Ferguson / Staten Island Decisions -- No Indictments

Shocking that the self-proclaimed board "libertarian," (quotation marks intended) is clueless about civil disobedience, and that he doesn't recognize it in action.

Nobody claimed that you have a "constitutional right," to block traffic (with your quotation marks or not).

But you are correct. Anyone blocking traffic as a form of protest is breaking a law and should be prepared to deal with the consequences. As I'd guess they are.

Your ideas about what are the acceptable and unacceptable forms of civil disobedience are noted (because it's apparently not about being noticed, it's about not being a "fucking asshole" and not pissing anyone off). And your opinion that they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law is noted, as well. Bull Conner couldn't have said it any better.

 

The reason I am not out personally protesting is that I don't see a coherent message among the people I have seen protesting, and to some degree it has largely turned into sheep walking around the city and chanting canned things at the cops, who stand there and take it. That doesn't mean that many of the protesters aren't sincere, and that they aren't protesting a legitimate police problem that actually exists. And I respect anyone who feels that way and is out there. I do think that we have a justice system that is inherently unfair to some people and more sympathetic to others.

I think that it begins with the police. That observation is not simply about Eric Garner -- although what happened to him, in particular, was horrific. He is just a symbol that brought a lot of people's frustrations with a systematic problem to a boil. We have a criminal justice process that is patently unfair in how it treats people. It's discriminatory, if not by design, then by how it works in practice.

Joe, I'll assume the newspaper thing was a quip, and that you weren't serious. I'll also assume you can tell the difference between that and civil disobedience designed to lodge a protest, and effect change, in favor of people's rights. We are not talking about things people want" We are talking about our guaranteed human rights, which are universal, and a segment of people who think that their rights are being denied.

This has nothing to do with heroin needles not being available to heroin addicts. I found that analogy ridiculous. Unless you are living under the delusion that the police are clairvoyant, and that Eddie the cop with his GED and his score on the police exam that got him into the academy, can (and should) predetermine who is guilty and who isn't. And you believe that the punishment for your predetermined guilt begins the minute a cop engages you. Because that is what you are saying when you say, "If you don't want a cop to do anything bad to you, don't be a criminal" (paraphrasing you).

Our criminal justice system, from the bottom to the top, is broken. Minorities and poor people are treated differently than whites and people in middle and upper class neighborhoods. At the extreme, that has ended up with some very sketchy incidents in the last year that created dead bodies and a lot of media attention.

This isn't something that popped up last year or in the last decade. It's always been that way. It's gotten better in some ways and things like camera phones and cable news and the internet will continue to help make it even better still. But it still sucks, because the system itself is broken. That is why I don't understand anyone who isn't sympathetic to what is underlying those protests. The only reason NOT to be sympathetic, that I can see, is that you aren't seeing the reality of a system that is unfair to a lot of people, or you are racist or discriminatory.

Also, who the cops arrest or choose not to arrest has nothing to do with any accused person's guilt or innocent -- when you are accused, you are not found guilty or innocent of anything until a process has been adhered to. And there is actually a presumption of innocence in our country. Don't you agree that the cops should be treating everyone equally in their interactions? That includes WHO they choose to interact with (they operate with discretion), not just how they do it. As someone who is afraid of being falsely accused, I like that system better than the delusional one you seem to be advocating -- "The cops only bother the criminals, so I am cool."

Also, being accused in the first place, is supposed to be something serious -- we devoted a chunk of the bill of rights to addressing the rights of the accused. Once the cops pick and choose who to arrest in the first place (and again, there is nothing fair and equal about this, in practice), you have prosecutors with the discretion to move forward, and how. Minorities and poor people (who can't afford an attorney) get a substantially different version of justice than someone who can pay their way out of harsher punishment -- or pay their way out entirely.