Tuesday, November 22, 2011

HELP! HELP! I'M BEING REPRESSED!

So ten friends and I should be able to park our vehicles on the interstate, right? Park them in such away that you can't use it, put up signs that say "Occupy I-65" and the authorities should just let us as long as we're peaceful?  That seems to be the message I'm getting from everyone who is upset about the Occupy UC-Davis people getting pepper sprayed. 

When you break the law you get treated accordingly.  The lowest level of force the police can use is pepper spray (in most cases).  

Comparing this to the Civil Rights movement is thin, at best.  Sure, both groups broke the law.  Both went to jail (as they should have).  Jim Crow was wrong, and Civil Rights protesters were willing to go to jail in order to bring attention to that.  However, trespassing law is not wrong.  Nor are laws that say you cannot block the use of public roads and walkways without a permit to do so. 

If the OWS wants to bring attention to the problems they see with how Wall Street does business and how DC uses the power of regulation to run a protection racket then I am all for that.  But maybe, just maybe, they ought to take a long, hard look at the Tea Party, hire some of their organizers, and pull a few permits. 

Just as the Second Amendment does not confer on me the right to go into a park set up targets on the walkways for a little practice session, the First does not confer on anyone the right to block the walkways with their bodies in order to bring attention to their cause.

8 comments:

Borepatch said...

Actually, this sort of highway blockage happens all the time in Europe. I got caught in one of these once.

ASM826 said...

Linked back to you as a way to continue the discussion.

RobertM said...

BP-why does that not surprise me?

ASM826-Thank you. It is a discussion worth having. Any time the government is using force against its citizens I think it is a good thing to have people discussing it and putting it under scrutiny.

Old NFO said...

Good point, far as I'm concerned, they got off lucky...

greymobius said...

Maybe the police could spray them with that foam used for insulation in your wall joint & rafters or by shippers injected into boxes. They could then cart the whole stinky hippie mess encased in Styrofoam away with a forklift.

greymobius said...

Joists not joints - damned arthritic fingers...

Six said...

I dropped ASM826 a comment on this.
I agree with you with one proviso. The use of force actually began when the officers arrived and issued commands. presence/voice is actually the first and lowest force option on the use of foirce continuum. When that force option failed then ratcheting up the use of force scale was both justified and appropriate. This all hinges on whether or not the initial encounter and use of force was justified and clearly it was. The police are under no obligation to retreat when faced with resistance to lawful orders. They may ue that amount of force necessary to gain compliance and overcome the resistance. Command may then re-evaluate and re-consider before increasing the use of force but the actual use of force in this instance is absolutely justified, lawful and ethical.

RobertM said...

NFO-It could have been a lot nastier. I wouldn't agree that made it ok if the police action hadn't been justified. In this case I think it was, and it was fairly moderate.

greymobius-I saw a Discovery Channel show one time where the army was testing something like that for crowd control situations. Looked like it was more messy than it was worth.

Six-I agree, though I generally only consider 'force' to mean physical force.