Psychoward
Banned
Burning things yourself isn't going to be refunded by insurance?
If someone totaled my car right now I'd want a new one without paying of course but I wouldn't want that person sentenced to years in prison either lmao
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Why am I facing 75 years in prison? (Trump inauguration protesters)
- Thread starter emag
- Start date
Burning things yourself isn't going to be refunded by insurance?
If someone totaled my car right now I'd want a new one without paying of course but I wouldn't want that person sentenced to years in prison either lmao
Why? Did he or she say they were against those things?
Psychoward
Banned
no it's a nice false equivalence though, that anyone protesting a wanna-be fascist deadset on ruining the integrity of the office, the free press, healthcare and climate protection is clearly a complete left wing communist hippy
Frozenprince
Banned
People in here defending a mandatory decade long prison sentence for broken windows scare the crap out of me.
Because I don't find capitalism or taxes protest-worthy. But if I had to sacrifice my windows for someone to stay out of jail for some negligible shit, I'd do so.
FunkyPajamas
Member
That's odd. I don't know about years, but if someone committed a crime (destruction of property) I'd like that someone to "do the time" (fine or prison time depending on laws).
Now, let me clarify here: I'm not against protesting, I just think the whole "property worship/pathetic" comment is extreme. I wouldn't want anybody dead over property, but I sure like to own nice things without having to worry about those things being damaged/stolen in a riot (different from a protest).
No, which is why I included "etc" in there. Basically: if the poster thinks "worshipping" property is pathetic, then lead by example.
As a hypothetical, I dislike your opinions and think they're dangerous to the country and civilization at large and I come to your house/apartment, smash all your windows and set your car on fire (assuming you have one)... When the cops come and arrest me, I shouldn't face any jail time, right?
Actually a better metaphor would be if I couldn't get to your house, so I smash your neighbor's windows and burn their car because I disagree with you. Still no jail time right?
I'm not saying 10 years is necessarily a correct number, but I'm interested in what you think is a valid punishment for people destroying property because they disagree with you.
Psychoward
Banned
Not 10 years would be a good start.
Not arresting people who weren't proven guilty would be a good start.
"Worshiping" your property and putting it above people's rights is different than being in favor of destroying all your belongings.
Maybe he says.
Frozenprince
Banned
And yet, you can hold hostage a federal building with armed insurrection.
And not face a day in prison.
And not face a day in prison.
TheCochese
Banned
This scenario might hold relevance to the OP if you had mentioned the person five feet away from you who had nothing to do with it was also charged with the same thing for being in the same place.
FunkyPajamas
Member
Ugh. I didn't say or mean that. The comment was a broad generalization and so was mine.
Right. My point is: I'm fine with people protesting. I'm fine with rallies and closing roads, etc. I am not fine with my stuff being destroyed, as I am not part of the government or the political party, etc. I responded to your comment because it was specifically about private property. If someone wants to break stuff as a form of protest, I think it should be their own stuff. Burn a flag, etc. Don't break someone else's windows, car, etc.
elrechazado
Banned
Yep. One can be against police violence and aggressive prosecutorial overcharging and simultaneously against riot and destruction of property. Actions have consequences.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
They were also protesting the failure of the electoral collage, the failure of the media to accurately represent both candidates and the failure of a major political party to put its own needs behind those of the country and its citizens.
Jacksinthe
Banned
Lots of folks are viewing these events through the lens of today's escalation where just weeks ago we had the fascist group Antifa throwing M80s and Mortars into crowds if left, middle and right protesters.
If you don't know what a mortar firework is - it's those gigantic colorful bursts you see in the air at firework shows that twinkle, burn and can kill people. Just shy of 30 were thrown into groups in a single day and thank fuck nobody was killed.
If you support that kind of escalation, killing of people with ideological differences, you're part of the problem. The idiots that perpetrated the violence on Inauguration day are the same groups out to kill people today who dress like terrorists and start violence, beat people with bike locks, glass bottles and now have escalated to throwing explosives.
That's a problem that people need to recognize. Surely you aren't OK with the left doing those things, right? Because that's what it has escalated to.
I'm not suggesting attempted murder and breaking windows are the same thing but it's part of the same group of people who get more violent as time passes.
You don't assoaiate yourself with these terrorists and if you do and get caught by police running with that crowd, boo fucking hoo. We don't need wannabe murderer fascist groups running around not caring about who or what gets caught in their path.
There's a time and a place for violence but SPECIFIC types of violence. This shit isn't one of them.
A decade is harsh for destroying some property but you need to see how far that violence was stretched to now encompass throwing fucking explosives into crowds to murder people.
Something is going to give and this is just the start.
elrechazado
Banned
No arrested person is ever proven guilty. That's what a trial is for. It's literally impossible to prove someone guilty before arresting them.
I did, in the comment just before the one you quoted. I'm sorry I'm apparently wrong for the following counterarguments I've made in this thread that:
-They are not getting 75 years, that is a bargaining chip in a plea deal
-This is how the law worked before Trump was president.
-Trump's aggression to protestors Is still gross.
-Rioting is wrong.
-Murder is wrong.
I'm done with OT for awhile I think, there's no place for a moderate democrat here. Please, continue villifying people who hate Trump but also find this stuff distasteful. Shitting on moderates sure worked out great for us last year. Oh wait.
TheCochese
Banned
Wuthering_Heights
Banned
I know. It's hard to believe that anyone would defend the destruction of innocent peoples property, but.. Here we are.
Psychoward
Banned
Yeah. One can be against riots and destruction of property while not supporting overzealous sentencing that targets anyone in the area.. Actions should have proportional consequences.
Frozenprince
Banned
You arrest the one person that broke them not potentially then and 70 other people who were simply adjacent to them, threaten all of then with a lifetime in prison to force them to take plea deals wherein they still spend a decade in prison for something they probably had nothing directly to do with, because they could't afford legal help.
You don't beat and maim People then threaten them and destroy their lives because they were crime adjacent. That's ludicrous. That's made. Thats bit law and order that's the state usong it's iron grip to destroy you for something you werent even party too. Which is how police states start.
Psychoward
Banned
Agreed.
Did someone do that? If they did, I wholeheartedly disagree with them. All I have seen is people complaining that 10 years for breaking windows is ridiculous.
Frozenprince
Banned
Yeah.
This is how police states function.
You don't just get to throw people in prison for potentially maybe being associated with a group. A group, btw, that no matter how hard you spin and try too still isn't a bloody terror group. Protests become disorganized and people glom on to groups they dont even know anything about and are then thrown in a paddy wagon beaten and bloodied because the police open fire on them.
Generalpsyduck
Banned
Clear violation of the 1st admendment hopefully someone challenges it.
elrechazado
Banned
I just said I'm against overcharging, who are you arguing with? For those that want to fight it, Every case needs to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and every single one of these defendants will have counsel, so "couldn't afford legal help" is a total non sequitur.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
Fine the protesters $500 each - that covers the 100 grand in damages according to the article.
Why do these people need to be locked away for a year or more?
Except the article mentions how the person in question viewed the Women's March:
Probable Rioter said:
Something tells me they weren't exactly an innocent bystander if they viewed the Women's March in those terms. An actual peaceful protest that got positive news coverage... except from maybe Sean Hannity.
adamsappel
Member
So, when a sporting event celebration turns into overturning cars and such, it's cool to just arrest everyone who was on the street, right? I mean, you were as happy/unhappy about the outcome just the same as them, so you deserve the punishment, too, yes?
Frozenprince
Banned
Non sequiter? The police strong arming people who likely didn't have legal council present in the room or were detained without charge or justification other than "you were standing there" is a key aspect of this.
And yes, many will have public defenders, lawyers that are overworked and outnatched against the overwhelming mifht of the federal government and it's prosecutorial arm is certainly equitable.
this is a pretty stupid post and it's clear you don't have the range to talk about any sort of activism
One Eyed Willy
Member
..
Frozenprince
Banned
Aren't you a libertarian?
Shouldn't you be all about how this is an egregious overreach by the federal government? Given how you shpuld be aall about personal Indi accountability?
TheCochese
Banned
Sounds exactly what got us in this scenario: assumptions based on zero evidence.
Do better.
elrechazado
Banned
Because destruction of property and violence are crimes, not civil violations. Do young black men get to just pay a fine for their crimes then go on their way? Do undocumented immigrants? Why are you wanting to provide special protections to people committing crimes in one area but not in others? If these people committed a crime, it should be appropriately charged, not overcharged to try to elicit s plea bargain. If they didn't burn a car or throw a rock or swing a pipe, and the state can't prove it, toss the case, or don't take a plea and force the state to prove it. Not complicated.
elrechazado
Banned
I'm not clear on what you are attempting to say in the first paragraph, nor how it relates at all to what you quoted. People don't have their lawyers with them upon arrest.
I think I understand more than you. Again, these were anarchists. If we're gonna play the "founders are rolling in their graves" game, I think it's fair to point out that there's no way they'd be for rioting when fear of the rabble is a major component of our governmental structure.
Is such a discussion asinine when we're talking about unreasonable police action and excessive charges after the fact? Yeah, but when the majority of the first page is "this is literal fascism" and one-liners it's hard to see how I'm the one derailing this thread.
Perception is reality.
Control perception, you control reality.
The perception is: rioting douchebags burning things down and smashing windows is a bridge too far in protesting Trump. A guy who had been in office 2 minutes by that point (with a very small crowd in attendance I might add). No one inthe media was okay with the rioting. Maybe fringe GAF was cool with it, but by and in large, the country wasn't.
The Women's March was far more effective at getting minds ... Or at least not turning them off to the message being spoken (i.e. "Trump bad").
People think "libertarian" means "All government is bad", and that's just not the case. Some government is needed to keep society from devolving into the Middle Ages.
Absolutely I'm against government overreach. But I'm also about personal liberties like the ability to have a store on a busy street and expect that the police will keep it safe from roving gangs of people with pitchforks and torches.
And if this person was actually an innocent bystander that was arrested for being at the wrong place at the wrong time, then that's what a trial is for. Truth will out.
TheCochese
Banned
Because all trials follow all evidence and everyone convicted of a crime actually did it.
Of all places, I would think GAF would recognize this as folly.
big, if true.
Acerac
Banned
The terrifying part to me is that they are on the less extreme end of the spectrum of such viewpoints.
The op-ed argues (unsurprisngly) that the Women's March was pointless. He's advocating violent resistance because he thinks peaceful protest is ineffectual, which is why I initially said that he doesn't seem to actually believe in civil disobedience, which pretty much is defined by working in the constraints of the legal framework rather than arguing against the state itself.
did you read the article??????????
elrechazado
Banned
Ok, so we are now reductio ad absurdem to "the system is flawed so..." What? Nobody should ever be charged with a crime again. Got it. Why do you think pointing out the flaws in the justice system is a counter argument?
LinkAndEpona
Banned
At least you guys are finally past incessantly bullshitting that these protests were 'peaceful'
If your business was looted and destroyed, vehicles torched, and own person harmed by lunatics that only want anarchy then you would likely be pissed off about it.
TheCochese
Banned
I'm absolutely shocked that you got that out of my post.
Shocked.
Perhaps, just perhaps, and don't think I'm crazy here, we not have absurd potential penalties for relatively inoffensive shit? Or is having such life-changing penalties to elicit pleas the goal?
Hmmm.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Every single time whenever the conversation of protests comes up there's always that one guy who makes the token "violence" argument. Every. Single. Time.
And it's bullshit. Our freaking president incites violence at his rallies multiple times. The NRA made a commercial encouraging violence against black people. And multiple states are trying to pass protest laws that put peaceful protestors away. There's always going to be assholes who incite riots, and they should be held accountable. Even then 75 years is fucking ridiculous for fucking property damage. That's the kind of sentence that's for murder or homicide. But considering our prison system is shit I'm not surprised.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked