Support NeoGAF

[Ogodei]

So we'll be a nation that teaches how we won our independence from Britain through protest and resistance, worship those historical figures as gods and yet outlaw it in the modern day due to its "inconvenience"?

Thank minorities, women and LGBTQ+ peoples because they've sacrificed long and hard (and no doubt will continue too) against an insidious & impossible enemy: the apathy of people who survive on an island of privilege that it allows evil like this to bloom.

Mostly I just hope all the apathetic, "both sides", people don't complain when they wake up one day to realize they let totalitarianism envelop their lives and their family's lives.

Anyway, I'm not done. If I get run over or die in the street due to shit like this, then that's how I'll go. I didn't hesitate to support a fight for someone's rights before, I won't stop now. That'd be an insult to the men & women who fought and died before me, including the founders of this country.

The Tea Party was actual, factual economic terrorism, destruction of property of a publicly-owned corporation to force change in government policy, like if protestors went to a postal sorting center and set fire to a ton of mail and packages.

Many people who fetishize the Tea Party would support stopping these protests as "economic terrorism."

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Fine, but that doesn't make attempting to block a freeway a safe practice whether Republicans particularly care about that aspect or not.

So give the Republicans the ability to further curb stomp minorities because this is the line you wanna draw in the sand? Cool.

Protesters have a right to protest. That shouldn't give them the right to prevent others from going about their lives, regardless of how important the chosen cause is or how badly they want/need the media attention.

Like I said, black people die in the streets is preferable to inconveniencing people. That's all you are saying.

And I can't tell if you're being facetious when you mention not caring about the possibility of someone dying in an ambulance because they can't get to the hospital, or whether you're saying that that won't happen, but either way it's pretty messed up.

Black people havw been dying by the hands of the police far far far longer than the amount of freeway protests you can count on your hands and toes. I am not gonna lecture black people on the safety of the masses when no one ever gave and continues to give a shit about their safety. No one would have to hypothetically die in an ambulence if people cared but they dont so what are you gonna do? Go back to getting shot but it's cool because everyonw elses stuff sits well above your life? That's fine. We know where you stand.

In any case, when you block thousands of cars, you don't know where any of them are heading. Not everything is as severe as a life or death situation, not everything is as mundane as someone heading for work.

Hey if the issue of police brutality against minorities mattered at all then no one would have their lives interupted to begin with. But you know, w/e it is only the countries seriously oppressed talking out. Lets weaponize the law to beat the shit out of protestors because that is preferable to solving actual problems.

Yes this is an all or nothing thing. You are in or you are out. You should not applaud the republicans for silencing minority voices. I dont care how you feel about the method.

 

[Derwind]

And when the oppressed can't protest in a way that gives their oppression attention, people die, too. That's pretty messed up as well. Perhaps if we want people out of the streets we should listen to what they're saying rather than ignore the root problem and corral them elsewhere?

Preach!!

 

[Shadynasty]

Yeah, lets criminalize and give the police power to destroy people who block a freeway. Because that is the appropriate solution to the issue :/

Republicans dont give a shit about safety. They know blowcking freeways works, it grabs national news and it forces people to listem. That's why they want this criminalized. Whatever argument you think you have, what i have said is the only reason republicans are doing this.

And that is why all this "blocking a freeway is bad" none sense is hilarious. Black people are dying in the streets. The police see no punishment for terrorizing black communities. When they cause a commotion lets give the police unrestrained ability to destroy these people. Yes how democratic. People were late for work. Nana ruth died in an ambulance. Enough is enough.

We can all agree the not being allowed to block interstates is a good thing right? I don't care what you are protesting, blocking the interstates can not be allowed. The rest are bullshit.

Peoples right to protest should not be infringed upon. The blocking of highways is not something I'm a fan of. Let's not forget that some motorists get attacked by the protesters blocking traffic so yeah you get national attention, but maybe not the kind the protesters were going for. How effective has blocking traffic and attacking motorists been in gaining positive attention and support. When did the first amendment start covering destruction of property, assault, and battery?

 

[commedieu]

Thank you!

- The Ruth Family

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Peoples right to protest should not be infringed upon. The blocking of highways is not something I'm a fan of. Let's not forget that some motorists get attacked by the protesters blocking traffic so yeah you get national attention, but maybe not the kind the protesters were going for. How effective has blocking traffic and attacking motorists been in gaining positive attention and support. When did the first amendment start covering destruction of property, assault, and battery?

Some black people got killed by the state over the last 400 years or so. Lets weigh those 2 and see which one holds a lil more validity.

People dont block freeways because its cool. If they could get the attention of authorities and solve the problem with a letter and a talk they would.

 

[Got]

Thank you!

- The Ruth Family

for ruth

 

[Shadynasty]

Some black people got killed by the state over the last 400 years or so. Lets weigh those 2 and see which one holds a lil more validity.

I'm not trying to weight of validity of the black communities plight in the history of this country. I'm weighing in on the effectiveness of blocking traffic in respects to affecting the desired change. All I've witnessed is people getting protesters getting run over and/or motorists getting attacked. So the message that is trying to be demonstrated for all to see is undermined imo.

 

[Derwind]

Peoples right to protest should not be infringed upon. The blocking of highways is not something I'm a fan of. Let's not forget that some motorists get attacked by the protesters blocking traffic so yeah you get national attention, but maybe not the kind the protesters were going for. How effective has blocking traffic and attacking motorists been in gaining positive attention and support. When did the first amendment start covering destruction of property, assault, and battery?

Again, as has been repeated in this thread, the point is not about whether you gain positive or negative attention, it's simply about being heard because if you think this road hasn't been travelled before or other avenues haven't been explored then you're deluding yourself.

This is the most effective way of garnering any attention, if it makes you uncomfortable GOOD, if it get you riled up GOOD, if it makes you want to do something about it and possibly seek your elected representatives to deal with the issue GOOD & GOOD!!

Getting signatures, doing planned picketing, attempting convenient demonstrations does nothing to break you out of your apathy...
but removing you from regular routine such as driving to work or going on a vacation.. or whatever, will get you to listen that is guaranteed.

People, especially in the US seem to be inherently selfish and only care about something (regardless of whether it's positive or negative) if it inconvenience's them.

If you truly want a comfortable little protest in a corner that you can gawk at for less than a minute before that shit is out of sight & out of mind, then you're not looking for a healthy democracy...

 

[Slayven]

I'm not trying to weight of validity of the black communities plight in the history of this country. I'm weighing in on the effectiveness of blocking traffic in respects to affecting the desired change. All I've witnessed is people getting protesters getting run over and/or motorists getting attacked. So the message that is trying to be demonstrated for all to see is undermined imo.

 

[Messofanego]

Peoples right to protest should not be infringed upon. The blocking of highways is not something I'm a fan of. Let's not forget that some motorists get attacked by the protesters blocking traffic so yeah you get national attention, but maybe not the kind the protesters were going for. How effective has blocking traffic and attacking motorists been in gaining positive attention and support. When did the first amendment start covering destruction of property, assault, and battery?

Blocking a road doesn't result in any of that. Those things at the end you mention are already crimes. A protester would get arrested over destruction. But a peaceful protest that inconveniences people shouldn't be illegal. Civil right protests that resulted in positive changes involved such kinds of protests, as you can see from the images above.

 

[PAULINK]

The only thing I agree with is no protesting on high ways, it's very dangerous for both protestors and drivers.

 

[Averon]

"You can protest as much as you want...just as long as it is in an abandoned park miles off from any main roads or population centers or pretty much anywhere where you can get any decent attention."

That's pretty much what some are advocating for. Making protesting as ineffectual as possible.

 

[radios shipping overview]

Maybe protesters should just strap up and occupy a federal building somewhere? Then they'd be "protesting peacefully" in a way that's Republican-approved.

Oh, wait - if they're not white, they'll all be shot.

 

[SenorArdilla]

Candy-ass Americans who want stability over justice.

 

[Ogodei]

Thank you!

- The Ruth Family

Can someone explain this? It feels like one of those memes exclusive to GAF because i tried googling "Nana Ruth protests" and it took me back to a GAF thread from July.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

I'm not trying to weight of validity of the black communities plight in the history of this country.

You think supporting the republicans weaponizing the laws is not doing this? You are wrong.

I'm weighing in on the effectiveness of blocking traffic in respects to affecting the desired change. All I've witnessed is people getting protesters getting run over and/or motorists getting attacked. So the message that is trying to be demonstrated for all to see is undermined imo.

You think the people out there blocking freeways need your help and a lecture? You think after decades of being antagonized by the police they care that you think this is bad?

 

[Slayven]

 

[JZA]

Because the GOP's actual constituents protest in the form of political donations, they don't actually have to physically assemble.

 

[Shadynasty]

Slayven show me pictures of Selma protesters attacking motorists and I'll concede my point. Blocking traffic is civil disobedience. When it turns to destruction of property, assault, battery, rioting etc. This is where I have a problem. Hell I'll concede if you can make a good argument violence over non violence. Which one is more effective?

You think the people out there blocking freeways need your help and a lecture? You think after decades of being antagonized by the police they care that you think this is bad?

Don't try and get how I feel about shit twisted. I don't support weaponized police against protesters. I have no doubt the shit I witnessed in STL that they give any shits about what I or anybody think, but attacking vehicles and threatening motorists doesn't do much to shake the apathy of people.

 

[Pagusas]

Again, as has been repeated in this thread, the point is not about whether you gain positive or negative attention, it's simply about being heard because if you think this road hasn't been travelled before or other avenues haven't been explored then you're deluding yourself.

This is the most effective way of garnering any attention, if it makes you uncomfortable GOOD, if it get you riled up GOOD, if it makes you want to do something about it and possibly seek your elected representatives to deal with the issue GOOD & GOOD!!

It does do what you say, it gets people pissed off and calling their electorate asking to make blocking an interstate illegal. It makes people not give a damn about the issue and instead grow angry at the people protesting. The action becomes the story, not the issue.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

When it turns to destruction of property, assault, battery, rioting etc.

What does any of that have to do with the GOP's law?

It does do what you say, it gets people pissed off and calling their electorate asking to make blocking an interstate illegal.

That's already illegal. How are you sitting here telling us the the GOP giving police the right to remove protesters by any means necessary because they blocked the road is acceptable?

"By any means necessary"

Black people. The police.

I should be shocked but you know, par for course.

 

[Slayven]

Slayven show me pictures of Selma protesters attacking motorists and I'll concede my point. Blocking traffic is civil disobedience. When it turns to destruction of property, assault, battery, rioting etc. This is where I have a problem. Hell I'll concede if you can make a good argument violence over non violence. Which one is more effective?

Who is advocating for violence? No sane person would go out just to fuck shit up. Especially when you got folks thinking they are in Call of Duty

 

[Shadynasty]

Who is advocating for violence? No sane person would go out just to fuck shit up. Especially when you got folks thinking they are in Call of Duty

Some do advocate violence and despite what some say do just go out to fuck shit up. I don't care what puff pieces they put out on Ferguson. Everytime I drive through the area I grew up it's a complete shit hole and hasn't come close to recovering the way it should. This is my argument against vile shit like this.

What does any of that have to do with the GOP's law?

That one's easy. Because of these things less people give a shit about them being passed even though when the shoe's on the other foot it can be used to suppress them as well. I don't think something like this would be so easy pass without the violence we have seen in Ferguson, Baltimore etc. Which is why I maintain the believe that people using these tactics do nothing to advance their cause. I also advise anyone that's involved in any protests and activism to arm themselves for protection and please use proper gun safety.

 

[FStubbs]

If this happens, than people will full on revolt. Their heads will be on pikes.

I doubt it. The deplorables are way better armed. They'd love it if things got to that point so they'd have an excuse to kill minorities and liberals outright.

 

[Lime]

Just wait until Jeff fucking Sessions gets going. The worst is yet to come.

 

[Lil'DigiOp]

Some do advocate violence and despite what some say do just go out to fuck shit up. I don't care what puff pieces they put out on Ferguson. Everytime I drive through the area I grew up it's a complete shit hole and hasn't come close to recovering the way it should. This is my argument against vile shit like this.

They flipped a car and looted buildings because cops are killing unarmed citizens in the street.


The pictures I posted, they burned shit and flipped cars because their sports team lost.

Come the fuck on moe

 

[Slayven]

Some do advocate violence and despite what some say do just go out to fuck shit up. I don't care what puff pieces they put out on Ferguson. Everytime I drive through the area I grew up it's a complete shit hole and hasn't come close to recovering the way it should. This is my argument against vile shit like this.

Hundreds of protests happen every day, it is unfortunate people only focus on ones that go wrong. 70% percent of the adult population of Ferguson had some type of warrant on them. The people were oppressed in every sense of the word. Tone policing or concern trolling at this point, I don't care. At this point we will have to agree to disagree. Cause like Jesse says "Unless you have a critique for the oppression,don't come at us when we try to resist"

They flipped a car and looted buildings because cops are killing unarmed citizens in the street.


The pictures I posted, they burned shit and flipped cars because their sports team lost.

Come the fuck on moe

Remember the pumpkin fest

 

[Ogodei]

Some people just want to fuck shit up. That's just about true of every movement in history, before you get into the weird psychological stuff of mob mentality which turns normal people violent if you mix the right conditions in.

 

[gutter_trash]

Putin won

 

[Messofanego]

Can someone explain this? It feels like one of those memes exclusive to GAF because i tried googling "Nana Ruth protests" and it took me back to a GAF thread from July.

I covered the Nana Ruth meme a couple of pages ago.

 

[Lime]

New White House website:

 

[Gotdatmoney]

Some do advocate violence and despite what some say do just go out to fuck shit up. I don't care what puff pieces they put out on Ferguson. Everytime I drive through the area I grew up it's a complete shit hole and hasn't come close to recovering the way it should. This is my argument against vile shit like this.

How did the GOP giving police the ability to do whatever they want to protesters on a highway turn into complaining about rioting? Are you serious here? This is how I know you are not genuine about caring about black oppression. This shit has nothing (literally nothing) to do with the thread and you are making it an issue.

 

[More_Badass]

New White House website:

Yeah, this sounds scary in light of these proposes laws listed in this thread

Our job is not to make life more comfortable for the rioter, the looter, or the violent disrupter. Our job is to make life more comfortable for parents who want their kids to be able to walk the streets safely. Or the senior citizen waiting for a bus. Or the young child walking home from school.

Supporting law enforcement means supporting our citizens’ ability to protect themselves. We will uphold Americans’ Second Amendment rights at every level of our judicial system.

 

[PopeReal]

I hope more traffic is blocked than ever before.

I know you Nana Ruthers prefer order over justice, but too bad.

 

[Latvian Hitman]

I would be OK with banning "freeway blocking" protests. That's an unsafe practice, both for the protesters and the general public, and therefore, doesn't really fall in the realm of peaceful assembly.

But, making it legal for people to run protesters over? How...did....we....get....here?

It amazes me that the same group of people who fight so ardently for their 2nd amendment rights couldn't give less of a shit about the 1st amendment.

 

[adj_noun]

New White House website:

Ah, that feeling when a cold chill slowly crawls up your spine.

 

[PopeReal]

Lol what a joke this government is. Thank you so much Trump supporters and wise middle men. Good job.

 

[kess]

New White House website:

The beatings will continue until morale improves!

 

[Messofanego]

I would be OK with banning "freeway blocking" protests. That's an unsafe practice, both for the protesters and the general public, and therefore, doesn't really fall in the realm of peaceful assembly.

But, making it legal for people to run protesters over? How...did....we....get....here?

It amazes me that the same group of people who fight so ardently for their 2nd amendment rights couldn't give less of a shit about the 1st amendment.

You care about peaceful assembly and yet are ok with making freeway protests illegal. Hmm. You want to pull up some hard evidence about it being unsafe?

Read up on "unlawful assembly" and how that got abused, then got abolished.

As long as there is no intention of violence, freeway protests should be legal.

 

[Shadynasty]

Hundreds of protests happen every day, it is unfortunate people only focus on ones that go wrong. 70% percent of the adult population of Ferguson had some type of warrant on them. The people were oppressed in every sense of the word. Tone policing or concern trolling at this point, I don't care. At this point we will have to agree to disagree. Cause like Jesse says "Unless you have a critique for the oppression,don't come at us when we try to resist"


Remember the pumpkin fest

And that was a common practice in much of unincorporated STL and a policy that's no longer in effect, I feel that it could of been achieved without fucking up everything. I'm not "concern trolling", but I'm not going to act like I think some tactics used in these protests are okay with me. So yeah I'm okay with leaving it at that.

How did the GOP giving police the ability to do whatever they want to protesters on a highway turn into complaining about rioting? Are you serious here?

If you'd please read what I've posted you'll see that I'm not advocating for the police to have their way with protesters. I'm just making the point of GOP lawmakers using it as a reason and my opinion on violent protests and rioting and the effect it's had on my hometown.

You don't have to agree with me, just please don't put words in my mouth.

 

[Anjelus_]

It's always been a danger, for several years now, that being too liberal with the word "terrorism" would backfire. It can inevitably be used to redefine certain domestic annoyances/misdemeanors/crimes/.

"Economic terrorism" for protestors is a sign of things to come, I think.

 

[More_Badass]

Don't forget bullshit laws squarely aimed at making their opposition felons, and ineligible to vote.

This is perhaps the scariest and most insidious part. Damaging the right to protest and eliminating opposing votes in future elections at the same time

 

[Derwind]

It does do what you say, it gets people pissed off and calling their electorate asking to make blocking an interstate illegal. It makes people not give a damn about the issue and instead grow angry at the people protesting. The action becomes the story, not the issue.

The issue has a story only through that sort of action. It's about broadcasting the issue rather than making some people convenienced.

Anyone who didn't give a damn before isn't suddenly going to care if they weren't inconvenienced on their way to work. The point is, this was never about convincing the apathetic but to make sure the wider world cannot ignore the issue or the message that is being related to them.

If the elected official wants to make protesting illegal, you protest some more, making his/her indifference known to the world, air all that dirty laundry.

...

Also, I'd like to know what form of protest is acceptable for you? Is it something that doesn't step on any toes, ruffle any feather? I'm curious, what form of assembly is okay for you?

 

[Foffy]

Weaponizing and demonizing dissent is totally fascist playbooks.

And of course, it comes from the terrorists at the GOP who talk about freedoms....

 

[commedieu]

I would be OK with banning "freeway blocking" protests. That's an unsafe practice, both for the protesters and the general public, and therefore, doesn't really fall in the realm of peaceful assembly.

But, making it legal for people to run protesters over? How...did....we....get....here?

It amazes me that the same group of people who fight so ardently for their 2nd amendment rights couldn't give less of a shit about the 1st amendment.

Because people are OK with banning street blocking. So they indirectly support laws/the idea that make it OK to run over people as they fundamentally agree that protesting or blocking street is a negative thing. A person wanting to be absolved of running over a protestor, is in the same camp as the person that doesn't want people blocking streets.

So how did we get here?


http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=228760097

 

[devilhawk]

I'm pretty sure being a pedestrian on most freeways and interstates is illegal already and there is no need for additional laws. They just need to enforce the current one.

 

[PopeReal]

Too many Americans are racist idiots.

They get poorer but seeing a black man die or put in prison is worth it.

 

[Got]

I'm pretty sure being a pedestrian on most freeways and interstates is illegal already and there is no need for additional laws. They just need to enforce the current one.

which they do enforce generally. many people fail to understand that being arrested is also a function of protesting. people intend to disrupt in civil way and are willing to sacrifice their own self interests to prove a point. this is a good thing obviously but some in here seem to think otherwise.

 

[User Name Here]

The GOP hate dictatorships so much that they looped back into loving and wanting to be them.