Protest used to mean something in this country!

a reply to: boohoo

I absolutely agree with your opinion. One thing you said though bears a point being made...

"If you know you're going to get shot with rubber bullets and bean bag shotguns...."

At Kent State, the National Guard used LIVE BULLETS and shot 4 of us DEAD. We didnt think they'd shoot to KILL US! Murdered. By order of the President. We were protesting...we were kids in college.

Shot and killed DEAD by the government. What if that happend last night in Ferguson? If the police were orderd to kill?

Its happened before...to kids...protesting.

Thank you so much for your reply! Peace MS

I think you've all brought up some very interesting points and counterpoints.

But the fact remains that the people's right to a redress is being suppressed.

We've got "free speech zones", a concept so Orwellian and terrifying..

a reply to: Grifter42

I'd say that it's not just bred out. It's viewed with acrimony and routinely met with vitriol. It's really quite startling to realize that people will scream over assuring the protections of one right within the Bill of Rights and then, turn a nasty eye and tongue towards yet another--the First Amendment. It's downright disturbing.

Just because one person chooses to actively demand redress of their grievances of the government in a peaceable fashion, it does not warrant vitriol. I've actually been sickened by the level of vitriol against all protesters that I've seen here on these boards without any distinguishing between those who riot and those who protest peaceably being made. You'll not see me defending the taking of a bridge or stopping up of a freeway because of the inherent dangers of both and I sure as hell don't agree with individuals who choose to burn others' property. However, peaceable protest I totally respect and I fully support an individual's First Amendment rights even if I may disagree with their cause.

The vitriol against protest in general is disgusting. I've seen people rationalizing the injury to protesters as if somehow actually going out to demand that redress warrants a baton, pepper spray or being hit with rubber bullets. I don't, however, support illegal activity that does harm to another. Although the Weather Underground's only fatalities, iirc, were themselves in a failed bomb making attempt, they really just got lucky. The abduction of Patty Hearst? Wholly illegal, do not support and all the rest follow suit.

I do not support illegality, period. I support First Amendment rights and I heavily question how those rights are dealt with in this country. I think it's frequently met with a boot to the face regardless if one is peaceable and one isn't. That has to stop but with the kind of tarnishing of the whole concept, it's never going to because you have plenty of sideliners dishing out hate and toxicity that basically supports the treatments.

a reply to: boohoo

Some did learn actually. Here's footage of Occupy Oakland protesters attempting to form a shield bearing phalanx out of makeshift shields to march forward against rubber bullets being fired upon them. Problem was they still get scattered due to the gas but hey, they tried.



I think the problem is that a lot of people do go down to join a protest that may have never felt motivated to actually protest anything before. They don't realize what it can quickly become. If we're going to be a country that tosses flash bangs and tear gas at our protesters, uses batons, LRADs, rubber bullets and more, then we should probably teach our children in the schools that you have the right to peaceably protest in this country but that does not guarantee that the local PD won't beat your butt for it.

It's like the courts finding the forced march of Ferguson protesters to be "unconstitutional". Just the forced march--everything else was done apparently was.

I don't know. I live in France. I am not working tomorrow because I am on strike. I don't even know why. I think they want more money, but there is no more money. I'm giving in to peer pressure.
I must say though, the people here keep a firm grip on government.

originally posted by: WhiteAlice
Some did learn actually. Here's footage of Occupy Oakland protesters attempting to form a shield bearing phalanx out of makeshift shields to march forward against rubber bullets being fired upon them. Problem was they still get scattered due to the gas but hey, they tried.

I'll admit, I didn't know they tried, good on them.

However, THIS image is a much closer to a phalanx and I've NEVER seen it done this way, at any, American protest (note that nearly everyone in the crowd is also wearning civilian grade respirators):


Here is the American version, cut-up Rubbermaid trash cans, unprotected neck gaiter and hoodies:


When it comes to effective protesting and HOLDING ground against LEO's Americans don't know squat!

But lets not get ahead of ourselves and say that they "did learn" because I'd argue they didn't. Respirators, Goggles and Safety Helemts, in that order, should be mandatory kit for modern protests. As for the make shift shields, intended to stop rubber bullets and bean bag rounds, in the case of the video, they are irrelevant, because first the shields are too small and second a similar effect could have been gained by duct-taping padding all over their bodies (phone books maybe). Based on what I recommended protesters use, for protective gear, tear gas and flash bangs should be less effective at dispersing crowds, than bean bag rounds or rubber bullets.

I understand when people run from the bean bag rounds and rubber bullets, but ALL protestors should learn to hold their ground for flash bangs and tear gas, which requires, AT MINIMUM, bringing Respirators and Goggles with you to the protests (ear protection and safety helmets as well).

Look at these guys in Keiv, they know exactly what they are doing, they are even wearing construction hard-hats, for crying out loud:

rt.com...

We need more of this:


and much, MUCH, less of this:

a reply to: boohoo

Yep, the remark about them still getting scattered by gas was actually specifically pointing towards that taking the step to shield but not getting goggles or a gas mask as well. I sometimes wonder if it's the nature of Americans to, should they protest and get hit by gas, to talk about how they got gassed as a kind of war tale. It's a lot less exciting sounding than "I got hit by gas but it didn't bother me as I was wearing goggles and a gas mask".

I'm sure that sounds a bit snarky but that's also why I cushion the snark with the fact that maybe people going to protest are doing it for the first time in their lives. Those kind of motivations can be very impromptu and running out to go buy either might not be even in their consideration. However, you're right about the crew with the shields. Masks and goggles would've probably been wise, too, if they didn't want to be scattered to the four winds.

I follow protests around the world and you're right. We're not very good at it. Is it because getting hit with something is an exciting tale as an American penchant or is it that people are taught in schools about how protests did this or that in the 60's as if the tools to disperse somehow no longer exist? I don't know the answer to that one. However, I am all for teaching kids the truth about our First Amendment. They can't force you to march but they can beat you with a baton and gas you for utilizing your First Amendment rights.

That seems to be how the right to peaceably assemble and demand redress seems to be working at least over the last 50+ years. Might as well teach the kids the facts for a change instead of them being deluded in thinking otherwise and being shocked to hell and back when it gets ugly. We could at least be honest.

I'm kinda surprised this topic went dead. There is plenty of protests going on right now, you'd think this would be a "hot" topic.