Occupy Wallstreet people are Nucking Futs!

[silverjon]

It's a protest. If protestors just say "oh, okey dokey" when someone tells them to go home, why bother to show up in the first place?

A friend of mine did opt to relocate a demonstration she was organizing when the city informed her of the permits she'd be required to acquire before the event could go ahead on a public street, but that was because she felt that going ahead without the permits would distract from the event itself, which wasn't about defying the city. If there'd been time to fundraise the thousands of dollars needed, they'd have done that instead.

[GreenGoo]

The Chancellor called out the police who proceeded then to pepper spray the students. Not a CEO, but a university chancellor and our government.

I'm not really following your logic for that statement. If the kids were protesting police brutality or excessive force, you might have a point, or if the police were part of the 1%, you also might have a point.

In any case, as Silverjon said, this is a protest. I'm not sure how overstaying their welcome puts the pepper spraying of people sitting quietly in non-compliance into a gray area. Making things inconvenient is part of the MO of a protest.

Also, if you don't let people protest peacefully, then you limit their choices. I personally like them having additional choices, because when people feel they have no choice, they do crazy, destructive things, like rioting and destroying property, instead of just sitting on it.

Allowing peaceful (even if technically illegal) protesting is an important part of a free society. Again as Silverjon says, it's a protest. If officials could just press a button (in this case, a pepper spray button) and make it all go away, then the people feel they have even less of a voice than they already do, which makes people angry, and angry people do violent things. Letting them sit there quietly seems like a good compromise.

[naednek]

It's a protest. If protestors just say "oh, okey dokey" when someone tells them to go home, why bother to show up in the first place?

A friend of mine did opt to relocate a demonstration she was organizing when the city informed her of the permits she'd be required to acquire before the event could go ahead on a public street, but that was because she felt that going ahead without the permits would distract from the event itself, which wasn't about defying the city. If there'd been time to fundraise the thousands of dollars needed, they'd have done that instead.

then one should accept the consequences. There's rules for a reason.

[Isgrimnur]

It's a protest. If protestors just say "oh, okey dokey" when someone tells them to go home, why bother to show up in the first place?

A friend of mine did opt to relocate a demonstration she was organizing when the city informed her of the permits she'd be required to acquire before the event could go ahead on a public street, but that was because she felt that going ahead without the permits would distract from the event itself, which wasn't about defying the city. If there'd been time to fundraise the thousands of dollars needed, they'd have done that instead.

then one should accept the consequences. There's rules for a reason.

I agree. The whole point of civil disobedience is that you expect to face consequences for your actions.

But pepper spraying someone merely for noncompliance is an escalation of action that is not needed from law enforcement. If people won't move, you remove them bodily. If they were being aggressive and confrontational and represented a threat to the police or others, then sure, spray them down. But casually spraying down a line of sit-in protesters that aren't showing any aggressive action is over the line of a reasonable response.

[Anonymous Bosch]

But pepper spraying someone merely for noncompliance is an escalation of action that is not needed from law enforcement. If people won't move, you remove them bodily.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that using pepper spray typically makes the process of bodily removing people safer and easier for both the LEOs and the civilly disobedient folk. Ask yourself whether the civilly disobedient folk are more or less likely to put up a fight when being bodily removed without being pepper sprayed, or subsequent to being pepper sprayed? And assuming there is a greater likelihood of a physical altercation when LEOs attempt to bodily remove people without using pepper spray, the risk of serious injury also increases significantly for both parties involved. None of which necessarily means that the use of pepper spray in this particular case was actually warranted.

[GreenGoo]

They are less likely to put up a fight with a bullet in each of them too, but that doesn't mean you get to pre-emptively shoot them for what they might do in the future.

[Kraken]

They are less likely to put up a fight with a bullet in each of them too, but that doesn't mean you get to pre-emptively shoot them for what they might do in the future.

Spoilsport.

[Anonymous Bosch]

They are less likely to put up a fight with a bullet in each of them too, but that doesn't mean you get to pre-emptively shoot them for what they might do in the future.

As I said at the end of my prior post, I wasn't putting that forward as a justification for the use of pepper spray in that particular situation. I was simply pointing out that when attempting to bodily remove people, as Isgrimnur suggested, pepper spray typically makes that process safer for everyone involved. The same cannot be said of your ludicrous comparison of using pre-emptive lethal force.

[Isgrimnur]

I fail to see how inducing temporary blindness and extreme pain, likely to include thrashing about, being safer to remove than someone that is merely occupying somewhere with their presence. Why not just tranq them and remove the unconscious bodies? I still see it as an unnecessary escalation. There was no indication that these people were going to actively resist removal in any way.

If the attempt was made to remove them and they got aggressive, the pepper spray is still in reserve. But it should not be used as a matter of convenience.

[Pyperkub]

I would expect civil disobedience to get a civil response. I'm not sure spraying pepper spray in the students' faces is civil.

Of course, I also don't think linking arms is an aggressive response, but that's just me I guess.

Epic 4g/Tapatalk

[Anonymous Bosch]

I fail to see how inducing temporary blindness and extreme pain, likely to include thrashing about, being safer to remove than someone that is merely occupying somewhere with their presence.

Talk to anyone involved in law enforcement. The fact is, people tend to be far more compliant when they have a pressing need to wash burning capsaicin out of their eyes, nose, and throat. And the temporary blindness you mentioned allows LEOs to more easily restrain, or bodily remove, subjects. Again, I'm not saying that justifies the use of pepper spray at the U.C. Davis protest, but if you favour having LEOs bodily remove subjects, pepper spray absolutely makes that process safer for all concerned.

Why not just tranq them and remove the unconscious bodies?

Because, alas, we do not live in a Batman comic. Tranquilliser darts are not generally included in military or police less-than-lethal arsenals because no drug is yet known that would be quickly and reliably effective on humans without the risks of serious side effects or a deadly overdose. This means that effective use requires an estimate of the weight of the target to be able to determine how many darts can be used. Shooting too few would result in no effect whatsoever, while too many can kill the target.

[Combustible Lemur]

My cousin, who is squarely on the ows side had an interesting suggestion. Instead of doing anything proactive. Seal off The area and refuse to let people enter. The protesters are then forced to leave of their own accord with out food or facilities. Or subsist on their own waste.
Occupy occupy!

sent from incredible'

[msduncan]

Occupy Wall Street is now going to try to disrupt retailers tomorrow.

I'm sure if they were to succeed in stopping Black Friday and cause retailers financial problems that eventually result in layoffs of ordinary Americans they will send them a Sympathy card in the mail or something?

Filthy scabies ridden idiots.

[GreenGoo]

Occupy Wall Street is now going to try to disrupt retailers tomorrow.

I'm sure if they were to succeed in stopping Black Friday and cause retailers financial problems that eventually result in layoffs of ordinary Americans they will send them a Sympathy card in the mail or something?

Filthy scabies ridden idiots.

Lol. What does ordinary Americans mean?

[GreenGoo]

They are less likely to put up a fight with a bullet in each of them too, but that doesn't mean you get to pre-emptively shoot them for what they might do in the future.

As I said at the end of my prior post, I wasn't putting that forward as a justification for the use of pepper spray in that particular situation. I was simply pointing out that when attempting to bodily remove people, as Isgrimnur suggested, pepper spray typically makes that process safer for everyone involved. The same cannot be said of your ludicrous comparison of using pre-emptive lethal force.

My point is that you don't get to use violence pre-emptively for some non-existent imaginary violent resistance that hasn't occurred and which you have no compelling evidence will occur. Unless you're a minority report officer I guess.

And if you're not making a judgment as to whether pepper spray is warranted in this situation, then I fail to see anything useful in your post. As pepper spray has been involved in many deaths while in police custody, my bullet comparison, while extreme (and amusing, to me), is not ludicrous. Pepper spraying people can result in death, so I don't feel it's a viable option for "subduing" people who are sitting quietly on the ground.

[RunningMn9]

Occupy Wall Street is now going to try to disrupt retailers tomorrow.

I'm sure if they were to succeed in stopping Black Friday and cause retailers financial problems that eventually result in layoffs of ordinary Americans they will send them a Sympathy card in the mail or something?

Filthy scabies ridden idiots.

I don't doubt that a great many of these people are genuinely filthy, scabies ridden idiots. The problem that I have with the rest of your position is that it ignores whether or not their issue is legitimate or not. Your counter-argument isn't really about whether or not the Corporatization of your beloved country is good or bad. It simply appears to be that no one should fight against it because some people might lose their jobs. If Corporate America(tm) has put us on a path of transforming this country from the Land of Opportunity(tm) into the Land of "I Hope I Get A Meaningless Job In A Cube Farm Some Day For Mediocre Pay", then protecting them because their death will mean some of us getting laid off seems like a stupid counter-argument.

I would suspect that the OWS folks are fine with that. Lots of people are going to have to stop being Corporate indentured servants if they get their way (assuming they have a way, they may not). Bringing down Wal-Mart and somehow ushering in a return to smaller, local businesses would obviously result in the loss of a lot of shitty, low-paying Wal-Mart jobs. I think they desperately want the consequences you are threatening them with.

Now, you and I know that they have no chance of accomplishing their goals, while being comprised mostly of filthy, scabies ridden idiots. But they don't know that. And they aren't listening to you, because you are a tool of the System that they want to undo.

[msduncan]

Occupy Wall Street is now going to try to disrupt retailers tomorrow.

I'm sure if they were to succeed in stopping Black Friday and cause retailers financial problems that eventually result in layoffs of ordinary Americans they will send them a Sympathy card in the mail or something?

Filthy scabies ridden idiots.

Lol. What does ordinary Americans mean?

Americans that get off their ass, take a shower, and try to find jobs? Yeah...maybe that.

[msduncan]

Occupy Wall Street is now going to try to disrupt retailers tomorrow.

I'm sure if they were to succeed in stopping Black Friday and cause retailers financial problems that eventually result in layoffs of ordinary Americans they will send them a Sympathy card in the mail or something?

Filthy scabies ridden idiots.

I don't doubt that a great many of these people are genuinely filthy, scabies ridden idiots. The problem that I have with the rest of your position is that it ignores whether or not their issue is legitimate or not. Your counter-argument isn't really about whether or not the Corporatization of your beloved country is good or bad. It simply appears to be that no one should fight against it because some people might lose their jobs. If Corporate America(tm) has put us on a path of transforming this country from the Land of Opportunity(tm) into the Land of "I Hope I Get A Meaningless Job In A Cube Farm Some Day For Mediocre Pay", then protecting them because their death will mean some of us getting laid off seems like a stupid counter-argument.

I would suspect that the OWS folks are fine with that. Lots of people are going to have to stop being Corporate indentured servants if they get their way (assuming they have a way, they may not). Bringing down Wal-Mart and somehow ushering in a return to smaller, local businesses would obviously result in the loss of a lot of shitty, low-paying Wal-Mart jobs. I think they desperately want the consequences you are threatening them with.

Now, you and I know that they have no chance of accomplishing their goals, while being comprised mostly of filthy, scabies ridden idiots. But they don't know that. And they aren't listening to you, because you are a tool of the System that they want to undo.

You do realize that Corporations are owned by ordinary people, each of which gets to vote on their leadership right? I know video games started portraying corporations as super powerful evil entities about a decade ago. I forgive you for being a massive Deus Ex fan with little sense of reality, but I'm assuring you that corporations are not the evil world controlling entities that you may think they are.

[GreenGoo]

Occupy Wall Street is now going to try to disrupt retailers tomorrow.

I'm sure if they were to succeed in stopping Black Friday and cause retailers financial problems that eventually result in layoffs of ordinary Americans they will send them a Sympathy card in the mail or something?

Filthy scabies ridden idiots.

Lol. What does ordinary Americans mean?

Americans that get off their ass, take a shower, and try to find jobs? Yeah...maybe that.

Silly. You're only an ordinary American if you have a job?

Feel free to visit the economy downturn thread and voice your opinion there, too.

[GreenGoo]

I forgive you for being a massive Deus Ex fan with little sense of reality, but I'm assuring you that corporations are not the evil world controlling entities that you may think they are.

Somehow I don't think Rmn9 is going to feel very assured by your assurance. Given that you're a tool of said corporations. And clear, everyday evidence that you are in fact wrong doesn't help either, although evil is subjective, so I'm willing to give you that one, unless you're christian, because I'm fairly sure amoral fits into the christian definition of evil.

[msduncan]

Silly. You're only an ordinary American if you have a job?

Feel free to visit the economy downturn thread and voice your opinion there, too.

Americans that get off their ass, take a shower, and try to find jobs? Yeah...maybe that.

I can quote it for you again if it helps you read it better.

Or perhaps I should support some movement in your country trying to undermine your system even though I have absolutely no stake or connection to your country? Maybe that.

[GreenGoo]

Silly. You're only an ordinary American if you have a job?

Feel free to visit the economy downturn thread and voice your opinion there, too.

Americans that get off their ass, take a shower, and try to find jobs? Yeah...maybe that.

I can quote it for you again if it helps you read it better.

Or perhaps I should support some movement in your country trying to undermine your system even though I have absolutely no stake or connection to your country? Maybe that.

Go ahead. Post on all the message boards you want.

Oh, and in case you can't see past the borders of your country, this shit is happening in many 1st world countries, not just yours. There are actual protests in my city. How about you? Undermining is a bit of a reach though.

And for the record, I haven't had to physically move to look for a job in at least 10 years. Hell, I'm bidding on an rfp right now. Maybe it's different in your country, but my ass is in a comfy chair. It would actually be more work for me to protest than it is looking for a job.

[Combustible Lemur]

I would just note that the people running these corps are NOT ordinary Americans. Whether trust fund baby or workaholic prodigy, neither are ordinary. Unless of course you consider NFL players, or Hollywood a-listers, or tier 1 politicians also ordinary

sent from incredible'

[Kraken]

The Occupy movement is still only a few months old and genuinely grassroots, so of course it's unfocused and of questionable effectiveness. It's also facing a slowdown from winter weather, as many gleefully note. So the real question of its impact will become more obvious when numbers swell again in the spring, with several months of organization gone by and a presidential campaign in full swing.

Will they thrive on further acts of persecution, or will they crumble until widespread ridicule? Will they be bought out by billionaires like the tea party was, or will they somehow remain outside corporate politics, or will they be hijacked by the many fringe groups that are already drawn to them?

My opinion of the Occupiers will remain mixed until we see how some of these questions play out. I expect that to happen in the spring.

[Rip]

My cousin, who is squarely on the ows side had an interesting suggestion. Instead of doing anything proactive. Seal off The area and refuse to let people enter. The protesters are then forced to leave of their own accord with out food or facilities. Or subsist on their own waste.
Occupy occupy!

sent from incredible'

I was thinking the other day they should let a farmer move in with his manure spreader and let them have it. I am sure they will be running to find a shower somewhere.

[Combustible Lemur]

My cousin, who is squarely on the ows side had an interesting suggestion. Instead of doing anything proactive. Seal off The area and refuse to let people enter. The protesters are then forced to leave of their own accord with out food or facilities. Or subsist on their own waste.
Occupy occupy!

sent from incredible'

I was thinking the other day they should let a farmer move in with his manure spreader and let them have it. I am sure they will be running to find a shower somewhere.

Nah they would just use it to foothold their organic subsistance farm.

sent from incredible'

[LawBeefaroni]

You do realize that Corporations are owned by ordinary people, each of which gets to vote on their leadership right?

If you are talking about votes that come from owning shares, it's nice in theory but in reality it doesn't work that way. The only "ordinary" people who have any real voting power are guys like Carl Ichan.

[GreenGoo]

My opinion of the Occupiers will remain mixed until we see how some of these questions play out. I expect that to happen in the spring.

I am somewhat shocked this hasn't died already. At the beginning I thought it would last a weekend. A week, tops. The stamina of this protest is far greater than I expected.

Someone had quoted a 54% sympathy vote from the general population. I wonder where that number lies now. Is the movement gaining ground or losing it?

[msduncan]

The Occupy movement is still only a few months old and genuinely grassroots, so of course it's unfocused and of questionable effectiveness. It's also facing a slowdown from winter weather, as many gleefully note. So the real question of its impact will become more obvious when numbers swell again in the spring, with several months of organization gone by and a presidential campaign in full swing.

Will they thrive on further acts of persecution, or will they crumble until widespread ridicule? Will they be bought out by billionaires like the tea party was, or will they somehow remain outside corporate politics, or will they be hijacked by the many fringe groups that are already drawn to them?

My opinion of the Occupiers will remain mixed until we see how some of these questions play out. I expect that to happen in the spring.

No it's not genuinely grassroots. How the hell can you say that with a straight face?

It's supported by Anarchist groups (organized), labor (very organized), and other interest groups.

[Zarathud]

No it's not genuinely grassroots. How the hell can you say that with a straight face?

It's supported by Anarchist groups (organized), labor (very organized), and other interest groups.

That's just speculation, unlike how the Koch brothers & company organized the Tea Party groups.

Anarchists by definition can't organize their way to lunch, let alone a sustained action. Labor showed up late to the party. It's inconsistent to call OWS both a mob of unwashed lazy idiots and servants of a liberal conspiracy.

Angry unemployed youth with no prospects historically have been grassroots opponents of our friends and enemies. It's now our turn to figure out how to deal with them. The solution isn't pepper spray or police action -- it's restoring economic opportunity. Those who are busy working in good jobs rarely take to the streets.

[Rip]

ACORN

[silverjon]

I'd just like to point out that the idea that American protestors could conceivably stop a full force of American shoppers is HILARIOUS.

You've obviously never been to a sample sale.

[Zarathud]

The Black Friday Shoppers were ready for trouble. Don't stand between a woman and her X-Box games.

[GreenGoo]

I'd just like to point out that the idea that American protestors could conceivably stop a full force of American shoppers is HILARIOUS.

You've obviously never been to a sample sale.

Man, those unions and anarchists are farther reaching than I expected. How does the right wing explain the near simultaneous outbreak of protests across the world?

This protest is as grassroots as it gets. Literally. The idea that this is organized, funded or with ulterior motives is laughable.

The protestors don't even know what they want, specifically. Other than "change".

My god msd...I'm actually at a loss for words that anyone could call this a special interest group front with a straight face.

But now I understand your fury, as misguided and misplaced as it is, and why you believe "undermine" is appropriate.

[RunningMn9]

You do realize that Corporations are owned by ordinary people, each of which gets to vote on their leadership right? I know video games started portraying corporations as super powerful evil entities about a decade ago. I forgive you for being a massive Deus Ex fan with little sense of reality, but I'm assuring you that corporations are not the evil world controlling entities that you may think they are.

I "own" parts of several corporations. I have no say in choosing their leadership. My problem isn't having little sense of reality. My problem is having too much a sense of history. The ebb and flow of corporate power and the detrimental effect on society has been an issue for several hundred years. One time, there was even this one corporation that had the audacity to have the British Crown impose a tea tax on it's colonies. Perhaps you've heard of it?

This is not a new problem.

[Pyperkub]

I'm also pretty sure that the Enron shareholders didn't have much to say about the folks who were cooking the books there, esp as many of them (the shareholders) were employees who lost their retirement plan.

Epic 4g/Tapatalk

[Rip]

I'd just like to point out that the idea that American protestors could conceivably stop a full force of American shoppers is HILARIOUS.

You've obviously never been to a sample sale.

Man, those unions and anarchists are farther reaching than I expected. How does the right wing explain the near simultaneous outbreak of protests across the world?

This protest is as grassroots as it gets. Literally. The idea that this is organized, funded or with ulterior motives is laughable.

The protestors don't even know what they want, specifically. Other than "change".

My god msd...I'm actually at a loss for words that anyone could call this a special interest group front with a straight face.

But now I understand your fury, as misguided and misplaced as it is, and why you believe "undermine" is appropriate.

There are certainly plenty of grassroots people that want change. The problem is they are and will continue to be hijacked by special interest groups who convince them that there is some evil group of rich and powerful causing it all and raping the poor. Even though it is the people they point at who pay for most of the government spending while forgetting just how many pay nothing in income taxes while sucking from the system at every opportunity.

The reality is it is THE POLITICIANS that are a problem. The corps only do what politics enables them to.

[Combustible Lemur]

Corps do what they can get away with not what they are allowed to do. How ingrained is the in and outflow between politics and corps.


sent from incredible'

[RunningMn9]

The corps only do what politics enables them to.

The corps have bought and paid for the system. That's how you get hydraulic fracturing exempted from the Clean Water Act. That's how you get "too big to fail". That's how you get a prescription drug plan where you aren't allowed to use your buying power to negotiate better drug prices with the drug companies that wrote the legislation. That's how you get the government to impose a tea tax on the Colonies to help you unload excess inventory.

The problem isn't the corporations or the politicians. The problem is the People who have sat idly by and let it happen.

[Rip]

Corps do what they can get away with not what they are allowed to do. How ingrained is the in and outflow between politics and corps.


sent from incredible'

Is not what they get away with what they are allowed to do?

The corporations are enabled by the politicians who have sold out to the corporations.

In the end though who can we blame other than ourselves. It is high time we made the politicians answer to the voters instead of bowing at the altar of large corporations for the influence we allow their donations to achieve.

The way I see it the only way to reign in the corporations is to reign in the politicians who we allow to use the corporate dollar to brainwash us.