Home› A Moving Train

Two Interesting Videos

sapperskunksapperskunk Posts: 684
edited February 2007 in A Moving Train
The first is a "pro-life" demonstrator being attacked by someone who is obviously "pro-choice". This is just another example of the poor political discourse now too common in our country. I guess the Young Republicans here at UW had an Affirmative Action bake sale, and had their menu/price sign destroyed by someone with an adverse opinion. Also, I remember pro-choicers coming with large sticks and sheets to try and cover up the signs made by pro-lifers. All of these examples aren't good for anybody.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKe14jtpbbY


On the other side of the spectrum, we have the police tazering a woman who, IMO, could have been easily subdued with their hands. I could see some leg kicking which might suggest she was NOT yet fully restrained. Those, cops were kind of big, I just don't think it should have gone that far. And I think the worst part of this video, is hearing her brave and noble friends just stand there and watch her while she gets zapped, that made me sick.

(You'll need an account for this one)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kA8fD6YvyJk


I don't want this to become a pro life or pro choice thread, or a pro/against police thread. I'm interested in hearing the opinions of people who are in favor or not of these methods of political interaction and what you think of these videos. That goes for the censorship of pro-lifers and the methods of police dealing with protestors.
www.myspace.com/olafvonmastadon
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Well, attacking the pro-lifer was wrong. On the other hand, that picture was wrong. I can see why the person was upset. Unfortunately I can't watch the other one. But still, assault is wrong in any case.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • sourdoughsourdough Posts: 579
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Well, attacking the pro-lifer was wrong. On the other hand, that picture was wrong. I can see why the person was upset. Unfortunately I can't watch the other one. But still, assault is wrong in any case.
    I couldn't see what was on the poster, but if you are showing offensive imagery or if your sign is inflammatory, then they share part of the blame. BTW that was in Vancouver, so those nasty politics don't end at the border.

    As for the second video, without knowing the context, it is difficult to evaluate the police response. We see a woman who is not threatening anyone being tazed, however without knowing what she had done before the video starts might answer a lot of questions. You do lose sympathy whenever your campaign is marred by your actions.
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    sourdough wrote:
    I couldn't see what was on the poster, but if you are showing offensive imagery or if your sign is inflammatory, then they share part of the blame. BTW that was in Vancouver, so those nasty politics don't end at the border.

    As for the second video, without knowing the context, it is difficult to evaluate the police response. We see a woman who is not threatening anyone being tazed, however without knowing what she had done before the video starts might answer a lot of questions. You do lose sympathy whenever your campaign is marred by your actions.

    This was the exact poster that was being held
    http://www.edsanders.com/abortion/03.jpg

    From what I've gathered, people who have had abortions know what a fetus looks like, they probably know a lot about abortion. I think they have a hell of a time deciding to have an abortion and it's probably something they are sensitive about. This picture isn't subtle to say the least.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • sourdoughsourdough Posts: 579
    Ahnimus wrote:
    This was the exact poster that was being held
    http://www.edsanders.com/abortion/03.jpg

    From what I've gathered, people who have had abortions know what a fetus looks like, they probably know a lot about abortion. I think they have a hell of a time deciding to have an abortion and it's probably something they are sensitive about. This picture isn't subtle to say the least.
    Thanks for the link. I haven't seen that one before but I have seen demonstrations that use shock value and offensive imagery to try and communicate their cause. To me having that poster in my face as I wait for a bus is an assault on my senses and I would be furious if I had a child with me seeing that. It sounds to me like the person who took the sign had some strong personal issues with abortion. I can imagine that if you had been personally effected by an abortion how that could set someone off.

    This goes for any campaign. I also object to PETA when they post their junk around showing grotesque images and emotional appeals. Its different if its just on their website, but not at my bus stop.
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    sourdough wrote:
    Thanks for the link. I haven't seen that one before but I have seen demonstrations that use shock value and offensive imagery to try and communicate their cause. To me having that poster in my face as I wait for a bus is an assault on my senses and I would be furious if I had a child with me seeing that. It sounds to me like the person who took the sign had some strong personal issues with abortion. I can imagine that if you had been personally effected by an abortion how that could set someone off.

    This goes for any campaign. I also object to PETA when they post their junk around showing grotesque images and emotional appeals. Its different if its just on their website, but not at my bus stop.

    I agree. I think it's important in some cases for people to see imagery to reflect the issue. But in public, it's just not appropriate. Imagine trying to protest pornography that way. lol, ok well that might not have the same effect, but that would actually be illegal.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    I think it's very inappropriate to show such imagery in public. I don't condone the actions of the "pro-choicer" but it's understandable.

    I don't have a youtube account so can't watch the second video.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    As for the first one, I am adamantly pro-choice, but I am also adamantly pro-First Amendment. The best remedy for offensive speech not supression, but more speech. If you find the pro-life position to be simplistic or offensive (as I often do), it's up to you to state your own position and make it better than theirs ... or you can try to shout them down if you like ... or you can hang around and harrass them ... whatever. What you shouldn't do is steal their property or attempt to stop them from speaking.

    As for the second one, I agree that cops that size shouldn't have had any trouble restraining that woman without tazering her, but actions like this from cops stopped surprising me long ago. I'd be interested to see what the woman's actions were that led to this incident ... it's a shame the video starts with the tazering, it makes it impossible to say for sure that it was unwarranted, but it likely was.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • sapperskunksapperskunk Posts: 684
    hippiemom wrote:
    As for the first one, I am adamantly pro-choice, but I am also adamantly pro-First Amendment. The best remedy for offensive speech not supression, but more speech. If you find the pro-life position to be simplistic or offensive (as I often do), it's up to you to state your own position and make it better than theirs ... or you can try to shout them down if you like ... or you can hang around and harrass them ... whatever. What you shouldn't do is steal their property or attempt to stop them from speaking.

    As for the second one, I agree that cops that size shouldn't have had any trouble restraining that woman without tazering her, but actions like this from cops stopped surprising me long ago. I'd be interested to see what the woman's actions were that led to this incident ... it's a shame the video starts with the tazering, it makes it impossible to say for sure that it was unwarranted, but it likely was.


    There is a longer video for the second one, but the camera really just turns on her right when this goes down, so you can't really see what she did.
    www.myspace.com/olafvonmastadon
Sign In or Register to comment.