Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on November 11, 2018, 03:32:42 PM
-
Apparently this is what the cool kids are doing now: shutting off valves along oil pipelines as a means of protest. They are even finding sympathetic judges. I guess we'll see how things go when they shut off the wrong valve and something explodes and hurts or kills somebody. Otherwise, you'd think an oil company could sue them for loss of income.
https://www.wired.com/story/monkeywrenching-vandals-are-reinventing-climate-activism/
-
Apparently this is what the cool kids are doing now: shutting off valves along oil pipelines as a means of protest. They are even finding sympathetic judges. I guess we'll see how things go when they shut off the wrong valve and something explodes and hurts or kills somebody. Otherwise, you'd think an oil company could sue them for loss of income.
https://www.wired.com/story/monkeywrenching-vandals-are-reinventing-climate-activism/
SSS
Sick of these cretins. They take second place only to ballot box stuffers.
-
Monkey wrench gang
-
I was happier a minute ago, when I wasn't aware of such garbage.
-
With any luck, they'll push hard enough that the oil companies will start installing armed security at valve locations on a 24/7 basis.
Morons.
-
With any luck, they'll push hard enough that the oil companies will start installing armed security at valve locations on a 24/7 basis.
Morons.
They may not mind that. The companies would have to raise prices, which would make alternative energy more attractive.
-
With any luck, they'll push hard enough that the oil companies will start installing armed security at valve locations on a 24/7 basis.
Morons.
With a bajillion valves all over the country, extremely cost prohibitive. I believe many valves can be opened/closed via the interwebz, thus also surveilled. I would have thought Keystone valves capable of that, but maybe not, or maybe the criminals are smashing the electronics.
Maybe better to treat them like criminals instead of performing artists. That includes - unlike in the article - handcuffing them, then prosecuting them. It doesn't help that LE and judges are treating them like pals.
-
Maybe better to treat them like criminals instead of performing artists. That includes - unlike in the article - handcuffing them, then prosecuting them. It doesn't help that LE and judges are treating them like pals.
Agreed completely.
-
Ya know, the older I get, the more "Just shoot the SOBs" seems the reasonable course of action...
-
I'm sure they would never 'fess up to it, but their actions (and their rationale therefor) demonstrate quite clearly that they favor abandoning the rule of law in favor of outright anarchy. Their philosophy seems to be, "When we can use the law, we support law and order. When the law doesn't do what WE want -- *expletive deleted*ck the law, we'll do what we want anyway."
-
Ya know, the older I get, the more "Just shoot the SOBs" seems the reasonable course of action...
I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
-
"They are even finding sympathetic judges."
Come onnnnnn, President Trump ! Appoint, appoint, appoint! Change the philosophy of the judicial system from the ground up and from the top down. Go, Donald !
Terry, 230RN
-
This thread desperately needs more caning. :mad:
(https://www.dw.com/image/18298593_303.gif)
-
"They are even finding sympathetic judges."
Come onnnnnn, President Trump ! Appoint, appoint, appoint! Change the philosophy of the judicial system from the ground up and from the top down. Go, Donald !
Unfortunately, Trump only gets to appoint federal judges. If these incidents of industrial sabotage (that's what I consider them to be) are not covered by some federal law, they'll have to be charged and prosecuted under state law. At the state level, many lower court judges are elected, and others are appointed by governors. My state's judges (other than probate court) are all appointed, and I don't think we have had a conservative judge here for more than forty years.
-
Aside from exploding and killing somebody, an overpressure incident in a backed up pipeline could probably trigger a bad leak or burst in the pipeline.
This is how you go from caribou using the pipeline as a heat source through the winter to survive and thrive (good), to animals suffocating in oil and contaminated water supplies (bad).
It amazes me how much environmentalists refuse to acknowledge the symbiotic good that humans do for the environment as its stewards. I'll grant them that as a species we trend towards a net deficit in stewardship, but discounting the good entirely is myopic.
-
This is how you go from caribou using the pipeline as a heat source through the winter to survive and thrive (good), to animals suffocating in oil and contaminated water supplies (bad)
And the leak from the pipeline sabotaged by environmental terrorist would be touted as an example of why pipelines are bad.
Just declare that tampering with a pipeline that crosses state lines is an act of terrorism and ship em off to Gitmo.
-
With it being critical infrastructure it wouldn’t be a big stretch for the Fed.gov to get involved.
I cannot believe that there’s not a federal law being broken regarding the sabotaging of critical infrastructure like gas lines, water supplies etc.
-
Unfortunately, Trump only gets to appoint federal judges. If these incidents of industrial sabotage (that's what I consider them to be) are not covered by some federal law, they'll have to be charged and prosecuted under state law. At the state level, many lower court judges are elected, and others are appointed by governors. My state's judges (other than probate court) are all appointed, and I don't think we have had a conservative judge here for more than forty years.
My contention is that "aggressive" emplacement of conservative judges at any level (in this case, federal) will inevitably shift the general judicial population toward conservative. It's a biasing effect I'm looking at, not a whiz-bang effect.
If miscreants get pats on the back at the state and local level, but get whammed at the federal level, this has got to have a feedback effect on local judges. Maybe not all of them, but it will give some of them pause and an opportunity to re-think things --maybe just at the water cooler level at first.
Thus, a "biasing" effect.
Rome... built... day...
Go, Donald, go !
Terry
-
With it being critical infrastructure it wouldn’t be a big stretch for the Fed.gov to get involved.
I cannot believe that there’s not a federal law being broken regarding the sabotaging of critical infrastructure like gas lines, water supplies etc.
I was thinking about interference with interstate commerce or some conspiracy charge. With all the felonies that exist, I am sure they could find one if they wanted.
Other than that, the "necessity defense" and other crap in that article make it sounds like this issue hasn't been in the public debate so they had no choice. It should all be thrown out since legislatures and Congress have debated it endlessly for decades and it has been rejected (so far).
-
And the leak from the pipeline sabotaged by environmental terrorist would be touted as an example of why pipelines are bad.
Just declare that tampering with a pipeline that crosses state lines is an act of terrorism and ship em off to Gitmo.
I find your comments interesting and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
-
With it being critical infrastructure it wouldn’t be a big stretch for the Fed.gov to get involved.
I cannot believe that there’s not a federal law being broken regarding the sabotaging of critical infrastructure like gas lines, water supplies etc.
Doesn't even have to be critical infrastructure. It's interstate commerce. If the feds can claim jurisdiction over marijuana that's grown, harvested, sold and consumed all within one state under the guise that it "affects" interstate commerce (because the end users didn't buy a product from another state!), a pipeline that crosses state lines and carries a product that is sold in multiple states certainly qualifies. Tinkering with a pipeline is environmental terrorism.
-
Other than that, the "necessity defense" and other crap in that article make it sounds like this issue hasn't been in the public debate so they had no choice. It should all be thrown out since legislatures and Congress have debated it endlessly for decades and it has been rejected (so far).
"But it was necessary because the government didn't do what WE want!"