US citizen kills ecoprotesters in Panama

[griz]

Well if it's perfectly ok for you to sit on the road in your pavement princess, it's perfectly ok for protesters to protest there if you ask me. It's a reclamation of public spaces for something better.

No, the roads were designed and intended for vehicular travel.  Traffic jams aren't protests and not intentional.  To use your reasoning, it would be fine to drive SUVs on hiking trails to "protest"........, well, anything.

[kgbsquirrel]

That's a hell of an action photo.  The bokeh, the lighting, the spent case at eyebrow level.  Someone with some serious equipment took that photo.  That's a major telephoto lens with a large aperture to get enough light for that shutter speed to get the brass not to smear in motion.  And that much subject separation from the background.

It's almost like they were primed and ready with the media machine just in case someone actually did something about the unlawful obstruction of travel and detainment. 

You know, if I detained a bunch of people somewhere against their will I'd probably get charged with unlawful detention/kidnapping, and those people I did it to would be with-in their rights to defend themselves from me with lethal force.  Just sayin'.

[230RN]

I pointed that out earlier, kgbsquirrel.

I said that it was possible that the protesters themselves might be guilty of unlawful arrest charges by blocking the drivers from their legitimate movement.

https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=69071.msg1417746#msg1417746

Ho hum.

But noooooo, since their cause was "good," and "just" and "noble," and "altruistic," they have a right to eviscerate the drivers' rights.

Right?

Ho hum again.

     

Sheldon "You people have to learn to listen to me," Cooper. 

Terry, 230RN :)

[HankB]

I remember back during the '60s or '70s a bunch of radical students or hippies took to setting up roadblocks somewhere in the Appalachians, and then demanding drivers pay a "toll" to pass. They'd then disappear before the police would arrive. (This was before cell phones, so it took the victims a while to get to a phone and call the cops.)

According to legend, a group of soldiers - Green Berets - took to cruising the hills in civilian garb, looking for these people. They eventually found them, and administered a little attitude adjustment. Nobody was killed but the hippies all experienced a thorough pummeling. 

No more hippie roadblocks.

[WLJ]

I remember back during the '60s or '70s a bunch of radical students or hippies took to setting up roadblocks somewhere in the Appalachians, and then demanding drivers pay a "toll" to pass. They'd then disappear before the police would arrive. (This was before cell phones, so it took the victims a while to get to a phone and call the cops.)

According to legend, a group of soldiers - Green Berets - took to cruising the hills in civilian garb, looking for these people. They eventually found them, and administered a little attitude adjustment. Nobody was killed but the hippies all experienced a thorough pummeling. 

No more hippie roadblocks.

Nowadays the government would spare no effort in hunting down the soldiers and prosecute them while leaving the hippies largely alone.

[MechAg94]

Let us be honest about this.  These climate "protestors" are blocking roads because they know that is the only way they can get any attention for their stupid issue.  They have too few people involved and most normal people don't give a damn about it.  It is the same reason they are trying to damage art work and glue themselves to floors and road ways. 

IMO, a protest is not necessarily disruptive.  It is supposed to be part of the right to free speech and assembly.  If your assembly of 20 people in a park doesn't get enough attention, are you then allowed to "assemble" in more and more inappropriate/dangerous places until it does get attention?  Seems like you are getting beyond simple free speech and assembly at that point. 


And I am not saying they should be jailed for years over this.  Just removed from the roadway and/or forced to confine their protest to the side of the road.  The only charges I can think of would be misdemeanors.  Should have been the same with the J6 people.  If the authorities wanted to remove them from the capital, that could be done pretty easily.  From the videos released, they didn't even do that.  The prosecutions over that are wildly politicized and out of proportion to what was actually done.   

[cordex]

Let us be honest about this.  These climate "protestors" are blocking roads because they know that is the only way they can get any attention for their stupid issue.  They have too few people involved and most normal people don't give a damn about it.  It is the same reason they are trying to damage art work and glue themselves to floors and road ways. 

In this case, I think these protesters might be distinct from the Stop Oil types in Europe.  I've heard that they were protesting the extension of mining rights for a particular, local copper mine that pollutes the area.  Not to justify their choice of protest, but that makes me feel more sympathy toward these particular protesters than when I associated them with the entitled Greta types.

And I am not saying they should be jailed for years over this.  Just removed from the roadway and/or forced to confine their protest to the side of the road. 

I think this is the biggest issue.  If the police won't move people who are maliciously blocking roadways for their intended use (or bike lanes, or sidewalks, or airport runways, zahc) then it is a problem with the police.

[dogmush]

You know, if I detained a bunch of people somewhere against their will I'd probably get charged with unlawful detention/kidnapping, and those people I did it to would be with-in their rights to defend themselves from me with lethal force.  Just sayin'.

There wasn't anyone "detained" to anywhere near the standard of lethal self defense at that protest.

[WLJ]

There wasn't anyone "detained" to anywhere near the standard of lethal self defense at that protest.

Agree, as far as I know there was nothing stopping people from just leaving.

[zahc]

It all revolves around the interpretation of "peaceably to assemble".

Protesters that are being violent lose their constitutional license. But assembling in a public space isn't violence just because you want to occupy that space instead. That's nothing but the old "speech I don't like is violence" BS.

In practice, we know that whenever the right engages in political speech, the media and the left wing (but I repeat myself) always call it "violence" and "threatening". Whenever the left engages in actual violence, the media calls it "speech". Both are BS, and BS should always be called.

[MechAg94]

One other side point:  When the justice system consistently fails to provide justice, you often end up with vigilante justice in one form or another.  Unfortunately, a lot of vigilante actions end up like this:  poorly thought out, done in anger, and/or very disproportionate. 

[cordex]

But assembling in a public space isn't violence just because you want to occupy that space instead.

I don't think you really believe that, except when and where it doesn't significantly impact you.

[230RN]

"doublethink
/dŭb′əl-thĭngk

noun

Thought marked by the acceptance of gross contradictions and falsehoods, especially when used as a technique of self-indoctrination.

The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.

Believing two contradictory ideas at the same time."  *

And of course, by its very nature, it is impossible for one to recognize when one is doublethinking.

Terry, 230RN

*The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition

[Boomhauer]

The roads are public and belong to everyone. People protesting in the road are not "blocking the road", they are USING their roads. For a constitutionally protected activity. Probably a better use of the roads, on the balance.

Yeah violent protesters are scum. Many of the causes (and people) are stupid. And anyone who runs out in front of traffic and gets hit sort of asked for it. But the entitlement shown by motorists anytime somebody dares to use "their" roads always makes me sympathetic to the protesters. Thousands of people descend on our roads every day and block them, in cars, while polluting and making miserable noise, killing hundreds and injuring thousands per day in the process, usually for mundane or stupid reasons; a sea a taillamps drinking foreign oil stretching to infinity all across the country, and everyone thinks that's normal. Well if it's perfectly ok for you to sit on the road in your pavement princess, it's perfectly ok for protesters to protest there if you ask me. It's a reclamation of public spaces for something better.

Show us on the doll where Henry Ford hurt you…







Jesus Christ we get it you hate cars and love trains and unhinged rants about the evilness of the automobile

[charby]

If a protest mob decided to walk very slowly down a major highway (not controlled access interstate) would they have the right of way over the vehicle?

How about a group of bicyclists do a similar protest, do they have the right of way?

I know in Iowa when passing a bicyclist, you must pass like you do a car and give a full lane clearance.

[dogmush]

If a protest mob decided to walk very slowly down a major highway (not controlled access interstate) would they have the right of way over the vehicle?

How about a group of bicyclists do a similar protest, do they have the right of way?

I know in Iowa when passing a bicyclist, you must pass like you do a car and give a full lane clearance.

Cyclists do that around here not even as a protest, just out showing off their Lycra.  And yes they have the right of way.  You have to give the bike at least 3 ft clearance,  which when they are packed up and feral means going full on into the other lane like passing a car.

[JTHunter]

Some roads, specifically, most federal interstates (if not all of them), are marked as prohibiting pedestrians and frequently, certain other equipment.
As one example, IL-ANNOY at one time (don't know if they still do) also barred motorcycles with engines less than 150cc.
Protestors do NOT have the right to block an interstate regardless of their reason(s).

[zahc]

Most controlled access highways forbid pedestrians, bicycles, and low-powered motorcycles as a normal matter, so protesting on them would be illegal.

[WLJ]

While we're on the subject

Jonathan Choe Journalist (Seattle)
@choeshow
HAPPENING NOW: Traffic at standstill once again as pro Palestine protesters start march at corner of 4th Ave and Pine St in downtown Seattle. Drivers so frustrated their coming out of cars to yell at organizers. One guy tried to drive through bike lane but was blocked by FAR-LEFT activists doing security. #Seattle

https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1723481753099313626?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

And the police just watch

Note what someone posted in the comments

[HankB]

Nowadays the government would spare no effort in hunting down the soldiers and prosecute them while leaving the hippies largely alone.

More and more, the police are becoming a security detail for the mob. They won't stop mob actions, but they WILL jump with both feet on anyone who fights the mob.

Even federally - the Border Patrol, tasked with preventing illegal aliens from entering the US, is enabling their entry by removing barriers or welding gates open.

How long before "Defund the Police" resurfaces in a really ugly way - e.g., the taxpayers will vote to get rid of the cops who aren't doing their d*** jobs? This would open the door for vigilantes, and for reasons already mentioned in (for example) post #60 above, I DON'T want to see that.

[RocketMan]

I'm not so sure we should entirely blame the cops as they don't have much choice in these matters.  They are taking their instruction from the politicians and bureaucrats above them.

[Ben]

While we're on the subject
https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1723481753099313626?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

And the police just watch

Note what someone posted in the comments

[img width=600]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F-sLx2EbMAA-Ppa?format=jpg&name=medium

I'm assuming that it is this same one:

https://twitchy.com/brettt/2023/11/13/seattle-cops-watch-over-antifa-bike-brigade-blocking-traffic-n2389758

I note there were antifa there holding "kill nazis" signs. Since everyone to the right of them is a nazi, can I assume they threatened my life and then use my vehicle or gun as a defensive tool to escape the threat?

In case anyone thinks I'm asking sarcastically, I'm not. If someone says they want to kill me, I'll take them seriously and act accordingly.

[charby]

Most controlled access highways forbid pedestrians, bicycles, and low-powered motorcycles as a normal matter, so protesting on them would be illegal.

I excluded controlled access roads in my post.

[zahc]

So if pedestrians are walking where they have the right of way (and you say you aren't talking about places they don't), then what's the actual question?

[dogmush]

I'm not so sure we should entirely blame the cops as they don't have much choice in these matters.  They are taking their instruction from the politicians and bureaucrats above them.

Oh.  Well if they are just following orders, OK then.  That's cool.