Should celebrities avoid talking politics to fans ?

mace1229

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Seems like a very american thing. The only ones I've heard the "shut up and just sing" comments from.
Never heard it about any swedish artists or from anyone I know here in Europe.

Absurd to try to dictate what an artist/person are allowed to do or not. They are not monkeys in cages. Their songs and messages are, often, more than entertainment.

It's almost like not being allowed to criticise your countries leader when he starts an unjust war. Oh wait, same country again.

...but I sing in the choir.

What we're trying to get to in America is judging people by individual actions, not by the country in which they live or broad groups who we may wrongly believe they are a part.

I'm trying to remember the cases where Americans were jailed because they criticized the war. I was a fierce critic but I don't remember not being "allowed" to voice my criticism. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I spent three years in jail and they gave me amnesia pills.

There is definitely a drive to muzzle protesters via arrests, so I think you might be underestimating how many people actually have been jailed because they criticize the government these days... it is happening.

Please provide me one case where someone in the US was arrested and convicted of sedition or similar crime about Iraq, Afghan, etc. Many of the protesters were committing vandalism. If you are protesting and some of the protesters are committing crimes, sometimes you get caught up in teh shuffle. I'm not defending that, but I'm not defending vandalism either. However, there is a very clear line between unlawful protests (private property, no permit, etc.) along with vandalism AND sedition or free speech violations. There's also a line between an arrest and a conviction.

I am talking about this kind of drive to muzzle protestors, and other similar efforts (this is the first link I got from google btw - I've seem many stories about it from many sources lately, and related. Not to mention all the footage from places like Standing Rock, where peaceful protestors are being attacked by militarized police forces): https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19/republican-lawmakers-in-five-states-propose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/

As others mentioned, these laws are just enforcing existing ones. As it is, protesters can block a freeway, which is illegal, and get a slap on the wrist if anything at all.
Peaceful protesting and blocking a freeway are two different things in my opinion. You have the right to protest, you don't have the right to prevent me from getting to work.

PJPOWER

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Seems like a very american thing. The only ones I've heard the "shut up and just sing" comments from.
Never heard it about any swedish artists or from anyone I know here in Europe.

Absurd to try to dictate what an artist/person are allowed to do or not. They are not monkeys in cages. Their songs and messages are, often, more than entertainment.

It's almost like not being allowed to criticise your countries leader when he starts an unjust war. Oh wait, same country again.

...but I sing in the choir.

What we're trying to get to in America is judging people by individual actions, not by the country in which they live or broad groups who we may wrongly believe they are a part.

I'm trying to remember the cases where Americans were jailed because they criticized the war. I was a fierce critic but I don't remember not being "allowed" to voice my criticism. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I spent three years in jail and they gave me amnesia pills.

There is definitely a drive to muzzle protesters via arrests, so I think you might be underestimating how many people actually have been jailed because they criticize the government these days... it is happening.

Please provide me one case where someone in the US was arrested and convicted of sedition or similar crime about Iraq, Afghan, etc. Many of the protesters were committing vandalism. If you are protesting and some of the protesters are committing crimes, sometimes you get caught up in teh shuffle. I'm not defending that, but I'm not defending vandalism either. However, there is a very clear line between unlawful protests (private property, no permit, etc.) along with vandalism AND sedition or free speech violations. There's also a line between an arrest and a conviction.

I am talking about this kind of drive to muzzle protestors, and other similar efforts (this is the first link I got from google btw - I've seem many stories about it from many sources lately, and related. Not to mention all the footage from places like Standing Rock, where peaceful protestors are being attacked by militarized police forces): https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19/republican-lawmakers-in-five-states-propose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/

As others mentioned, these laws are just enforcing existing ones. As it is, protesters can block a freeway, which is illegal, and get a slap on the wrist if anything at all.
Peaceful protesting and blocking a freeway are two different things in my opinion. You have the right to protest, you don't have the right to prevent me from getting to work.

I agree, the road blockers create dangerous situations for themselves and motorists. There have been several incidents where they were not letting ambulances or firetrucks through. If someone died because the road blockers were not letting their ambulance through, maybe those illegal protesters should get charged for the death of that person? Those dumbasses need to get more than a slap on the rist for that idiot behavior.

Degeneratefk

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

PJ_Soul

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Seems like a very american thing. The only ones I've heard the "shut up and just sing" comments from.
Never heard it about any swedish artists or from anyone I know here in Europe.

Absurd to try to dictate what an artist/person are allowed to do or not. They are not monkeys in cages. Their songs and messages are, often, more than entertainment.

It's almost like not being allowed to criticise your countries leader when he starts an unjust war. Oh wait, same country again.

...but I sing in the choir.

What we're trying to get to in America is judging people by individual actions, not by the country in which they live or broad groups who we may wrongly believe they are a part.

I'm trying to remember the cases where Americans were jailed because they criticized the war. I was a fierce critic but I don't remember not being "allowed" to voice my criticism. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I spent three years in jail and they gave me amnesia pills.

There is definitely a drive to muzzle protesters via arrests, so I think you might be underestimating how many people actually have been jailed because they criticize the government these days... it is happening.

Please provide me one case where someone in the US was arrested and convicted of sedition or similar crime about Iraq, Afghan, etc. Many of the protesters were committing vandalism. If you are protesting and some of the protesters are committing crimes, sometimes you get caught up in teh shuffle. I'm not defending that, but I'm not defending vandalism either. However, there is a very clear line between unlawful protests (private property, no permit, etc.) along with vandalism AND sedition or free speech violations. There's also a line between an arrest and a conviction.

I am talking about this kind of drive to muzzle protestors, and other similar efforts (this is the first link I got from google btw - I've seem many stories about it from many sources lately, and related): https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19/republican-lawmakers-in-five-states-propose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/

A protest movement doesn't have the right to impede or endanger others that are not involved in the protest. I am a great supporter of protests and marches, but I'm not a supporter of fucking up the traffic. Here in Richmond several months ago, some BLM protesters blocked I-95 in the afternoon, creating hours of back up. That's my way home from work.... sorry, their beliefs don't supersede my right to get home and pick my daughter up from gymnastics, church, day care, etc.

The proposals, which strengthen or supplement existing laws addressing the blocking or obstructing of traffic, come in response to a string of high-profile highway closures and other actions led by Black Lives Matter activists and opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Republicans reasonably expect an invigorated protest movement during the Trump years.

I'm a great supporter of fucking up the traffic myself, with rational exceptions.
The situation that has been ongoing at Standing Rock is DISGUSTING and a clear violation of protestor rights, as well as Native rights and Native Treaties, so there's that. Anyway, I think there is a clear desire to shut down dissenting voices, and there are a ton of current examples to show us that. Sure, some members of government can craft a line that somehow presents a technicality that excuses their actual intent, but I'm actually a bit surprised that you think there aren't members of government, the POTUS included, who specifically want to shut down protestors just for their dissent, and want to shut down peaceful protest (not to mention the media and the truth). I am also surprised that you're not willing to admit that protestors' rights have been violated in the past few weeks. There are many examples of this. Seems pretty naive, coming from you.

PJPOWER

Degeneratefk said:

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

I cannot believe people think they have the right to stand out in the middle of the freeway...

PJ_Soul

PJPOWER said:

Degeneratefk said:

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

I cannot believe people think they have the right to stand out in the middle of the freeway...

I cannot believe that people think being able to drive down a freeway is more important that a fight for civil or human rights.

PJPOWER

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Seems like a very american thing. The only ones I've heard the "shut up and just sing" comments from.
Never heard it about any swedish artists or from anyone I know here in Europe.

Absurd to try to dictate what an artist/person are allowed to do or not. They are not monkeys in cages. Their songs and messages are, often, more than entertainment.

It's almost like not being allowed to criticise your countries leader when he starts an unjust war. Oh wait, same country again.

...but I sing in the choir.

What we're trying to get to in America is judging people by individual actions, not by the country in which they live or broad groups who we may wrongly believe they are a part.

I'm trying to remember the cases where Americans were jailed because they criticized the war. I was a fierce critic but I don't remember not being "allowed" to voice my criticism. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I spent three years in jail and they gave me amnesia pills.

There is definitely a drive to muzzle protesters via arrests, so I think you might be underestimating how many people actually have been jailed because they criticize the government these days... it is happening.

Please provide me one case where someone in the US was arrested and convicted of sedition or similar crime about Iraq, Afghan, etc. Many of the protesters were committing vandalism. If you are protesting and some of the protesters are committing crimes, sometimes you get caught up in teh shuffle. I'm not defending that, but I'm not defending vandalism either. However, there is a very clear line between unlawful protests (private property, no permit, etc.) along with vandalism AND sedition or free speech violations. There's also a line between an arrest and a conviction.

I am talking about this kind of drive to muzzle protestors, and other similar efforts (this is the first link I got from google btw - I've seem many stories about it from many sources lately, and related): https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19/republican-lawmakers-in-five-states-propose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/

A protest movement doesn't have the right to impede or endanger others that are not involved in the protest. I am a great supporter of protests and marches, but I'm not a supporter of fucking up the traffic. Here in Richmond several months ago, some BLM protesters blocked I-95 in the afternoon, creating hours of back up. That's my way home from work.... sorry, their beliefs don't supersede my right to get home and pick my daughter up from gymnastics, church, day care, etc.

The proposals, which strengthen or supplement existing laws addressing the blocking or obstructing of traffic, come in response to a string of high-profile highway closures and other actions led by Black Lives Matter activists and opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Republicans reasonably expect an invigorated protest movement during the Trump years.

I'm a great supporter of fucking up the traffic myself, with rational exceptions.
The situation that has been ongoing at Standing Rock is DISGUSTING and a clear violation of protestor rights, as well as Native rights and Native Treaties, so there's that. Anyway, I think there is a clear desire to shut down dissenting voices, and there are a ton of current examples to show us that. Sure, some members of government can craft a line that somehow presents a technicality that excuses their actual intent, but I'm actually a bit surprised that you think there aren't members of government, the POTUS included, who specifically want to shut down protestors just for their dissent, and want to shut down peaceful protest (not to mention the media and the truth). I am also surprised that you're not willing to admit that protestors' rights have been violated in the past few weeks. There are many examples of this. Seems pretty naive, coming from you.

The thing is, when you "fuck up traffic", you have no idea who's lives you are fucking up. It could merely be someone trying to get to work or it could be a child having an asthma attack being taken to a hospital or a woman in labor, etc, etc, etc. If you feel the need to block people, then you should be liable for the consequences of your illegal behavior, such as lawsuits, criminal charges, etc. If someone's child is having a life threatening medical issue, then I believe that parent has every right to drive through those assholes that are purposely trying to block them.

mace1229

Degeneratefk said:

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

No one says driving is a right. But it is clearly marked on highways and freeways for no bikes or pedestrians. Why do protesters think laws do not apply to them just because they are protesting?
Those laws are there for everyone's safety. Imaging going down the freeway at 70 mph and suddenly passed a curve is a group marching down the freeway?
Protest all you want, but you still have to obey laws when you do.

mrussel1

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Seems like a very american thing. The only ones I've heard the "shut up and just sing" comments from.
Never heard it about any swedish artists or from anyone I know here in Europe.

Absurd to try to dictate what an artist/person are allowed to do or not. They are not monkeys in cages. Their songs and messages are, often, more than entertainment.

It's almost like not being allowed to criticise your countries leader when he starts an unjust war. Oh wait, same country again.

...but I sing in the choir.

What we're trying to get to in America is judging people by individual actions, not by the country in which they live or broad groups who we may wrongly believe they are a part.

I'm trying to remember the cases where Americans were jailed because they criticized the war. I was a fierce critic but I don't remember not being "allowed" to voice my criticism. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I spent three years in jail and they gave me amnesia pills.

There is definitely a drive to muzzle protesters via arrests, so I think you might be underestimating how many people actually have been jailed because they criticize the government these days... it is happening.

Please provide me one case where someone in the US was arrested and convicted of sedition or similar crime about Iraq, Afghan, etc. Many of the protesters were committing vandalism. If you are protesting and some of the protesters are committing crimes, sometimes you get caught up in teh shuffle. I'm not defending that, but I'm not defending vandalism either. However, there is a very clear line between unlawful protests (private property, no permit, etc.) along with vandalism AND sedition or free speech violations. There's also a line between an arrest and a conviction.

I am talking about this kind of drive to muzzle protestors, and other similar efforts (this is the first link I got from google btw - I've seem many stories about it from many sources lately, and related): https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19/republican-lawmakers-in-five-states-propose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/

A protest movement doesn't have the right to impede or endanger others that are not involved in the protest. I am a great supporter of protests and marches, but I'm not a supporter of fucking up the traffic. Here in Richmond several months ago, some BLM protesters blocked I-95 in the afternoon, creating hours of back up. That's my way home from work.... sorry, their beliefs don't supersede my right to get home and pick my daughter up from gymnastics, church, day care, etc.

The proposals, which strengthen or supplement existing laws addressing the blocking or obstructing of traffic, come in response to a string of high-profile highway closures and other actions led by Black Lives Matter activists and opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Republicans reasonably expect an invigorated protest movement during the Trump years.

I'm a great supporter of fucking up the traffic myself, with rational exceptions.
The situation that has been ongoing at Standing Rock is DISGUSTING and a clear violation of protestor rights, as well as Native rights and Native Treaties, so there's that. Anyway, I think there is a clear desire to shut down dissenting voices, and there are a ton of current examples to show us that. Sure, some members of government can craft a line that somehow presents a technicality that excuses their actual intent, but I'm actually a bit surprised that you think there aren't members of government, the POTUS included, who specifically want to shut down protestors just for their dissent, and want to shut down peaceful protest (not to mention the media and the truth). I am also surprised that you're not willing to admit that protestors' rights have been violated in the past few weeks. There are many examples of this. Seems pretty naive, coming from you.

I'm not arguing that the POTUS and his team of Nationalists wouldn't love to stifle dissent. I'm arguing it hasn't happened and the strength of our separation of powers can and should prevent it. I'm heartened that the current administration hasn't tried to move around the 9th Circuit on the travel ban. That's a testament to the power of our Constitution and the separation. I'm fully confident that if a law made it through a state or federal process that prohibited a peaceful protest (within the boundaries of local ordinances) or reduced the rights of written free speech, it would be struck down swiftly.

Spiritual Chaos made, what in my mind, are both unfounded allegations along with a broad sweeping indictment of Americans. Well I take offense to those accusations for all of the reasons I've been writing.

mrussel1

Degeneratefk said:

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

No one said driving is a right under the Bill of Rights. If it were, then you couldn't remove that right from people (which happens all the time). What I've said (and I think my friends on the right here) are saying is that a protester sure as hell doesn't have the right to stop me, my family, whatever from moving on the open roads by breaking laws. Their right to protest illegally (blocking roads is against the law) does not supersede my right to go where I wish.

rgambs

mace1229 said:

Degeneratefk said:

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

No one says driving is a right. But it is clearly marked on highways and freeways for no bikes or pedestrians. Why do protesters think laws do not apply to them just because they are protesting?
Those laws are there for everyone's safety. Imaging going down the freeway at 70 mph and suddenly passed a curve is a group marching down the freeway?
Protest all you want, but you still have to obey laws when you do.

You don't understand civil disobedience?

PJPOWER

rgambs said:

mace1229 said:

Degeneratefk said:

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

No one says driving is a right. But it is clearly marked on highways and freeways for no bikes or pedestrians. Why do protesters think laws do not apply to them just because they are protesting?
Those laws are there for everyone's safety. Imaging going down the freeway at 70 mph and suddenly passed a curve is a group marching down the freeway?
Protest all you want, but you still have to obey laws when you do.

You don't understand civil disobedience?

I think that some of the people that exercise civil disobedience often do not understand being held responsible for the consequences.

mace1229

rgambs said:

mace1229 said:

Degeneratefk said:

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

No one says driving is a right. But it is clearly marked on highways and freeways for no bikes or pedestrians. Why do protesters think laws do not apply to them just because they are protesting?
Those laws are there for everyone's safety. Imaging going down the freeway at 70 mph and suddenly passed a curve is a group marching down the freeway?
Protest all you want, but you still have to obey laws when you do.

You don't understand civil disobedience?

Sure. But don't complain when those laws are enforced. And that doesn't really have anything to di with my comment you highlighted. Yes, when you protest you still have to obey laws. Civil disobedience is purposefully breaking the law in protest, but you are still held accountable because it is still the law. Laws apply to everyone, even protesters.
It sounds people here think that no laws should be enforced during a protest (within reason I guess), and if they are then the rights of the protesters are being violated. That is just ridiculous. If you chose the path of civil disobedience, then accept the consequences of breaking the law. Which, in my opinion, should be stiff fines or jail time for impeding traffic on a freeway.

PJ_Soul

PJPOWER said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Seems like a very american thing. The only ones I've heard the "shut up and just sing" comments from.
Never heard it about any swedish artists or from anyone I know here in Europe.

Absurd to try to dictate what an artist/person are allowed to do or not. They are not monkeys in cages. Their songs and messages are, often, more than entertainment.

It's almost like not being allowed to criticise your countries leader when he starts an unjust war. Oh wait, same country again.

...but I sing in the choir.

What we're trying to get to in America is judging people by individual actions, not by the country in which they live or broad groups who we may wrongly believe they are a part.

I'm trying to remember the cases where Americans were jailed because they criticized the war. I was a fierce critic but I don't remember not being "allowed" to voice my criticism. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I spent three years in jail and they gave me amnesia pills.

There is definitely a drive to muzzle protesters via arrests, so I think you might be underestimating how many people actually have been jailed because they criticize the government these days... it is happening.

Please provide me one case where someone in the US was arrested and convicted of sedition or similar crime about Iraq, Afghan, etc. Many of the protesters were committing vandalism. If you are protesting and some of the protesters are committing crimes, sometimes you get caught up in teh shuffle. I'm not defending that, but I'm not defending vandalism either. However, there is a very clear line between unlawful protests (private property, no permit, etc.) along with vandalism AND sedition or free speech violations. There's also a line between an arrest and a conviction.

I am talking about this kind of drive to muzzle protestors, and other similar efforts (this is the first link I got from google btw - I've seem many stories about it from many sources lately, and related): https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19/republican-lawmakers-in-five-states-propose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/

A protest movement doesn't have the right to impede or endanger others that are not involved in the protest. I am a great supporter of protests and marches, but I'm not a supporter of fucking up the traffic. Here in Richmond several months ago, some BLM protesters blocked I-95 in the afternoon, creating hours of back up. That's my way home from work.... sorry, their beliefs don't supersede my right to get home and pick my daughter up from gymnastics, church, day care, etc.

The proposals, which strengthen or supplement existing laws addressing the blocking or obstructing of traffic, come in response to a string of high-profile highway closures and other actions led by Black Lives Matter activists and opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Republicans reasonably expect an invigorated protest movement during the Trump years.

I'm a great supporter of fucking up the traffic myself, with rational exceptions.
The situation that has been ongoing at Standing Rock is DISGUSTING and a clear violation of protestor rights, as well as Native rights and Native Treaties, so there's that. Anyway, I think there is a clear desire to shut down dissenting voices, and there are a ton of current examples to show us that. Sure, some members of government can craft a line that somehow presents a technicality that excuses their actual intent, but I'm actually a bit surprised that you think there aren't members of government, the POTUS included, who specifically want to shut down protestors just for their dissent, and want to shut down peaceful protest (not to mention the media and the truth). I am also surprised that you're not willing to admit that protestors' rights have been violated in the past few weeks. There are many examples of this. Seems pretty naive, coming from you.

The thing is, when you "fuck up traffic", you have no idea who's lives you are fucking up. It could merely be someone trying to get to work or it could be a child having an asthma attack being taken to a hospital or a woman in labor, etc, etc, etc. If you feel the need to block people, then you should be liable for the consequences of your illegal behavior, such as lawsuits, criminal charges, etc. If someone's child is having a life threatening medical issue, then I believe that parent has every right to drive through those assholes that are purposely trying to block them.

I'm pretty sure everyone understands the flimsy argument you're presenting.
Life is all about weighing pros and cons and risks, right? I also specifically said I support it with rational exceptions. The kinds of situations you're talking about here are only anecdotal. Once you start posting stories about how someone died because of a peaceful protest blocking traffic because somehow the protest blocked off all possible options for someone, or stories about parents who mowed down people with their car because their kid was dying next to them, maybe I'll pay attention.

mace1229

PJ_Soul said:

PJPOWER said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Seems like a very american thing. The only ones I've heard the "shut up and just sing" comments from.
Never heard it about any swedish artists or from anyone I know here in Europe.

Absurd to try to dictate what an artist/person are allowed to do or not. They are not monkeys in cages. Their songs and messages are, often, more than entertainment.

It's almost like not being allowed to criticise your countries leader when he starts an unjust war. Oh wait, same country again.

...but I sing in the choir.

What we're trying to get to in America is judging people by individual actions, not by the country in which they live or broad groups who we may wrongly believe they are a part.

I'm trying to remember the cases where Americans were jailed because they criticized the war. I was a fierce critic but I don't remember not being "allowed" to voice my criticism. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I spent three years in jail and they gave me amnesia pills.

There is definitely a drive to muzzle protesters via arrests, so I think you might be underestimating how many people actually have been jailed because they criticize the government these days... it is happening.

Please provide me one case where someone in the US was arrested and convicted of sedition or similar crime about Iraq, Afghan, etc. Many of the protesters were committing vandalism. If you are protesting and some of the protesters are committing crimes, sometimes you get caught up in teh shuffle. I'm not defending that, but I'm not defending vandalism either. However, there is a very clear line between unlawful protests (private property, no permit, etc.) along with vandalism AND sedition or free speech violations. There's also a line between an arrest and a conviction.

I am talking about this kind of drive to muzzle protestors, and other similar efforts (this is the first link I got from google btw - I've seem many stories about it from many sources lately, and related): https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19/republican-lawmakers-in-five-states-propose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/

A protest movement doesn't have the right to impede or endanger others that are not involved in the protest. I am a great supporter of protests and marches, but I'm not a supporter of fucking up the traffic. Here in Richmond several months ago, some BLM protesters blocked I-95 in the afternoon, creating hours of back up. That's my way home from work.... sorry, their beliefs don't supersede my right to get home and pick my daughter up from gymnastics, church, day care, etc.

The proposals, which strengthen or supplement existing laws addressing the blocking or obstructing of traffic, come in response to a string of high-profile highway closures and other actions led by Black Lives Matter activists and opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Republicans reasonably expect an invigorated protest movement during the Trump years.

I'm a great supporter of fucking up the traffic myself, with rational exceptions.
The situation that has been ongoing at Standing Rock is DISGUSTING and a clear violation of protestor rights, as well as Native rights and Native Treaties, so there's that. Anyway, I think there is a clear desire to shut down dissenting voices, and there are a ton of current examples to show us that. Sure, some members of government can craft a line that somehow presents a technicality that excuses their actual intent, but I'm actually a bit surprised that you think there aren't members of government, the POTUS included, who specifically want to shut down protestors just for their dissent, and want to shut down peaceful protest (not to mention the media and the truth). I am also surprised that you're not willing to admit that protestors' rights have been violated in the past few weeks. There are many examples of this. Seems pretty naive, coming from you.

The thing is, when you "fuck up traffic", you have no idea who's lives you are fucking up. It could merely be someone trying to get to work or it could be a child having an asthma attack being taken to a hospital or a woman in labor, etc, etc, etc. If you feel the need to block people, then you should be liable for the consequences of your illegal behavior, such as lawsuits, criminal charges, etc. If someone's child is having a life threatening medical issue, then I believe that parent has every right to drive through those assholes that are purposely trying to block them.

I'm pretty sure everyone understands the flimsy argument you're presenting.
Life is all about weighing pros and cons and risks, right? I also, I specifically said I support it with rational exceptions. The kinds of situations you're talking about here are only anecdotal. Once you start posting stories about how someone died because of a peaceful protest blocking traffic because somehow the protest blocked off all possible options for someone, or stories about parents who mowed down people with their car because their kid was dying next to them, maybe I'll pay attention.

Fatal stories aside, why should certain laws not apply to someone just because they are protesting?
If I walk along the side of a freeway today I will get a ticket. If I try to ride my bike home on the freeway I will get a ticket and my bike confiscated.
Why should laws not apply, that are clearly posted and everyone knows them, not apply to someone simply because they are protesting?
That is more my argument, although I do remember cases of emergency vehicles not getting to their destination, I don't think anyone was killed as a result from what I heard though.

PJ_Soul

mace1229 said:

PJ_Soul said:

PJPOWER said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Seems like a very american thing. The only ones I've heard the "shut up and just sing" comments from.
Never heard it about any swedish artists or from anyone I know here in Europe.

Absurd to try to dictate what an artist/person are allowed to do or not. They are not monkeys in cages. Their songs and messages are, often, more than entertainment.

It's almost like not being allowed to criticise your countries leader when he starts an unjust war. Oh wait, same country again.

...but I sing in the choir.

What we're trying to get to in America is judging people by individual actions, not by the country in which they live or broad groups who we may wrongly believe they are a part.

I'm trying to remember the cases where Americans were jailed because they criticized the war. I was a fierce critic but I don't remember not being "allowed" to voice my criticism. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I spent three years in jail and they gave me amnesia pills.

There is definitely a drive to muzzle protesters via arrests, so I think you might be underestimating how many people actually have been jailed because they criticize the government these days... it is happening.

Please provide me one case where someone in the US was arrested and convicted of sedition or similar crime about Iraq, Afghan, etc. Many of the protesters were committing vandalism. If you are protesting and some of the protesters are committing crimes, sometimes you get caught up in teh shuffle. I'm not defending that, but I'm not defending vandalism either. However, there is a very clear line between unlawful protests (private property, no permit, etc.) along with vandalism AND sedition or free speech violations. There's also a line between an arrest and a conviction.

I am talking about this kind of drive to muzzle protestors, and other similar efforts (this is the first link I got from google btw - I've seem many stories about it from many sources lately, and related): https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19/republican-lawmakers-in-five-states-propose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/

A protest movement doesn't have the right to impede or endanger others that are not involved in the protest. I am a great supporter of protests and marches, but I'm not a supporter of fucking up the traffic. Here in Richmond several months ago, some BLM protesters blocked I-95 in the afternoon, creating hours of back up. That's my way home from work.... sorry, their beliefs don't supersede my right to get home and pick my daughter up from gymnastics, church, day care, etc.

The proposals, which strengthen or supplement existing laws addressing the blocking or obstructing of traffic, come in response to a string of high-profile highway closures and other actions led by Black Lives Matter activists and opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Republicans reasonably expect an invigorated protest movement during the Trump years.

I'm a great supporter of fucking up the traffic myself, with rational exceptions.
The situation that has been ongoing at Standing Rock is DISGUSTING and a clear violation of protestor rights, as well as Native rights and Native Treaties, so there's that. Anyway, I think there is a clear desire to shut down dissenting voices, and there are a ton of current examples to show us that. Sure, some members of government can craft a line that somehow presents a technicality that excuses their actual intent, but I'm actually a bit surprised that you think there aren't members of government, the POTUS included, who specifically want to shut down protestors just for their dissent, and want to shut down peaceful protest (not to mention the media and the truth). I am also surprised that you're not willing to admit that protestors' rights have been violated in the past few weeks. There are many examples of this. Seems pretty naive, coming from you.

The thing is, when you "fuck up traffic", you have no idea who's lives you are fucking up. It could merely be someone trying to get to work or it could be a child having an asthma attack being taken to a hospital or a woman in labor, etc, etc, etc. If you feel the need to block people, then you should be liable for the consequences of your illegal behavior, such as lawsuits, criminal charges, etc. If someone's child is having a life threatening medical issue, then I believe that parent has every right to drive through those assholes that are purposely trying to block them.

I'm pretty sure everyone understands the flimsy argument you're presenting.
Life is all about weighing pros and cons and risks, right? I also, I specifically said I support it with rational exceptions. The kinds of situations you're talking about here are only anecdotal. Once you start posting stories about how someone died because of a peaceful protest blocking traffic because somehow the protest blocked off all possible options for someone, or stories about parents who mowed down people with their car because their kid was dying next to them, maybe I'll pay attention.

Fatal stories aside, why should certain laws not apply to someone just because they are protesting?
If I walk along the side of a freeway today I will get a ticket. If I try to ride my bike home on the freeway I will get a ticket and my bike confiscated.
Why should laws not apply, that are clearly posted and everyone knows them, not apply to someone simply because they are protesting?
That is more my argument, although I do remember cases of emergency vehicles not getting to their destination, I don't think anyone was killed as a result from what I heard though.

You're acting like there are no laws right now. That is obviously not the case.

mace1229

I was getting the impression that several here, including you, thought it would not be fair write citations and give fines for those protesting on the freeway. But a tactic by republicans to stomp out the protest. Is that not correct?
If it is, what gives them the right to do so, when it is clearly illegal?

mrussel1

PJ_Soul said:

PJPOWER said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

Seems like a very american thing. The only ones I've heard the "shut up and just sing" comments from.
Never heard it about any swedish artists or from anyone I know here in Europe.

Absurd to try to dictate what an artist/person are allowed to do or not. They are not monkeys in cages. Their songs and messages are, often, more than entertainment.

It's almost like not being allowed to criticise your countries leader when he starts an unjust war. Oh wait, same country again.

...but I sing in the choir.

What we're trying to get to in America is judging people by individual actions, not by the country in which they live or broad groups who we may wrongly believe they are a part.

I'm trying to remember the cases where Americans were jailed because they criticized the war. I was a fierce critic but I don't remember not being "allowed" to voice my criticism. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I spent three years in jail and they gave me amnesia pills.

There is definitely a drive to muzzle protesters via arrests, so I think you might be underestimating how many people actually have been jailed because they criticize the government these days... it is happening.

Please provide me one case where someone in the US was arrested and convicted of sedition or similar crime about Iraq, Afghan, etc. Many of the protesters were committing vandalism. If you are protesting and some of the protesters are committing crimes, sometimes you get caught up in teh shuffle. I'm not defending that, but I'm not defending vandalism either. However, there is a very clear line between unlawful protests (private property, no permit, etc.) along with vandalism AND sedition or free speech violations. There's also a line between an arrest and a conviction.

I am talking about this kind of drive to muzzle protestors, and other similar efforts (this is the first link I got from google btw - I've seem many stories about it from many sources lately, and related): https://theintercept.com/2017/01/19/republican-lawmakers-in-five-states-propose-bills-to-criminalize-peaceful-protest/

A protest movement doesn't have the right to impede or endanger others that are not involved in the protest. I am a great supporter of protests and marches, but I'm not a supporter of fucking up the traffic. Here in Richmond several months ago, some BLM protesters blocked I-95 in the afternoon, creating hours of back up. That's my way home from work.... sorry, their beliefs don't supersede my right to get home and pick my daughter up from gymnastics, church, day care, etc.

The proposals, which strengthen or supplement existing laws addressing the blocking or obstructing of traffic, come in response to a string of high-profile highway closures and other actions led by Black Lives Matter activists and opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline. Republicans reasonably expect an invigorated protest movement during the Trump years.

I'm a great supporter of fucking up the traffic myself, with rational exceptions.
The situation that has been ongoing at Standing Rock is DISGUSTING and a clear violation of protestor rights, as well as Native rights and Native Treaties, so there's that. Anyway, I think there is a clear desire to shut down dissenting voices, and there are a ton of current examples to show us that. Sure, some members of government can craft a line that somehow presents a technicality that excuses their actual intent, but I'm actually a bit surprised that you think there aren't members of government, the POTUS included, who specifically want to shut down protestors just for their dissent, and want to shut down peaceful protest (not to mention the media and the truth). I am also surprised that you're not willing to admit that protestors' rights have been violated in the past few weeks. There are many examples of this. Seems pretty naive, coming from you.

The thing is, when you "fuck up traffic", you have no idea who's lives you are fucking up. It could merely be someone trying to get to work or it could be a child having an asthma attack being taken to a hospital or a woman in labor, etc, etc, etc. If you feel the need to block people, then you should be liable for the consequences of your illegal behavior, such as lawsuits, criminal charges, etc. If someone's child is having a life threatening medical issue, then I believe that parent has every right to drive through those assholes that are purposely trying to block them.

I'm pretty sure everyone understands the flimsy argument you're presenting.
Life is all about weighing pros and cons and risks, right? I also specifically said I support it with rational exceptions. The kinds of situations you're talking about here are only anecdotal. Once you start posting stories about how someone died because of a peaceful protest blocking traffic because somehow the protest blocked off all possible options for someone, or stories about parents who mowed down people with their car because their kid was dying next to them, maybe I'll pay attention.

Bridgegate had some consequences that I'm sure the Christie crew didn't really think through when they shut down the GWB. In my example where they blocked I-95 in Richmond (I-95 is one of the busiest interstates in the US, running from Boston to Miami), there certainly may have been issues that protesters didn't really think through.

TRENTON — The controversial lane closures at the George Washington Bridge last September delayed emergency responders from attending to at least four medical situations in Fort Lee — including helping a 91-year-old woman who lay unconscious and later died, according to a report by The Record.
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/01/fort_lee_woman_died_as_gwb_closures_delayed_medical_help.html

Go Beavers

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

mace1229 said:

Degeneratefk said:

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

No one says driving is a right. But it is clearly marked on highways and freeways for no bikes or pedestrians. Why do protesters think laws do not apply to them just because they are protesting?
Those laws are there for everyone's safety. Imaging going down the freeway at 70 mph and suddenly passed a curve is a group marching down the freeway?
Protest all you want, but you still have to obey laws when you do.

You don't understand civil disobedience?

I think that some of the people that exercise civil disobedience often do not understand being held responsible for the consequences.

And there's legal consequences for that. Our entitled driver culture supports that if you're in your car, you can assault or intimidate people with your car because you're being delayed. We've had people in here, and I've heard people say they would run people over who delayed them. I have a problem with this and am on the receiving end of it occasionally. F**kers try to intimidate me with their car or truck because they think I'm slowing them down. Of course, the irony isn't lost on them when I'm talking to them about it at the next stop and they realize I'm going as fast as they are. They all backpedal pretty quickly when out side of their anonymous cage.

mrussel1

Go Beavers said:

PJPOWER said:

rgambs said:

mace1229 said:

Degeneratefk said:

I can't believe people still think that driving is a right. It's even more ridiculous that people think you have the right to drive without being stopped.

No one says driving is a right. But it is clearly marked on highways and freeways for no bikes or pedestrians. Why do protesters think laws do not apply to them just because they are protesting?
Those laws are there for everyone's safety. Imaging going down the freeway at 70 mph and suddenly passed a curve is a group marching down the freeway?
Protest all you want, but you still have to obey laws when you do.

You don't understand civil disobedience?

I think that some of the people that exercise civil disobedience often do not understand being held responsible for the consequences.

And there's legal consequences for that. Our entitled driver culture supports that if you're in your car, you can assault or intimidate people with your car because you're being delayed. We've had people in here, and I've heard people say they would run people over who delayed them. I have a problem with this and am on the receiving end of it occasionally. F**kers try to intimidate me with their car or truck because they think I'm slowing them down. Of course, the irony isn't lost on them when I'm talking to them about it at the next stop and they realize I'm going as fast as they are. They all backpedal pretty quickly when out side of their anonymous cage.

That is also an extreme example or statement. But even as a liberal, I can't condone protesters blocking the interstates. Plus it really doesn't serve any purpose. It makes me less sympathetic to the cause and presumably they'd want more people to be sympathetic. Unless they are backassward protesters.