unattributed photos. Care to post some from the ukraine democracy protests in 2015 as well to solidify the narrative of unhinged violence? Attribution of information is a pretty key and important thing these days.

The same folks who were enamored with the brutality against peaceful protesters in DC for a photo op with a bible are here excusing and defending fascism in action.

Ok, gotcha.  You are neither a serious person nor have any semblance of objectivity.  These pics have been all over the news and various outlets for weeks now.

Here is the Portland Police Union being burned

Or that racist elk finally getting what it had coming!

Here is the Federal Building being burned.  But yeah.....unsourced.....

[Huckleberry 32701]

Does the logic of being near somebody doing something illegal making it okay to be arrested, detained, abused, gassed, etc. also apply to the "law enforcement" officers who are near their colleagues when they illegally arrest somebody?

[Captainant 27451]

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Ok, gotcha.  You are neither a serious person nor have any semblance of objectivity.  These pics have been all over the news and various outlets for weeks now.

Excuse me for not trusting unattributed and unsourced pictures from a right-wing poster the day after the president used pictures from another country to demonstrate how "LAWLESS" our nation has become. If the pics have been all over the news and various outlets, I'd think that posting the article that they're from is easier than finding the picture, digging out the hotlink, and posting it here. Ya know, because there's so much fake news out there right?

And I wasn't aware that a small fire outside of a fence could endanger a concrete structure, those VIOLENT ANARCHISTS sure have been sprucing up their cookbook.

[ztejas 43265]

57 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I am saying that the feds are using the actions of a few people to justify collective punishment against that group. It's not the feds job to act as property guards, it's to enforce the law. They have been taking actions outside of the law. Posters in this thread are openly glad to see law enforcement break the law to persecute free speech and assembly. Fascism is on the rise.

Please cite examples of them being punished. Being detained for 3 hours is not being punished. 

And please read the bill of rights if you are going to keep citing it:

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.

Portland quit peaceably assembling a long time ago. There is a reason that the word "peaceably" is included in the constitution. Because you do not have the right to violently assemble. If you are assembling amongst people that are breaking the law or taking violent actions then yeah, you might get detained and questioned. If you get beaten half to death or shot in the face with a rubber bullet then I will support your quest for legal recourse ten times out of ten. But if you are out past dark wearing all black and protective gear while federal buildings are being set on fire then don't be shocked when you are suspected of being involved. Effective police work in that circumstance is not oppressive nor is it secret. At it's worst it's fighting fire with fire.

[Huckleberry 32701]

1 minute ago, ztejas said:

Please cite examples of them being punished. Being detained for 3 hours is not being punished. 

And please read the bill of rights if you are going to keep citing it:

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.

Portland quit peaceably assembling a long time ago. There is a reason that the word "peaceably" is included in the constitution. Because you do not have the right to violently assemble. If you are assembling amongst people that are breaking the law or taking violent actions then yeah, you might get detained and questioned. If you get beaten half to death or shot in the face with a rubber bullet then I will support your quest for legal recourse ten times out of ten. But if you are out past dark wearing all black and protective gear while federal buildings are being set on fire then don't be shocked when you are suspected of being involved. Effective police work in that circumstance is not oppressive nor is it secret. At it's worst it's fighting fire with fire.

Holy shit you're not very bright. Did you know the Bill of Rights is longer than just the First Amendment? Crazy stuff, I know.

Also yes, being detained for 3 hours is being punished. Which is the reason it's, you know, illegal in that situation.

[BabaYaga 15212]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

And I wasn't aware that a small fire outside of a fence could endanger a concrete structure, those VIOLENT ANARCHISTS sure have been sprucing up their cookbook.

lol....ignore function enacted

 

[gmr548 16511]

Please cite examples of them being punished. Being detained for 3 hours is not being punished. 

[Huckleberry 32701]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

lol....ignore function enacted

 

Do you believe that the federal agents committing illegal actions should be punished for their illegal actions?

[UpperWestside 6136]

20 minutes ago, Captainant said: Extrajudicial arrests by unmarked irregular military forces is a fucking notable current event, and the persistent move to push anything sensitive into the CR is making the DT an unchallenged right-wing safe space for any topic that remotely involves trump.

Just don’t go engage with them. You are not going to convince terrible human beings to not be terrible. Keep pushing for change and leave these idiots behind. Brisket’s analogy yesterday of island-hopping them like we did to the Japanese in WWII makes sense when dealing with racist, sexist and backwards morons who are entrenched in their social construct. Move around them and keep going forward.

Edited July 23, 2020 by UpperWestside

[sidis 9749]

man, reading this thread is like being in bizarro world.  how very, very bizarro.

[bad_teammate 13132]

If someone is breaking the law, police should arrest that person.

If they cannot arrest that person immediately, they should record evidence and wait/track that person so that they can arrest that person when it is possible.

Sounds difficult, but that's why we pay them I guess.

[wildcat09 29243]

3 hours ago, ztejas said:

Being temporarily detained and questioned for loitering around a federal building that is a target of vandalism and arson while the worst pandemic in 100 years is going on is unconstitutional? Where in the bill of rights is that protection alluded to exactly?

 

 

The 4th Amendment, you stupid fuck.

[ztejas 43265]

19 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Holy shit you're not very bright. Did you know the Bill of Rights is longer than just the First Amendment? Crazy stuff, I know.

Also yes, being detained for 3 hours is being punished. Which is the reason it's, you know, illegal in that situation.

Seriously? I thought everyone was an adult here. That's not even a slap on the wrist. These people aren't getting picked up standing in line at Jamba Juice. 

And yes I'm aware there are other amendments. I'm confused as to which of those protect your right to do whatever the fuck they are doing in Portland.

[wildcat09 29243]

Just now, ztejas said:

Seriously? I thought everyone was an adult here. That's not even a slap on the wrist. These people aren't getting picked up standing in line at Jamba Juice. 

And yes I'm aware there are other amendments. I'm confused as to which of those protect your right to do whatever the fuck they are doing in Portland.

Look up, dipshit.

[Brisketexan 104605]

16 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

If someone is breaking the law, police should arrest that person.

If they cannot arrest that person immediately, they should record evidence and wait/track that person so that they can arrest that person when it is possible.

Sounds difficult, but that's why we pay them I guess.

No, no, no.

If someone breaks the law.....you should brutally beat and teargas anyone within 1,000 yards of that person.  You clearly didn't get the "how to be a federal paramilitary irregular" manual.  Could have sworn you were sent a copy.

Any crime committed in an area automatically entitles law enforcement to use brute force on every single human being anywhere near the event.  That's the way it works.  Obviously.

[Captainant 27451]

Guys, collective punishment is TOTALLY in alignment with the values of a democratic republic, GAWRSH! If you don't want to get brutalized by the police, just don't go exercise your right to free speech and assembly, and they won't arrest you in violation of the 4th amendment

And for @ztejas since he can't count past two in the bill of rights:

Amendment 4:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Captainant

[workswithseed 2036]

I must have been drunk making this topic. 

[wildcat09 29243]

You won't find a lawyer that isn't either (1) working for this administration or (2) an actual, honest-to-god neo-nazi, argue that getting black bagged by federal agents, blocks from any federal property, is not an illegal arrest in violation of the 4th Amendment. The overwhelming majority of the time, any lawyer's answer to any question about a legal issue is going to be "it depends." Like 99.5% of the time. But this?  It doesn't depend on anything. There's no other facts not in evidence that would make it a legal arrest. There's no possible good-faith argument based on the letter of the law or Supreme Court precedent, which is absurdly deferential to police, that it even might have been Constitutional. That's how fucking cut and dry this is. Anyone who will defend it is an absolute bootlicker and an un-American piece of shit.

[Huckleberry 32701]

13 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

I must have been drunk making this topic. 

You were the lucky one who had the lowest post number that got split into the new thread. Congrats? 

[NAVY 6738]

4 hours ago, Js1 said:

Who that ho? 

[burntorangebongos 10681]

20 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

I must have been drunk making this topic. 

It made no sense at the beginning, I quit reading it and started at the bottom in hopes of figuring it out....not gonna happen.

[UpperWestside 6136]

38 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

No, no, no.

If someone breaks the law.....you should brutally beat and teargas anyone within 1,000 yards of that person.  You clearly didn't get the "how to be a federal paramilitary irregular" manual.  Could have sworn you were sent a copy.

Any crime committed in an area automatically entitles law enforcement to use brute force on every single human being anywhere near the event.  That's the way it works.  Obviously.

There’s a scene in the movie Jojo Rabbit that explains the thought process on display here today. 
 

Fast forward to 1:28 if you want to see it how our resident morons sound in regards to rounding up nearby protesters.

Edited July 23, 2020 by UpperWestside

[elfenix 34171]

20 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

It made no sense at the beginning, I quit reading it and started at the bottom in hopes of figuring it out....not gonna happen.

the DT chicago thread went political and the mods split it out. 

be nice to leave a post saying that's what they did, for those posting while also watching opening day and listening with one ear to their wife's endless story

[JimmyJames 12271]

On 7/23/2020 at 3:35 PM, ztejas said:

Please cite examples of them being punished. Being detained for 3 hours is not being punished. 

And please read the bill of rights if you are going to keep citing it:

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.

Portland quit peaceably assembling a long time ago. There is a reason that the word "peaceably" is included in the constitution. Because you do not have the right to violently assemble. If you are assembling amongst people that are breaking the law or taking violent actions then yeah, you might get detained and questioned. If you get beaten half to death or shot in the face with a rubber bullet then I will support your quest for legal recourse ten times out of ten. But if you are out past dark wearing all black and protective gear while federal buildings are being set on fire then don't be shocked when you are suspected of being involved. Effective police work in that circumstance is not oppressive nor is it secret. At it's worst it's fighting fire with fire.

Being detained for 3 hours is not being punished? How fucking dumb are you? Nazi pussy.

[JimmyJames 12271]

On 7/23/2020 at 1:39 PM, Enchubben said:

There is zero background or context on that video you posted or what that person did or was thought to have done or what happened after putting said person into the vehicle. Regardless, I don't think anyone here is supporting the idea of abducting random people off the street.

But stand in a group of people intentionally trying to destroy others property (federal or otherwise) or hurt others expect to get questioned/detained etc.  Especially when it occurs at night, when people are wearing face coverings, when it becomes difficult to identify the specific perpetrators.  If local politicians and law enforcement won't do their jobs, then don't be surprised when the federal government steps in.

How has this idiot not been neg banned yet? He is a constant source of jackboot stupidity. Standing in a group deserves punishment eh? Just another Nazi. 

[Enchubben 5509]

3 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

How has this idiot not been neg banned yet? He is a constant source of jackboot stupidity. Standing in a group deserves punishment eh? Just another Nazi. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

Yep. A troll.

[Enchubben 5509]

Maybe compare your posting activity to everyone else in the thread and reevaluate who is the troll.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13546]

We really need Civics reintroduced as a core curriculum in our schools.

[JimmyJames 12271]

13 hours ago, Enchubben said:

Maybe compare your posting activity to everyone else in the thread and reevaluate who is the troll.

Ok. I went back and did that. And I learned you are an even bigger bootlicker than I thought. Your complete willingness to submit to authority is ridiculous. But you’re just trolling anyway so who cares.

[tchookem 3900]

We really need Civics reintroduced as a core curriculum in our schools.

It's there, it's just been shoehorned into US History, government, and economics (and the other social studies courses). The problem with that is there's already a mile's worth of content covered with an inch of depth. Civics, which should now include a media literacy component, should be its own social studies course.

[Guest Lobo]

We don't thoroughly teach Civics/Social Studies nor Personal Finance in this country.  If you think it's due to lack of funding, you're fucking insane.  

[tchookem 3900]

We don't thoroughly teach Civics/Social Studies nor Personal Finance in this country.  If you think it's due to lack of funding, you're fucking insane.  

Funding shows properties. Few people have ever compared a campus budget for social studies versus math, English, science, or athletics? There's a hierarchy in schools, and funding lays that hierarchy bare.

Right now, I'm hoping to move from middle school to high school to teach government/economics. The social studies department chair wants to hire me, one of the counselors had been trying to get me to the high school for years. Principals and other social studies teachers want me. The sticking point? The softball team wants another coach (not head coach, an assistant), and they'll need to put the coach in that social studies position.

You're going to say the funding is there, the schools are just choosing what they make priorities. I guess you're not wrong, but you get what you pay for. We could pay for a social studies teacher AND a softball coach, or we could pay for a social studies teacher that's a really bad softball coach. Too often we choose to pay for the coach that a really bad social studies teacher*.

*The coach in my instance may be very dedicated and very qualified to social studies. I may be completely out of line there. But the fact the social studies department chair has little to no say in the decision is telling, I think.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

On 7/23/2020 at 4:02 PM, BabaYaga said:

Which would be fine, but your entire point if one of conflating this

With this.  They are not the same thing.  They may have started out identical, but what we are seeing in Portland for weeks now is unfettered rioting, destruction, violence, and mayhem.  None of which are legal.  The local police was directly told to STAND DOWN.  To do nothing, leading to attacks on federal buildings (attempted arson) and precipitating federal involvement.  

 

 

All your photos date back to May.  At least one of them is from Eugene.  Another one is from, I believe, Minneapolis.  Sure, in May and early June, there were several days where riots destroyed property across the USA.  Temporary curfews were put in place and then lifted.  Peaceful protests resumed nationwide.  Today is July 28.  The feds arrived in Portland in early July in order to attack peaceful protests.  They did not arrive in response to anything you posted, all of which occurred 2 months prior.

Edited July 28, 2020 by FondrenRoad

[FondrenRoad 4378]

On 7/25/2020 at 11:41 PM, Enchubben said:

Maybe compare your posting activity to everyone else in the thread and reevaluate who is the troll.

If you have ever been present at all in a Wal-mart, Target, or grocery store, you've also been present when shoplifting has occurred.  Clearly, you should have been arrested for shoplifting.

[sheeeit 129]

This is such a weird and interesting topic.  Especially from the lawyers that selectively cite the law.

Dude getting arrested by the van, definite problem and he most likely had his rights broken and should get some justice.

But, it is hard to even have a debate when people keep making obvious lies about the law, especially when they claim to be lawyers.

On 7/23/2020 at 1:18 PM, Captainant said:

It is established case law that being adjacent to someone committing an unlawful act does not create probable cause for detainment, even temporary detainment.

On 7/23/2020 at 12:32 PM, Captainant said:

This is making excuses for unlawful and unconstitutional arrests.

More authoritarians on this site than I would have thought. 

This is just not true at all.  To be clear, I am not saying what the cops/feds are doing is right, I am saying that it is legal (with the caveat of the case I cited above with the van).  Just standing in a protest actually can be grounds for being detained or arrested in many instances and the case law is unambiguous.  Just off the top of my head you have the following:

1) As soon as a protest becomes violent or dangerous, the police can clear the area and arrest those involved.  This one has some grey area to it and "violent and dangerous" are subjective terms but, legally speaking, the police can act, including detaining.

2) Once the cops declare a protest dangerous, they can legally declare it an unlawful assembly.  They have to announce it, but once announced, if you do not leave, you can be detained and arrested legally.

3) Curfew- Portland is and has been under a curfew at different times.  8 pm.  I do not know the exact dates of the curfews and how they correspond to arrests.  Again, not claiming an action is right or wrong morally, but legally you can be detained and arrested for violating a state imposed curfew. 

At almost all times in the Portland saga, one or more of these scenarios existed.  Perhaps the law should be changed, but it is current law.  So yes, if you are just hanging out in a protest that has turned violent or dangerous or that the police have determined is unlawful assembly, you can legally be detained and arrested.