Slamming people into the ground, firing tear gas canisters into their faces, or killing them are not valid remedies for the state to take even if obstruction is happening. (even if they're being like really annoying with whistles and stuff!)
edit: even if they referred to the ICE agent as "fatty fat fat fat" meanly
As a matter of fact, arrest is the proper remedy for obstruction, which is at least a misdemeanor and sometimes a felony, and it may include those first two things, or even the third if they violently resist. And despite widely spread misinformation online, ICE has the legal authority to arrest anyone, even citizens, if they see them doing this.
There’s really no other way law enforcement could work, I don’t know what people are imagining. You don’t get to surround or block LEO from conducting business and just say “neener neener” and there’s nothing they can do. If you escalate to physical violence then you’re simply gambling with your life and there’s no other way it could be in the world we life in, except in maybe a very low crime society.
It’s one thing if you accept all this and do it anyway, but people keep acting shocked by what happens. “why did you have real bullets?”.
What if LEOs have a clear pattern of acting outside of the Constitution and lying about the circumstances around “obstruction”? Can you see a point at which it no longer makes sense to comply? I believe the founding fathers have much to say on this subject.
"Blocking traffic" is at this point a tired trope. Any sort of disruptive action is described as "blocking traffic", which is somehow framed as a form of violence. (My favorite version is when people argue that it is a form of unlawful detention akin to kidnapping.)
This would be more accurately framed as "parking illegally", which is the sort of thing for which you occasionally get a ticket placed under your windshield wiper, not the sort of thing for which armed, masked agents violently arrest you.
Purposely moving your car in front of law enforcement officers' cars to prevent them from arresting a suspect is in fact obstruction.
This is not "violence", but you will be arrested if you do this. If you resist arrest, you will be forcefully arrested/apprehended.
If you then attempt potentially life-threatening physical harm to the officer you will likely be met with deadly force.
There are two different things at play, and it's important to be clear about them:
- Legal protest. Standing out of the way, yelling, singing, signs, etc. 100% protected, only subject to reasonable crowd control (by the local LEA), eg to move people off the roadway.
- Civil disobedience. Intentional non-violent violations of the law. Intended to slow/disrupt government activity. You are breaking the law to make a point, and should be willing to accept the consequences. The violations are almost always minor, with at most a week or two in jail and a fine. Law enforcement has a legal obligation to apply proportionally in the enforcement, if they are non-violent then little or no force is acceptable in detaining or citing the protestors.
>If you resist arrest, you will be forcefully arrested/apprehended. If you then attempt potentially life-threatening physical harm to the officer you will likely be met with deadly force.
Translation: you'll be summarily executed if the officer vaguely feels "threatened"
Most of those are shorts clips that do not show the context of the situation. These sorts of clips are what is causing people to believe the actions of federal agents are not justified when they actually are. When the initial clip of Renee Good came out people thought that the she did not drive into the agent but now that other angles have come out it is clear that she did hit the federal agent. It is always important to find the whole clip and not just propaganda clips
In what world do you think it's acceptable to knee someone in the face repeatedly when they're on the ground and not resisting? You clearly didn't watch the videos at all.
Slamming people into the ground, firing tear gas canisters into their faces, or killing them are not valid remedies for the state to take even if obstruction is happening. (even if they're being like really annoying with whistles and stuff!)
edit: even if they referred to the ICE agent as "fatty fat fat fat" meanly
Lol. Seems necessary to be pointed out which is a low point really.
As a matter of fact, arrest is the proper remedy for obstruction, which is at least a misdemeanor and sometimes a felony, and it may include those first two things, or even the third if they violently resist. And despite widely spread misinformation online, ICE has the legal authority to arrest anyone, even citizens, if they see them doing this.
There’s really no other way law enforcement could work, I don’t know what people are imagining. You don’t get to surround or block LEO from conducting business and just say “neener neener” and there’s nothing they can do. If you escalate to physical violence then you’re simply gambling with your life and there’s no other way it could be in the world we life in, except in maybe a very low crime society.
It’s one thing if you accept all this and do it anyway, but people keep acting shocked by what happens. “why did you have real bullets?”.
What if LEOs have a clear pattern of acting outside of the Constitution and lying about the circumstances around “obstruction”? Can you see a point at which it no longer makes sense to comply? I believe the founding fathers have much to say on this subject.
2 replies →
"Blocking traffic" is at this point a tired trope. Any sort of disruptive action is described as "blocking traffic", which is somehow framed as a form of violence. (My favorite version is when people argue that it is a form of unlawful detention akin to kidnapping.)
This would be more accurately framed as "parking illegally", which is the sort of thing for which you occasionally get a ticket placed under your windshield wiper, not the sort of thing for which armed, masked agents violently arrest you.
Purposely moving your car in front of law enforcement officers' cars to prevent them from arresting a suspect is in fact obstruction. This is not "violence", but you will be arrested if you do this. If you resist arrest, you will be forcefully arrested/apprehended. If you then attempt potentially life-threatening physical harm to the officer you will likely be met with deadly force.
There are two different things at play, and it's important to be clear about them:
- Legal protest. Standing out of the way, yelling, singing, signs, etc. 100% protected, only subject to reasonable crowd control (by the local LEA), eg to move people off the roadway.
- Civil disobedience. Intentional non-violent violations of the law. Intended to slow/disrupt government activity. You are breaking the law to make a point, and should be willing to accept the consequences. The violations are almost always minor, with at most a week or two in jail and a fine. Law enforcement has a legal obligation to apply proportionally in the enforcement, if they are non-violent then little or no force is acceptable in detaining or citing the protestors.
>If you resist arrest, you will be forcefully arrested/apprehended. If you then attempt potentially life-threatening physical harm to the officer you will likely be met with deadly force.
Translation: you'll be summarily executed if the officer vaguely feels "threatened"
2 replies →
Please think more deeply about the consequences here. Besides even the first amendment’s right to assembly, these videos show just people driving by.
They can use their maps program to find another route.
Do these [1] look like blocking traffic?
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46598192
They will claim that if the person was in front of the car when ICE rammed into them, it means they were blocking the car
Most of those are shorts clips that do not show the context of the situation. These sorts of clips are what is causing people to believe the actions of federal agents are not justified when they actually are. When the initial clip of Renee Good came out people thought that the she did not drive into the agent but now that other angles have come out it is clear that she did hit the federal agent. It is always important to find the whole clip and not just propaganda clips
It's as if you're trying to find every excuse to just not research on your own; instead you expect everyone to feed you information
Here: https://www.reddit.com/r/law/comments/1q9tg16/updated_111_mi...
16 replies →
In what world do you think it's acceptable to knee someone in the face repeatedly when they're on the ground and not resisting? You clearly didn't watch the videos at all.
6 replies →