PDA

View Full Version : Why Are These People Being Arrested?



duane1969
09-05-2011, 02:55 AM
Is it now illegal to protest the government in this country? Look at the picture of the guy being arrested...he is wearing a freakin' sweater for cryin' out loud!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44386975/ns/us_news-christian_science_monitor/

theonedru
09-05-2011, 02:58 AM
Pretty sad, it should be the other way around the gov't should be rounded up for committing treason against this country

habsheaven
09-05-2011, 03:43 PM
It would only be a guess, but I have to imagine the problem is where they are protesting, not the fact that they are protesting. I am sure it is a logistical nightmare for the Secret Service to have crowds that large causing a disturbance (peaceful or otherwise) right outside the White House all day long.

Star_Cards
09-05-2011, 06:28 PM
I'm pretty certain that it's illegal to loiter out in front of the White House. Protesters or tourists that stand out there and refuse to leave will probably be detained.

pghin08
09-05-2011, 08:04 PM
Yeah, same thing happened to war protesters under Bush. Location, location, location.

duane1969
09-05-2011, 11:47 PM
Peacful protest on government property should not result in arrests. The government exists because of the people, the people supplied the funds with which the property was purchased and is maintained. It is tantamount to arresting them for being on their own property.

gatorboymike
09-06-2011, 02:21 AM
I suspect they're more concerned about the safety of governmental personnel than they are about the free speech of the public. And that is a legitimate cause for concern, you must admit, but this does go too far.

NyFanCam01
09-06-2011, 02:29 AM
Government = FAIL!

habsheaven
09-06-2011, 09:14 AM
Peacful protest on government property should not result in arrests. The government exists because of the people, the people supplied the funds with which the property was purchased and is maintained. It is tantamount to arresting them for being on their own property.

I agree. Let's all plan to meet up and have a scrimmage football game on the White House lawn. Of course, I will just spectate because I do not own the land, but YOU GUYS should be good to go. I don't foresee there being a problem. It is afterall, YOUR land.:sign0020:

Star_Cards
09-06-2011, 11:50 AM
Peacful protest on government property should not result in arrests. The government exists because of the people, the people supplied the funds with which the property was purchased and is maintained. It is tantamount to arresting them for being on their own property.

I don't think it because it's government property. It's because the president lives there. They have protest and gatherings at the Washington Monument all the time and are perfectly legal. This all has to do with security of the president.

pghin08
09-06-2011, 12:02 PM
Peacful protest on government property should not result in arrests. The government exists because of the people, the people supplied the funds with which the property was purchased and is maintained. It is tantamount to arresting them for being on their own property.

It's all about security though. This is nothing new.

Hilfiger1975
09-06-2011, 12:04 PM
Is it now illegal to protest the government in this country? Look at the picture of the guy being arrested...he is wearing a freakin' sweater for cryin' out loud!!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44386975/ns/us_news-christian_science_monitor/
It's always been illegal to protest in America. At least from my viewpoint on it's history. This is old news, just in a new generation...

America the beautiful...

duane1969
09-06-2011, 12:21 PM
I don't think it because it's government property. It's because the president lives there. They have protest and gatherings at the Washington Monument all the time and are perfectly legal. This all has to do with security of the president.

Exactly. Protests are perfectly fine as long as they are held somewhere that doesn't interfere with the politicians' lifestyle or make them late for a meeting. God forbid they should have to hear an angry mob while getting their manicure or trying to take a nap.

When people are arrested for simply protesting then democracy has died and tyranny has risen. As long as they are not inciting revolt or being violent then they have every right to be there.

Star_Cards
09-06-2011, 12:45 PM
Exactly. Protests are perfectly fine as long as they are held somewhere that doesn't interfere with the politicians' lifestyle or make them late for a meeting. God forbid they should have to hear an angry mob while getting their manicure or trying to take a nap.

When people are arrested for simply protesting then democracy has died and tyranny has risen. As long as they are not inciting revolt or being violent then they have every right to be there.

I don't think it's because politicians would have been made late for a meeting or messed with their lifestyle. Planes aren't allowed around the white house for a security reason. Not having protestors or any people standing around the white house is the same security reasoning. The protest isn't the issue.

duane1969
09-06-2011, 01:51 PM
I don't think it's because politicians would have been made late for a meeting or messed with their lifestyle. Planes aren't allowed around the white house for a security reason. Not having protestors or any people standing around the white house is the same security reasoning. The protest isn't the issue.

Have you ever been to the WH? Standing on the front sidewalk still leaves you like 100 yards from the actual building. To be a security threat you would have to be carrying an RPG or shoulder-fired missle.

Look at the distance from the fence to the WH in this pic. How muc of a threat could a peaceful protest be?

http://photos.igougo.com/images/p258171-Washington_D.C-James_in_front_of_the_White_House.jpg

habsheaven
09-06-2011, 02:03 PM
The peaceful protest is not the problem. The problem comes from the cover the crowd provides for the guy with the RPG. It really isn't that hard to understand. Break laws around the White House and you will be forcibly removed by arrest. How anyone can have a problem with that or morph it into something it isn't is beyond me.

Star_Cards
09-06-2011, 03:33 PM
Have you ever been to the WH? Standing on the front sidewalk still leaves you like 100 yards from the actual building. To be a security threat you would have to be carrying an RPG or shoulder-fired missle.

Look at the distance from the fence to the WH in this pic. How muc of a threat could a peaceful protest be?

http://photos.igougo.com/images/p258171-Washington_D.C-James_in_front_of_the_White_House.jpg

I haven't been to the WH. I just think it's not a place where they want people standing for a long period of time.

Plus, how do they know that a protest is going to be or stay peaceful or not?

Star_Cards
09-06-2011, 03:35 PM
The peaceful protest is not the problem. The problem comes from the cover the crowd provides for the guy with the RPG. It really isn't that hard to understand. Break laws around the White House and you will be forcibly removed by arrest. How anyone can have a problem with that or morph it into something it isn't is beyond me.

we are on the same page. I'm not one to give more control to government or security, but I don't see how there's a big uproar about this.

duane1969
09-06-2011, 03:38 PM
The peaceful protest is not the problem. The problem comes from the cover the crowd provides for the guy with the RPG. It really isn't that hard to understand. Break laws around the White House and you will be forcibly removed by arrest. How anyone can have a problem with that or morph it into something it isn't is beyond me.

I am not morphing it into something it isn't. The pics speak for themselves. People in flip-flops and sweaters being arrested for protesting a pipeline.

The irony of it all is that it has become so commonplace for people to get arrested for protesting that it is actually expected and accepted as "just the way it is".

I guess I take issue with it because more and more I see people losing their inaliable rights and being OK with it. I just need to stop expecting people to comprehend or care. I guess I should look at the silver lining since most of them were probably liberals anyway LOL

Star_Cards
09-06-2011, 03:47 PM
again. how do you know when protestors are actually protesting and not faking a protest to do something bad? If wearing flip flops and sweaters is a way security decides if someone is a threat or not I don't have much confidence in that security. I guess my point is usually people typically trying to do bad things are going to act like they aren't as to not get caught before they can carry out the deed.

duane1969
09-06-2011, 03:54 PM
again. how do you know when protestors are actually protesting and not faking a protest to do something bad? If wearing flip flops and sweaters is a way security decides if someone is a threat or not I don't have much confidence in that security. I guess my point is usually people typically trying to do bad things are going to act like they aren't as to not get caught before they can carry out the deed.

None of this justifies arresting people at a peaceful demonstration. Arresting people because of "what if'" "maybe" and "could happen" just doesn't cut it for me. You don't arrest people because they might do something or because they could do something.

A car with a dirty nuke could be driven right past the South Gate and level the WH without anybody ever giving it a second look. Do we now outlaw all vehicles within 1 mile of the WH?

A tanker truck could haul in 15000 gallons of fertilizer explosive and level half of D.C. Do we now need to outlaw all tanker trucks within a 20 mile radius of the beltway?

Where does it end? When does the government stop treating it's citizens like the enemy?

Hilfiger1975
09-06-2011, 03:59 PM
Does a "flash mob" pertain to this thread? I see it as another way for the government to "control" America...

Hilfiger1975
09-06-2011, 04:00 PM
none of this justifies arresting people at a peaceful demonstration. Arresting people because of "what if'" "maybe" and "could happen" just doesn't cut it for me. You don't arrest people because they might do something or because they could do something.

A car with a dirty nuke could be driven right past the south gate and level the wh without anybody ever giving it a second look. Do we now outlaw all vehicles within 1 mile of the wh?

A tanker truck could haul in 15000 gallons of fertilizer explosive and level half of d.c. Do we now need to outlaw all tanker trucks within a 20 mile radius of the beltway?

Where does it end? When does the government stop treating it's citizens like the enemy?
+1

mrveggieman
09-06-2011, 04:02 PM
None of this justifies arresting people at a peaceful demonstration. Arresting people because of "what if'" "maybe" and "could happen" just doesn't cut it for me. You don't arrest people because they might do something or because they could do something.

A car with a dirty nuke could be driven right past the South Gate and level the WH without anybody ever giving it a second look. Do we now outlaw all vehicles within 1 mile of the WH?

A tanker truck could haul in 15000 gallons of fertilizer explosive and level half of D.C. Do we now need to outlaw all tanker trucks within a 20 mile radius of the beltway?

Where does it end? When does the government stop treating it's citizens like the enemy?


We can start by repealing the patriot act. There is nothing patriotic about it. :confused0024:

habsheaven
09-06-2011, 04:06 PM
None of this justifies arresting people at a peaceful demonstration. Arresting people because of "what if'" "maybe" and "could happen" just doesn't cut it for me. You don't arrest people because they might do something or because they could do something.

A car with a dirty nuke could be driven right past the South Gate and level the WH without anybody ever giving it a second look. Do we now outlaw all vehicles within 1 mile of the WH?

A tanker truck could haul in 15000 gallons of fertilizer explosive and level half of D.C. Do we now need to outlaw all tanker trucks within a 20 mile radius of the beltway?

Where does it end? When does the government stop treating it's citizens like the enemy?

Who says they were arrested based on "what ifs and could bes"? They were arrested because they were breaking the law weren't they?

habsheaven
09-06-2011, 04:12 PM
I am not morphing it into something it isn't. The pics speak for themselves. People in flip-flops and sweaters being arrested for protesting a pipeline.

The irony of it all is that it has become so commonplace for people to get arrested for protesting that it is actually expected and accepted as "just the way it is".

I guess I take issue with it because more and more I see people losing their inaliable rights and being OK with it. I just need to stop expecting people to comprehend or care. I guess I should look at the silver lining since most of them were probably liberals anyway LOL

That is not what they are being arrested for.

How about this? I hop in my 2-seater airplane and buzz the White House with a protest banner trailing my plane.

Should I be allowed to?

Will they arrest me for protesting?

Exactly. Like I said, you are morphing the issue. Just because the administration may benefit from the protest being stopped does not diminish the valid security concerns any administration would have.

Star_Cards
09-07-2011, 11:35 AM
None of this justifies arresting people at a peaceful demonstration. Arresting people because of "what if'" "maybe" and "could happen" just doesn't cut it for me. You don't arrest people because they might do something or because they could do something.

A car with a dirty nuke could be driven right past the South Gate and level the WH without anybody ever giving it a second look. Do we now outlaw all vehicles within 1 mile of the WH?

A tanker truck could haul in 15000 gallons of fertilizer explosive and level half of D.C. Do we now need to outlaw all tanker trucks within a 20 mile radius of the beltway?

Where does it end? When does the government stop treating it's citizens like the enemy?

they weren't arrested because they might do something wrong. That's not what I'm saying. I'm sure they were asked to leave and I would assume they refused. That is what more than likely caused the arrest. My point was I believe people aren't allowed to stand around in front of the white house so when they refused to leave they were removed. Besides, getting arrested gets the protester way more publicity to his cause than if they show up, protest and then go home with no sort of conflict. :)