Jump to content
TAHAWK

Civil Protest, Policing, Moving Forward

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
On 6/22/2020 at 2:34 PM, Eagle1993 said:

Capital Hill Occupied Protest.  Not sure if it also means CHOP heads of their enemies and how many heads they have actually literally chopped off … you may have more info about that.  I have no idea why Seattle doesn't shut that

I guess people are now seeing the Wisconsin news about rioters roughing up and beating the legislator.  If these things accelerate or persist, there will be a reaction that could be bad, very bad.  The more violence, destruction and cultural purging that occurs, the greater the already growing risk of a group and their cause being discredited.  The more these acts erode rule of law, the less  indulgent the public will be.  Protesters are sowing the seeds of their own destruction.

 

it might be alleged by protesters that the feeling is that there is nothing to lose, they are losing lives. That may be true in a small statistical number of cases and nothing is diminished regarding need for some change.  But in thinking there is nothing to lose , the error of that reasoning is a grave one. 
 

Considering the accelerating popularity of stand your ground laws and vilification of police, and considering property losses by business owners from civil disturbances, and considering that now law makers are being attacked,  Storm clouds are building.  This could not only result in systemic tragedies, but a clampdown of civil rights.  Our well armed and polarized society could well flare up in places that will make the 60’s pale in comparison.
 

The United States does not need to become a parish state and cede positive influence to true authoritarian states.  We are resilient and have institutions of govt that are better than most.  Our youth will find many great lessons for civics, racial injustice and change. But if protestors (and counter protesters) are not careful, youth will take home a lot of horrifying memories beyond social justice. 

Edited by Troop75Eagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Troop75Eagle said:

Our youth will find many great lessons for civics, racial injustice and change. But if protestors (and counter protesters) are not careful, youth will take home a lot of horrifying memories beyond social justice. 

In his youth, Justice Clarence Thomas, one of our most conservative Supreme Court justices, participated in a riot.  Afterward, he was horrified at how he got caught up in the mob mentality.  He vowed to never let that happen again.

Our youth will each take home their own memories, and reach their own conclusions, about recent events.  As it should be.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any government employee who is proven to have violated civil rights should be removed from his or her government position and prosecuted. So cops should be fired and prosecuted if they violate someone's civil rights - when it is legally established that they are guilty of such actions = due process.

 The civil rights protected include the right to peacefully protest AND the right to be protected from criminal acts when the police have knowledge of those acts.

 When government, for reasons of hope for political gain, sloth, or incompetence allows mobs to riot, loot, injure and kill, it is time to change the government leaders by any means necessary and to invoke the natural right of self-defense.

 106 shot, including slain 3-year-old boy, in violent Chicago Father’s Day weekend.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

Any government employee who is proven to have violated civil rights should be removed from his or her government position and prosecuted. So cops should be fired and prosecuted if they violate someone's civil rights - when it is legally established that they are guilty of such actions = due process.

 The civil rights protected include the right to peacefully protest AND the right to be protected from criminal acts when the police have knowledge of those acts.

 When government, for reasons of hope for political gain, sloth, or incompetence allows mobs to riot, loot, injure and kill, it is time to change the government leaders by any means necessary and to invoke the natural right of self-defense.

 106 shot, including slain 3-year-old boy, in violent Chicago Father’s Day weekend.

You are correct in what you say.  But, When the protesters resort to violence, properties ruin livelihoods where losses are not covered by insurance, and begin to assault people...and the government fails to respond...the people are compelled to protect themselves.  This is one reason states have begun confirming and expanding castle doctrines along with stand your ground.  As I say , if governments are not oppressing but are CONSTRAINED from acting because of political ramifications, then the prospects are odious indeed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, TAHAWK said:

Any government employee who is proven to have violated civil rights should be removed from his or her government position and prosecuted. So cops should be fired and prosecuted if they violate someone's civil rights - when it is legally established that they are guilty of such actions = due process.

 The civil rights protected include the right to peacefully protest AND the right to be protected from criminal acts when the police have knowledge of those acts.

 When government, for reasons of hope for political gain, sloth, or incompetence allows mobs to riot, loot, injure and kill, it is time to change the government leaders by any means necessary and to invoke the natural right of self-defense.

  [emphasis added]

"But"?

Edited by TAHAWK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TAHAWK said:

by any means necessary

When people use the phrase, "by any means necessary", you can probably anticipate a totally unnecessary, under-disciplined, over-the-top response.  I prefer the best reasoned, most responsible, and least restrictive response possible under the circumstances.  Blunt force is usually not the best answer.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2020 at 2:34 PM, Eagle1993 said:

Capital Hill Occupied Protest.  Not sure if it also means CHOP heads of their enemies and how many heads they have actually literally chopped off … you may have more info about that.  I have no idea why Seattle doesn't shut that

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear and reason don’t go together for the average person. Shaken violently out of normal habit, predictability and expectation of social interaction...reason is swept away.  Even soldiers find this hard to overcome.  I did riot training with my MP unit years ago.  We were all friends. When you get a mob in front of you shrieking and pulling at sticks and shield, people become an enemy.  People got hurt.  How much more do so when an isolated person confronted with a pack or mob of people who do not appear to have your best interests and health in mind.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you get a mob in front of you shrieking and pulling at sticks and shield, people become an enemy."

They became the enemy when they began attacking.   Mobs are neither reasonable, peaceful, or constructive.

Whether the State can loose and bind
   In Heaven as well as on Earth:
If it be wiser to kill mankind
  Before or after the birth--
These are matters of high concern
   Where State-kept schoolmen are;
But Holy State (we have lived to learn)
    Endeth in Holy War.

Whether The People be led by The Lord,
    Or lured by the loudest throat:
If it be quicker to die by the sword
  Or cheaper to die by vote--
These are things we have dealt with once,
  (And they will not rise from their grave)
For Holy People, however it runs,
  Endeth in wholly Slave.

Whatsoever, for any cause,
    Seeketh to take or give
Power above or beyond the Laws,
    Suffer it not to live!
Holy State or Holy King--
   Or Holy People's Will--
Have no truck with the senseless thing.
   Order the guns and kill!
        Saying --after--me:--

Once there was The People--Terror gave it birth;
Once there was The People and it made a Hell of Earth
Earth arose and crushed it. Listen, 0 ye slain!
Once there was The People--it shall never be again!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2020 at 12:11 PM, Troop75Eagle said:

... I guess I’m an example of why clusters of like minded people in the same socioeconomic strata need to get out more. 

Yes. Getting out more is a very good idea. It's a hard sell to some parents, asking them to let their kids go join a carol sing in the most infamous part of town (thanks to Steven Bochco's Hill Street Blues).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Yes. Getting out more is a very good idea. It's a hard sell to some parents, asking them to let their kids go join a carol sing in the most infamous part of town (thanks to Steven Bochco's Hill Street Blues).

Let's be careful out there.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2020 at 12:00 PM, Sentinel947 said:

 The BLM group has some positions as Catholics that we cannot support in good faith, but like Scouting, where the BSA is just one element, the "official" BLM group is only part of a broader movement for racial justice.

 

I dunno.   I've reviewed their web page and I don't see anything on there my priest would object to.  I think the problem is simply that BLM's structure is just so fractured that they can't keep the people speaking out using their name on message.  That and the people getting interviewed sometimes get wrapped up in their emotions and start spouting their personal opinions instead of the organization's positions.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, elitts said:

I dunno.   I've reviewed their web page and I don't see anything on there my priest would object to.  I think the problem is simply that BLM's structure is just so fractured that they can't keep the people speaking out using their name on message.  That and the people getting interviewed sometimes get wrapped up in their emotions and start spouting their personal opinions instead of the organization's positions.

The "official" organizations about us page is here: https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

The Catholic church would object to "disrupting the nuclear family" as we consider it the most basic and important unit of society. BLM affirming transgender transitioning, which the church believes is harmful. 

Not sure about your priest, but the teachings of the Catholic church are clearly outlined in the Catechism, which can be found for free here. https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

That doesn't mean we can't make common cause with the BLM movement on areas of agreement, but it would preclude a blanket endorsement. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Sentinel947 said:

The "official" organizations about us page is here: https://blacklivesmatter.com/what-we-believe/

The Catholic church would object to "disrupting the nuclear family" as we consider it the most basic and important unit of society. BLM affirming transgender transitioning, which the church believes is harmful. 

Not sure about your priest, but the teachings of the Catholic church are clearly outlined in the Catechism, which can be found for free here. https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

That doesn't mean we can't make common cause with the BLM movement on areas of agreement, but it would preclude a blanket endorsement. 

I missed that "nuclear family" bit.  To my mind, that seems like the kind of line that gets thrown in because it sounds impressive, but isn't really descriptive of what someone is working for.  Kind of like how "Defund the police" actually means, "develop community response methods that don't require an armed officer whenever possible".

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Sentinel947 said:

That doesn't mean we can't make common cause with the BLM movement on areas of agreement, but it would preclude a blanket endorsement. 

Get serious.  Here's an interview with one of the founders of BLM.  At the 6 minute mark she talks about being a "trained Marxist."  The Postmodern progressive movement isn't interested in a diverse group of people singing scout vespers around the campfire.  

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...