Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 So in a recent conversation with liberal friend the outrage of the day was the fact that someone wants to hold protesters, or rioters as I call them, responsible for financial losses of the people that they have inconvenienced or damaged during the protest. Any of you members of loyal opposition find this to be a thing? Personally I'd have no problem at all holding these people liable for financial damages. And that goes for protesters on either side of an issue. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 I'd say if protesters smash windows, destroy cars, light fires, and prevent you from working due to blocking freeways or mass transit, hell yes they should be liable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Because so many protests today are actually excuses for rioting, arson, looting and vandalism there should be a law any protestor cannot cover their face. Any time you see "protestors" who have their faces covered it is a good bet they are up to no good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 So in a recent conversation with liberal friend the outrage of the day was the fact that someone wants to hold protesters, or rioters as I call them, responsible for financial losses of the people that they have inconvenienced or damaged during the protest. Any of you members of loyal opposition find this to be a thing? Personally I'd have no problem at all holding these people liable for financial damages. And that goes for protesters on either side of an issue. WSS I am for protesting but against rioters, destroying stuff to prove a points usually just makes people hate you or your objective. Destroying private\public property should carry a penalty\fine and businesses or homes should be compensated for any loss paid by the rioter(s). But I heard someone talking that if they saw protesters in a street they should be able to run them over with their car.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Stuart Too lazy right now to look it up right now, but yes, this was a bill proposed by two politicians from Arizona I believe. The only thing seen as a problem is that even those that are not destroying shit will also be held accountable. They are accessories. Fuck em, hold them all accountable. Whoever is paying these protesters to protest can afford to bail them out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Of course you shouldn't be able to run them over. But I imagine you would feel like it Especially if you were stuck in traffic for hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 I am for protesting but against rioters, destroying stuff to prove a points usually just makes people hate you or your objective. Destroying private\public property should carry a penalty\fine and businesses or homes should be compensated for any loss paid by the rioter(s). But I heard someone talking that if they saw protesters in a street they should be able to run them over with their car.... Well as much fun as that might be I couldn't support that. Besides actual destruction of property I'm thinking along the lines of blocking traffic so that people can't get to work ambulances or EMS can't get through school buses etcetera etcetera. I didn't bring up this facet with my friend like I was thinking what if it were the Westboro Baptist Church or anti-abortion demonstrators blocking the entrance to a clinic. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Well as much fun as that might be I couldn't support that. Besides actual destruction of property I'm thinking along the lines of blocking traffic so that people can't get to work ambulances or EMS can't get through school buses etcetera etcetera. I didn't bring up this facet with my friend like I was thinking what if it were the Westboro Baptist Church or anti-abortion demonstrators blocking the entrance to a clinic. WSS Emergency vehicles(fire, ems, police, etc) should not be obstructed, but blocking traffic is an expected side effect of large groups protesting. If you have a 100 people protesting its easy to say stay off the streets, but 1000, 2000, more it gets hard for them to voice their opinion and peacefully(not riot) gather without blocking traffic in areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Emergency vehicles(fire, ems, police, etc) should not be obstructed, but blocking traffic is an expected side effect of large groups protesting. If you have a 100 people protesting its easy to say stay off the streets, but 1000, 2000, more it gets hard for them to voice their opinion and peacefully(not riot) gather without blocking traffic in areas. So I assume you are gainfully employed and would have no problem if I parked in front of your garage door so you couldn't go to work. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 So I assume you are gainfully employed and would have no problem if I parked in front of your garage door so you couldn't go to work. WSS I can work from home if need be. Also how do you equate you blocking my garage door and a group of protestors blocking a road? If protestors block the road preventing me from getting to work, I would first try to find an alternate route, if that was unavailable, I would second contact my boss and see what I should do(if no one can get there they would likely have to close for the day). Now I work for a large company, and they would likely have contingency plans to continue working if people are protesting and blocking the entrance\road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 How do I equip blocking your free access to the world with a group of protesters blocking my free access to the world? Gee whiz think about it. So because you can work from home and your boss might not care if you blew the day off that goes for everybody right? So I'm assuming if the Westboro Baptist Church blocked the road in front of your house you're okay with it and especially if they needed a few days or weeks to make their point. I'm guessing not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 I wholly agree with this. Just remember it goes both ways. If theres ever a mass protest atbthe akron pp and they block market st traffic after work, they better have it out of their system by the time chief inspector comes through. Blm, planned parenthood i dont give a damn what ur protesting dont block my path home. I havevzero compunction driving over people to get out of a protest zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 How do I equip blocking your free access to the world with a group of protesters blocking my free access to the world? Gee whiz think about it. You blocking my garage alone is not protected as "Freedom to assembly", now if you and a few other started protesting on the road in front of my house that would be protected. So because you can work from home and your boss might not care if you blew the day off that goes for everybody right? I think it says more about your boss if they are willing to fire you over something you have no control over, then chances are they were looking for a reason to fire you edit- specially if it was only for 1 day So I'm assuming if the Westboro Baptist Church blocked the road in front of your house you're okay with it and especially if they needed a few days or weeks to make their point. To me I understand the right for groups(even ones I don't agree with) to have the ability to gather and protest(the ability to make ones voice heard is part of being an american) but if it goes beyond a day or two, police usually start putting up road blocks and directing traffic around protest area and making sure traffic can flow. I'm guessing not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Well I get the feeling you were just being the devil's advocate here but I won't call you a liar. Anyway you might think a boss was an asshole for firing you but let's take my job okay? If I don't show up it doesn't get done. There's nobody within the company that can do my job. There's probably no way they could get at short notice that could replace me satisfactorily. So it's not like they would fire me but it would be an extreme hardship for me and for them. Just so the Westboro Baptist Church until the world that God hates fags. Also if you are so concerned with their rights to make their point why would two days be worse than one, three worse than 2? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Well I get the feeling you were just being the devil's advocate here but I won't call you a liar. Anyway you might think a boss was an asshole for firing you but let's take my job okay? If I don't show up it doesn't get done. There's nobody within the company that can do my job. There's probably no way they could get at short notice that could replace me satisfactorily. So it's not like they would fire me but it would be an extreme hardship for me and for them. Just so the Westboro Baptist Church until the world that God hates fags. Also if you are so concerned with their rights to make their point why would two days be worse than one, three worse than 2? WSS I am not playing devils advocate, I just don't like the idea that would try to limit peaceful protestors, if you start telling protestors they are financially obligated to reimburse companies that may lose money or someone could not make it to work, then you start limiting or restricting peoples capabilities of protesting. If I told you that anyone who joins a protest to support gun rights has to pay $100 dollars to cover the potential loss of a business in the area you are protesting, would you still protest? How many people would not join? at what dollar amount would you decide it was something you couldn't afford to protest? Rights to make ones point should not endanger others, hence why police usually set up areas for people to protest to limit this( having protestors on one side of the street, directing traffic, road blocks, etc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 I maintain that restricting my freedom to live my life is not part of a peaceful demonstration. That's about all I can tell you. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 And I don't care what the purpose of the protest is if I stop someone else from going about what he needs to do and it affects him financially the protesters should be liable. Basically I think all protesters are assholes at least to some extent. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 And I don't care what the purpose of the protest is if I stop someone else from going about what he needs to do and it affects him financially the protesters should be liable. Basically I think all protesters are assholes at least to some extent. WSS Sometimes it takes people being an a-hole to keep this country great, Boston Tea party, woman suffrage, Labor strikes of the early 1900's, civil rights movements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 How would something like this even be enforced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 How would something like this even be enforced? I would guess if it was an organized protest then you would be able to sue the organization for lost wages\business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 How would something like this even be enforced? One example might be that everyone blocks access for an automobile in which someone's taking it loved one to a medical appointment could be held jointly and severally liable. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Sometimes it takes people being an a-hole to keep this country great, Boston Tea party, woman suffrage, Labor strikes of the early 1900's, civil rights movements So rioting and destruction of property (let's not pretend those demonstrations were peaceful) are perfectly legitimate Vehicles toward letting the world know that you hate Trump or that god hates fags.WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 So rioting and destruction of property are perfectly legitimate Vehicles toward letting the world know that you hate Trump or that god hates fags. WSS I said before I do not agree with rioting, destruction of public or private property is something I do not support. Peaceful protesting I do fully support, even if I do not agree with the protestors. Yes, it has happened with some of things I posted (ie the Boston Tea Party was not a peaceful protest). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 d (ie the Boston Tea Party was not a peaceful protest). U hush now!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 I said before I do not agree with rioting, destruction of public or private property is something I do not support. Peaceful protesting I do fully support, even if I do not agree with the protestors. Yes, it has happened with some of things I posted (ie the Boston Tea Party was not a peaceful protest). Yes well that's why I mentioned it. There are plenty of civil rights riots as well as the Boston Tea Party. Anyway I don't remember the suffragettes burning anything down for the record. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Yes well that's why I mentioned it. There are plenty of civil rights riots as well as the Boston Tea Party. Anyway I don't remember the suffragettes burning anything down for the record. WSS They didn't loot and say 'colonist's lives matter'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 Yes well that's why I mentioned it. There are plenty of civil rights riots as well as the Boston Tea Party. Anyway I don't remember the suffragettes burning anything down for the record. WSS a little off topic but.. A group of more "extreme women suffrage" protestors did get arrested for obstructing traffic for protesting in front of the White House, fined and jailed...then when they returned to protest beaten and tortured. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_Terror_(event) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 They didn't loot and say 'colonist's lives matter'? Well, it didn't work out for the British when they tried to make the colonists pay for the financial loss of the East india Company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 8, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 https://m.landofthebrave.info/boston-tea-party-facts.htm Some interesting stuff here. By the way arrested and fined for blocking traffic, perfect. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted March 8, 2017 Report Share Posted March 8, 2017 https://m.landofthebrave.info/boston-tea-party-facts.htm Some interesting stuff here. By the way arrested and fined for blocking traffic, perfect. WSS Reading the fact sheet...and found this to be funny\ironic, that an act of rebellion by British subject (at the time) was on Guy Fawkes Day. Boston Tea Party Fact 27On November 5, 1773, Guy Fawkes Day, celebrated as Pope’s Day in colonial Boston, Samuel Adams called a town meeting at Faneuil Hall in response to the “tea crisis” and declared anyone who aids or abets the “unloading receiving or vending the tea is an enemy to America!” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.