(07-23-2020 12:00 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(07-23-2020 10:34 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Holy **** - where's Ham when I need him to yell at someone for ignoring content?

If you think this is a violation of the AUP, feel free to report it.

If you're suggesting that it is somehow my duty to 'police' other people's opinions not directed at me? You're out of your mind. Funny that you constantly accuse me of being 'dad' and then when you feel attacked by someone else, you seek my defense.

As to the above, I see it as a relatively meaningless distinction... as some would say, a distinction without a difference. You have certainly repeatedly implied that the problem rests with the police response... even though it seems clear that the first violence came from the protestors...

So I continue to ask a very simple and direct question... How should police respond when a protest turns violent?

Should they not suppress the violence? Should they not arrest, detain, prosecute those engaging in violence?

I might add, I suspect that the initial response was done entirely by Portland police... again, lead by democrats... so it seems the initial fault absolutely lies with them... assuming I accept your position. Beyond that, it gets a little gray. It seems the Portland response to looting and destruction is to fail to protect SOME of its citizens from others. Is that not a responsibility of government?

Using an extreme example, but the context is similar... If a group of NRA members bought 100 acres down the road from you and they felt harassed by government for exerting their rights... and these people protested the police and began throwing rocks and M80's at them... maybe even shot at one... and they looted your store and beat up your father.... and the local mayor, also an NRA member decided not to pursue them...

Would that be 'it' for you? You wouldn't expect someone to protect your right to life and liberty because doing so would infringe on their right to own guns and protest?


So you now have 2 questions.
1) how should local police respond to unlawful acts by citizens during a lawful protest and
2) if they fail to respond, is there no recourse for you?

I'm asking because rather than this simple 'they shouldn't have done what they did... they should have done something else', I'd like some specific examples of what you think they should have done.

This is entirely consistent with the discussion that OO, Tanq, Numbers and I had about alternative policing... when rather than join in on the discussion, you decided to try and cast stones.

There is a third, meaningful question to add:

1) how should any police respond to people who refuse to obey lawful orders to disburse, that is, when a protest is declared an 'illegal assembly' or when declared a 'riot'?