Los Angeles gets tough with political protesters

protesting is a waste of time, the orginals of living is the only way to go, The real qustion you must ask yourselves (is there a better to live) ? Your born into a way to live but do you really know anything about it?

If you notice, this is in CA.. Who would wanna live in that state? I wish a quake would separate it from the us (not capitalized on purpose), and we can watch it drift out to sea. (sorry for you who live there)


Deebo

Originally posted by CIGGSofWAR
protesting is a waste of time, the orginals of living is the only way to go, The real qustion you must ask yourselves (is there a better to live) ? Your born into a way to live but do you really know anything about it?

Sir.. People are trying to live, without INTERFERENCE. If we were to actually just "live" we would be breaking "laws".

Deebo

reply to post by Deebo


California is awesome, I wouldn't live anywhere else on earth. Don't worry we're not going to get split into the ocean we're just moving to Alaska.

Really tough California has some of the most fertile and best agricultural land in the world, a huge economy and is an important part of the US economy. Instead of saying piss off maybe its best to try to assist?

Other than a few really stupid things like high taxes and restrictive gun laws and one large city prosecuting protesters there are a lot of protected civil liberties. Do you think San Francisco would prosecute protesters as much? Or even Sacramento? I don't think so.

Anyway nobody in California like LA anyway...

reply to post by DimensionalDetective


Hehe, this reminds me of the info wars resistance, against Tierney as some people have commented, I'm willing to say no, and keep my liberty. all that are willing to say no; are the resistance... Expect us.

The police state will do what ever it must to protect its self.
The people will have to suffer to eradiate it now.
The only way is revolution.
There is NO peaceful solution to americas(and allied countries) problems.
The rich elite have got to go.A different way of measuring worth instituted.
The corporate structures must be torn down.
If we do not rid the world of corporate structure, then the corporations will eventually rule the world.
This IS the NWO>
We will have corporations running everything with very little goverment oversight or power to intervene.
That is the way of it unless we stop it from comming to pass.
Whar part of this dont you get?

Originally posted by pcrobotwolf
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
. I wonder how many of them are going to pay it back or become citizens after they get a degree.

Yeah, like O. Soltero, J. Amores, D. Cruz, Jose Torre, O. Aceves, Delgado Arroyo, and K. Corzine. All dreamers. All dead. All heroes who paid back the ultimate price. All who took an oath to support and defend the Constitution, and did so with their lives, not chicken-poop words. And those 7 are just those from the last two months.

reply to post by Wyn Hawks


Yes, in my land people should be allowed to drive as fast and recklessly as they want. Natural selection will take its course and those people will be gone soon enough.

In my land, the government would regulate certain things for consistency, like truth in advertising and labeling to ensure product quality, and eliminate all the "exceptions" of things that do not have to go on ingredient lists. Instead of the crooked system we have now, it would be a system that actually worked.

The government would eliminate violent threats from society, by being on patrol and be active in our streets and neighborhoods. They would be on foot in the high crime areas as a deterrent and able to respond in seconds, instead of hiding in the bushes to speedtrap speeders in a school zone. (I have accosted a cop for that very thing. He was actually hidden among bushes in a school zone, instead of being on the street as a deterrent!)

In my land the government would be a servant of the people, not a shephard of it. We are not sheep, and we do not need to be controlled. We are in fact, responsible, independent, individual beings. We should be able to choose our own actions. The majority of drug laws, seatbelt laws, permits, and codes need to go away. Mandatory sentencing needs to go away. Power needs to be returned to the states, counties, and cities. Power needs to be returned to judges and juries instead of legislators. Cops need to be taken off ridiculous task forces and put on the streets.

Some people need the protection of police, and that is fine, we need the police close by and willing and able to come to those people's defense. Some people don't need the protection of police, so the police should not be wasting their time patrolling my street. We take care of our own on my street, in fact in my whole section of the community.

We need to stop catering to the small percentage of people and painting civilization with the broad brush of those select few that make the most noise. We need to stop educating our kids at the level that benefits the below average. We need to demand more self-responsibility from 2nd grade to old age. We need to stop lowering the standards and instead raise the standards. We need to stop rewarding laziness, whining, and excuse making, and instead reward hard work and innovation.

It is impossible to please everyone, and there will always be disagreement, and somebody will always be left out or disappointed, but we cannot tailor the whole country to pacify the whiners. We need to tailor the whole country for excellence, and then deal with the criminal elements, lazy elements, and specific events that lead to trouble.

My favorite new country song, but it probably won't get nationwide play.

My take on it?
Slippery slope.

They create these laws for further interpretation. I'm a Tea Party guy. If w assembled to protest a law, a bill, obamacare, a "cop" or lawmaker could interpret it as rioting.
Lock us all up.

Speak out at a townhall meeting?
Rioting.
Lock 'em up!

Carry a sign? Have a bumper-sticker?
Inciting a riot.
Lock 'em up.

Post on a website?

Having read the article and the op, there are a few things that can be stated.
In the past LA has endured a lot of damages and problems due to protests and riots. While the ability to protest is guaranteed under the constitution of the United States of America, however, there has to be responsibilities on the part of the protestors that needs to be followed. The primary one being that they have to ensure that everyone involved is there to do so peacefully, not riot or cause problems. That means that they can not block entrances to buildings, can not impede traffic or do anything that would endanger the public safety and well being to life and property. As this has not been the case in the past, it falls to the government to lay down guidelines and rules for when and where protestors may engage in that activity. Even though these protests may be peaceful, the reality is that a few has ruined it for the masses in LA, and they have had to enact different laws and rules, to govern those with mindful of the rights of all people living in the LA region.
So ultimately it all boils down to the following to determine if this is right or wrong, should be based off of the following:
Is it easy to get the permits to hold a protest/rally to point out the grievances against the local government, or is it tied up in red tape where it is very difficult?
And were the protestors putting any life, limb or property in danger with their actions? Were they being peaceful, or was there a chance that the protest that they were doing, would end up turning into a riot?
Those ultimately have to be the questions that would need to be answered. If the answers were yes to any of those three questions, then the government and the attorney is correct in their aspect and actions, if it is no, then it is indeed a violation of federal law and a violation of the rights guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States of America.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
My favorite new country song, but it probably won't get nationwide play.

It's in the top twenty videos so it gets nationwide play.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Wyn Hawks

 

Yes, in my land people should be allowed to drive as fast and recklessly as they want. Natural selection will take its course and those people will be gone soon enough.

...what about the people they kill?... they dont count in your fantasy land?...

...what would your response be if a drunken speeder killed your spouse and kids?... you'd kill their spouse and kids?... would you do nothing cuz it was just natural selection that they were murdered by a drunk whom you gave the right to endanger everyone on the highway?...

...your fantasy land would be littered with corpses left to rot where they fell...

Originally posted by getreadyalready
In my land, the government would regulate certain things for consistency, like truth in advertising and labeling to ensure product quality, and eliminate all the "exceptions" of things that do not have to go on ingredient lists. Instead of the crooked system we have now, it would be a system that actually worked.

...whoa, bubba, whoa-oh-oh!... thats goes against your natural selection hooey...

Originally posted by getreadyalready
The government would eliminate violent threats from society, by being on patrol and be active in our streets and neighborhoods.

...so does that one, as do the rest of the ideas you brought up... some of them were very good ideas but they contradicted your primary - natural selection...

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Some people don't need the protection of police, so the police should not be wasting their time patrolling my street. We take care of our own on my street, in fact in my whole section of the community.

...thats pure dee bs, lmao... if a crime is committed, you and neighbors do NOT deliver vigilante justice nor do you just write it off to natural selection... you call the cops, just like everyone else... you go through the courts, just like everyone else... if the contrary was true, your hood would be all over the news and that hasnt happened cuz you're just pullin my leg, you cute little thang...

reply to post by Wyn Hawks


I agree with the point Wyn has made but I would like to add that I really do enjoy the idea of natural law / natural selection to take its course.

If we live like that eventually the world would level out and clean up on its own GetReady is right! I think nobody is willing to take the several centuries of pure hell that it would require though. So we would do what we have always done: We will establish a government and laws to keep us safe. And if most of human history is an indication 99% of those laws and governments we allow to escape anarchy are controlling, self serving, and corrupt.

So yes, Natural law would work! But we won't stand for the hell it takes to make it work and there is a high probability we would be worse off than we are now.

Originally posted by Deebo

Originally posted by CIGGSofWAR
protesting is a waste of time, the orginals of living is the only way to go, The real qustion you must ask yourselves (is there a better to live) ? Your born into a way to live but do you really know anything about it?

Sir.. People are trying to live, without INTERFERENCE. If we were to actually just "live" we would be breaking "laws".

Deebo

edit on 12-2-2011 by Deebo because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-2-2011 by Deebo because: to add

edit on 12-2-2011 by Deebo because: (no reason given)

(without INTERFERENCE, just "live") This the point I'm referencing Yes I concur that your not, Complaining is protesting, which really is a waste of time. (The orginal way to live) how does one know what that is? If you have never lived it. The question than becomes how do you want to live, what is missing or taken away that allows living as in the ability to live. There is existing and than there is living. What changes are required for living, what written act in words that allow living.

People or groups are behaving igorant or in ignorances. What will bring about change or changes.What are the effective means to bring change or changes?

reply to post by Wyn Hawks


I might be exaggerating a little, but not as much as you would think. My "hood" wouldn't be all over the news if we were good enough to not get caught, and crime is virtually non-existent in my neighborhood, so there is not much cause for vigilante justice. It is fairly obvious that this isn't a good neighborhood to mess with.

You did bust me on the contradictions, but I didn't say "only" natural selection. I think natural selection should be a little more common, and it would clear some things up. We go to a lot of effort and expense to protect folks that probably shouldn't be breeding anyway. I don't want to turn entirely to the law of the jungle, but I don't think we should go as far as we do to protect dummies from themselves. That applies even to my neighborhood that I am so proud of.

So, you're right to an extent, on a place like ATS, I tend to take the hardline just to make a point, but obviously there has to be exceptions to make it work in the real world.

reply to post by buster2010


Thanks, that is great news. They are not playing it on my local country stations. I heard it on a Red Dirt Radio internet station, and I saw the video on GAC, but GAC isn't on every cable provider, and it isn't CMT, so I figured it was kind of an obscure song. I hope you are right and it gets played on some Top 40 stations.