The right to protest (ie: issue in AZ)

[MooNiNite]

By & large, the police do exactly what their publicly elected politicians order them to do. If they are ordered to not arrest violent protestors in Berkley, they don't arrest violent protestors in Berkley. If they are ordered to give protestors room to burn and destroy businesses in Baltimore, they do so. If they are ordered to arrest someone for selling "loosies" on a street corner in NYC, they do it. A law which adds conspiracy to organize a riot to the "racketeering" umbrella won't have any impact on how police address individuals at a protest because that is not at all the scope or meaning of this proposed revision of the law in Arizona.

 

If one is troubled by the systemic behavior of law enforcement in one's vicinity, one should take a hard look at the policymakers calling the tune. (I say "systemic behavior" because individual bad actors don't necessarily reflect those policymakers but it is worth noting that the reaction to those breeches may be such a reflection...)

 

Im not just targeting the police. Im targeting the whole system that has been systematically intensifying.

 

Police officers are public servants. They certainly don't act the same way they used to.

 

If you want to dig deeper, which we certainly shouldn't, atleast not here, many laws in place arn't actually laws unless we prescribe to them. 

[Pilgrim]

This is what happens when a small part of the population believes and learns it can act like a small child throw a tantrum kicking and screaming until it gets it's way.

 

This country has encouraged the ongoing nonesence by not discouraging it strongly enough. Proposals like this are a weeklings answer. They erode our liberties, put too much power in the hands of the corrupt and only lead to a revolution in time.

Edited February 24, 2017 by Pilgrim

[Brian]

I`m no lawyer, but that bill is a little confusing to me.  If it really means that people who the state proves have "conspired to riot" are guilty, I`m all for it.  My concern is that it might be used to discourage Joe Schmo on the street from peacefully protesting.  The wording that seems ambiguous to me is in section B: "has reason to know."  Everyone knows, or has reason to know, that protests can turn violent.  This is true of pretty much all protests.  Sometimes it`s even violence instigated by people who have infiltrated a group from "the other side" -- or at least so I`ve heard.  There`s a potential for violence, for instance, at Trump rallies.  I have reason to know it.  

 

But if it`s really intended only to prosecute people who plan violence, I`m all for it.  Go Arizona!

 

A.  A person commits conspiracy if, with the intent to promote or aid the commission of an offense, such person agrees with one or more persons that at least one of them or another person will engage in conduct constituting the offense and one of the parties commits an overt act in furtherance of the offense, except that an overt act shall not be required if the object of the conspiracy was to commit any felony upon ON the person of another, or to commit an offense under section 13‑1508, or 13‑1704 OR 13‑2903.

B.  If a person guilty of conspiracy, as defined in subsection A of this section, knows or has reason to know that a person with whom such person conspires to commit an offense has conspired with another person or persons to commit the same offense, such person is guilty of conspiring to commit the offense with such other person or persons, whether or not such person knows their identity.

That's a legitimate concern, Luke! The law is clearly written, though, so advocacy groups like the ACLU and FreedomWatch should have the Courts on their side in the event of overreach.

[MooNiNite]

This is what happens when a small part of the population believes and learns it can act like a small child throw a tantrum kicking and screaming until it gets it's way.

 

This country has encouraged the ongoing nonesence by not discouraging it strongly enough. Proposals like this are a weeklings answer. They erode our liberties, put too much power in the hands of the corrupt and only lead to a revolution in time.

 

Who says it is a small part of the population?

 

Millions and millions of people supported the standing rock protesters, they might not have travelled to north dakota. The oppressive government and corruption is another issue, but many people simply cant go protest!! I myself included.

[MooNiNite]

By & large, the police do exactly what their publicly elected politicians order them to do. If they are ordered to not arrest violent protestors in Berkley, they don't arrest violent protestors in Berkley. If they are ordered to give protestors room to burn and destroy businesses in Baltimore, they do so. If they are ordered to arrest someone for selling "loosies" on a street corner in NYC, they do it. A law which adds conspiracy to organize a riot to the "racketeering" umbrella won't have any impact on how police address individuals at a protest because that is not at all the scope or meaning of this proposed revision of the law in Arizona.

 

If one is troubled by the systemic behavior of law enforcement in one's vicinity, one should take a hard look at the policymakers calling the tune. (I say "systemic behavior" because individual bad actors don't necessarily reflect those policymakers but it is worth noting that the reaction to those breeches may be such a reflection...)

 

It doesnt make the actions and responses by the police OK

[Pilgrim]

Who says it is a small part of the population?

 

Millions and millions of people supported the standing rock protesters, they might not have travelled to north dakota. The oppressive government and corruption is another issue, but many people simply cant go protest!! I myself included.

Seems like you are doing a fair job now.

 

Protesting solves nothing. If you want Government to listen then you have to do something on the scale of Ghandhi where the entire nation peacefully says no and simply refuses to participate in Government operating procedure.

 

Protests and riots are nothing but release valves for the pressure cooker, people are too busy being polarized to realize they are already manipulated.

 

America has already become something other than a Repesentative Republic by for and of the people that it was supposed to be and the idiots howling democracy this democracy that fail to realize this country was never meant to be one. Democracy is nothing more than the dishonest child of whore politicians and a purposely failed form of Government that serves to feed the fattest rats before they abandon the sinking ship as it slides into not only socialism but dictatorships.

 

People will never agree on anything long enough or in enough numbers to make a difference.

 

America is very young, those in charge, not the face puppets like Obama or Trump will ensure it survives to serve their agenda, best to honor the powers and give unto Cesar his due.

 

I am part Native American.

 

The failure of the Native Americans was not that they failed to protest a technologically superior invader, they protested plenty to the point where they were hurled onto reservations because they were so effective in war. They failed to honor the power and adapt to the reality of the situation.

 

The government holds the power over each of our lives. This is the truth might as well warm up to it make peace with that fact and do what can be done to go along with it and make our country a better place, protest and riots will only make matters worse as no Government ruled by the elite will permit challenge to it's power.

 

That little thing called insurrection will not be tolerated, believe it.

[windwalker]

 

 

The failure of the Native Americans was not that they failed to protest a technologically superior invader, they protested plenty to the point where they were hurled onto reservations because they were so effective in war. They failed to honor the power and adapt to the reality of the situation.

I think you might want to revisit that.  The failure was that they lost a war.  

Nothing wrong with that as long as your not on the losing side. 

[Marblehead]

I think you might want to revisit that.  The failure was that they lost a war.  

 

And the reason they lost is that they continued to fight amongst themselves instead of consolidating their powers and making war against their common enemy.

[windwalker]

I posted the way it is worded. Literally the way it is worded, as in the actual words of the Bill itself. Did your read it?

Kind of the problem many don't really read whats enacted nor, really understand the law....It's problematic as in the past 8yrs or so its been selectively enforced 

 

 

The event was partly put on by Don’t Shoot PDX, which is lead by Teressa Raiford and Black Lives Matter. Dozens of people showed up, some wearing gas masks and covering their faces with ski masks. The group didn’t get a permit for their march, so they were met with Portland Police officers in riot gear. http://theblacksphere.net/2017/02/hilarious-raw-video-notmypresidents-day-protestor-confronts-portland-riot-police/

 

 

Which as some found out doesn't end well when it is enforced according to rule of law. 

I would expect things to change as the "protesters" find out there's a "new sheriff "in town one that's not on their side.  Looks like one should get a permit, and understand what "protesting" means under the law.

Rubber bullets,,,mmmm gotta hurt 

 

What I found interesting and also kind of funny, was that the "protester" expected the "law" to protect her/him from getting hurt while allowing them to disrupt others and threaten the police.   Seems like the protester was counting on them just to stand there and take it......

 

They did try to allow the protester to go away,,,but then the monkey dance started,   "monkey" lost 

Edited February 25, 2017 by windwalker