If they can get to the protestors. Traffic doesn't just occur at the single spot where this happens, and this is especially true on a bridge.
If they can get to the protestors. Traffic doesn't just occur at the single spot where this happens, and this is especially true on a bridge.
If you keep blocking a bridge or a highway you will eventually have a case where an emergency vehicle gets blocked. The consequences of that can be dire and the people who suffer as a result would have done nothing wrong in relation to whatever you're protesting. Nobody stuck in their car in a protest like that is going to thank you or support your cause. The businesses who don't have their workers their on time for regular operations is not going to support your cause either. Sure you get attention for your cause, but you have also just turned a whole lot of local people against you.
Putting yourself in danger, putting other people at risk, and pissing a whole lot of people off is not the best form of protest. The time and energy would be better spent taking the fight directly to those who can do real change in relation to your cause. Not everyday people who are just trying to get through the day.
My infant had a severe allergic reaction to food on more than one occasion as we were still understanding his allergies. I had to drive him to the ER one of those times and the thought crossed my mind that if I got blocked by protestors like this and they wouldn't let me through despite the situation, I would not want to have to choose between saving my son's life or sparing protestor's lives.
It also keeps emergency vehicles like ambulances from being able to get to hospitals which puts lives in danger.
I could definitely be for throwing Tom Cotton off a bridge in protest
"If something like this happened in Arkansas on a bridge there, let's just say that there would be a lot of wet criminals that would have been tossed overboard, not by law enforcement, but by the people whose road they are blocking," Cotton said.
While this can happen, it often doesn't as it requires the protesters and police to be coordinating and allow that portion of traffic, which in this particular instance in San Francisco did not happen.As someone who has blocked a road during a protest before, the police literally begin escorting you, are in radio contact with others and will ask you to let vehicles through.
Had it happen not even for an ambulance but someone saying they really needed to get home to their kid.
Blocking roads is not an effective protest. It's counterproductive, dangerous, and can cause serious issues for innocent people who have nothing to do with what you're protesting. Delaying emergency vehicles being one of the major ones as it was mentioned earlier.
Obviously not agreeing with what that dip shit said about throwing anyone off a bridge, but it's just not a form of a protest that I personally agree with.
and pissing a whole lot of people off is not the best form of protest.
Good, because the example you posted before you deleted it literally told the exact opposite story you thought it did, with the ambulance being blocked by police, not protesters, which were not even blocking that road's direction to begin with
Also shouldn't there normally be side roads or alternative routes that don't use major highways that protestors would block?If you're not conservative but you're still channeling the "but what about emergency vehicles" argument in the context of a protest, well, I'm no doctor but that may be a mean case of "boomer mindset."
If you're not conservative but you're still channeling the "but what about emergency vehicles" argument in the context of a protest, well, I'm no doctor but that may be a mean case of "boomer mindset."
No, these protests are typically designed to block things like bridges or other limited roads (as also happened yesterday in Chicago at the O'Hare entrance road) where there are no alternatives. Otherwise traffic would just flow around them with minimal impact.Also shouldn't there normally be side roads or alternative routes that don't use major highways that protestors would block?
Normally I would agree. These people are essentially cowards when it comes down to it, but for some reason when it comes to these kinds of protests the right wingers suddenly have the guts to do something. I think it's because most protesters don't fight back.Getting strong vibes of conservative people I've known who say they'll do A because you know manly or w/e and then when actually confronted with the situation they stfu and sit down. Garbage person pushing garbage dangerous ideas because the world is about THEM always.
Law enforcement doing it is one thing, I was more responding on the premise encouraging civilians into murdering protestors by chucking them off a bridge. I'm sure the more you unpack it the worse reality actually is but tbh it's Tuesday, I'm good not going further than just chastising all these bitch people with such fragile self important egos.Normally I would agree. These people are essentially cowards when it comes down to it, but for some reason when it comes to these kinds of protests the right wingers suddenly have the guts to do something. I think it's because most protesters don't fight back.
There are endless videos of angry drivers and police clearing out these protests and moving people out of the way by force. Or worse you get the psychos that start waving guns or try to run people over.
Yes, of course. US Republicans are not even a little bit concerned about hypocrisy. If a conservative is deplatformed or jeered at or even discussed negatively after the fact, that's anti-free speech. If a liberal is deplatformed that's fine and normal. Liberals complaining about Florida kids being taught that slavery was actually helpful to slaves are just whiners who want to brainwash kids with DEI, but banning "critical race theory" from classrooms is very good and important. etc. It's fine when we do it, it's unconscionable when they do it is just a way of life for Republicans, and they see no problems with that. Thus the now well-known quote about conservatives believing in in-groups that the law protects but does not bind and out-groups that the law binds but does not protect.What if the protest was for religious liberty? Against unfair taxation? Would it be different then?
Per a few news stories I just found from googling, this was a pro-Palestine protest? Possible it was ill-advised, certainly, but it's a little odd to say it wasn't for a cause.Yesterday a group blocked the entrance to Seattle-Tacoma airport. I can't think of an experience more counterproductive than sticking people in cars with the crushing anxiety that they will miss a nonrefundable flight. That protest was not for a cause. That protest was to show moral superiority and righteousness, an event about the protestors themselves. It was rightly condemned by everyone.
While this can happen, it often doesn't as it requires the protesters and police to be coordinating and allow that portion of traffic, which in this particular instance in San Francisco did not happen.
You know the civil rights movement didn't make a lot of white people happy right? Like it literally pissed a lot of people the fuck off, it was not seen as a good thing by the white majority so this always confuses me when people say stuff like this. That's the one thing that's guaranteed with a protest, that you're gonna piss folks off. There's a reason white folks hated Martin Luther King when he was alive. And the putting yourself in danger part too,. I don't even need to explain that part. I understand the emergency vehicle part tho, but I mean, folks gotta protest.
I mean. If you see a protest and you start running through hypotheticals where you gotta run them over..idk
Normally I would agree. These people are essentially cowards when it comes down to it, but for some reason when it comes to these kinds of protests the right wingers suddenly have the guts to do something. I think it's because most protesters don't fight back.
There are endless videos of angry drivers and police clearing out these protests and moving people out of the way by force. Or worse you get the psychos that start waving guns or try to run people over.
Per a few news stories I just found from googling, this was a pro-Palestine protest? Possible it was ill-advised, certainly, but it's a little odd to say it wasn't for a cause.
Man it's been awful over there. I spent the last couple hours of my shift trying to help direct people around and point them to where they can get help. I've never seen so many people crying about missed flights before.
You can see the reason in this thread itself. No one here will overtly support the calls for violence but there is enough "well they shouldn't protest like that" even on a fairly liberal platform.
When even people opposed to the fascists see the protestors as a danger or a nuisance, you can understand why they get emboldened.
"Look at how many people agree with me, I will do something about it."
That's what I was trying to say earlier. Go after the source. Make their lives hell.Protests that target ordinary people with zero power to change things doesn't make sense in many instances. Unless your goal is to generate publicity/awareness, which is needed sometimes. A blockade of our elected representatives driveways would be a lot more effective in this instance. Target the people with the power to do something.
That's what I was trying to say earlier. Go after the source. Make their lives hell.
I never forgot Ted Cruz a few years ago wanted to classify protests as "economic terrorism."
Realize that's the goal of the Republican platform.
That's what I was trying to say earlier. Go after the source. Make their lives hell.
This article is so bad the only thing it convinced me of is that some of you will post anything as long as the title agrees with your existing position.People still fall for this myth? https://bylinetimes.com/2022/10/26/the-myth-of-the-blocked-ambulance/
Agreed. Plus even if you think Cotton wouldn't ever do something, his rhetoric reaches far and it just needs to convince one person to take action. It's not a question of if or when. It's already happened multiple times in recent history.Normally I would agree. These people are essentially cowards when it comes down to it, but for some reason when it comes to these kinds of protests the right wingers suddenly have the guts to do something. I think it's because most protesters don't fight back.
There are endless videos of angry drivers and police clearing out these protests and moving people out of the way by force. Or worse you get the psychos that start waving guns or try to run people over.
That you have to tell somebody what the protest was about after the fact means it may not have been as effective as some people are assuming.Per a few news stories I just found from googling, this was a pro-Palestine protest? Possible it was ill-advised, certainly, but it's a little odd to say it wasn't for a cause.
This article is so bad the only thing it convinced me of is that some of you will post anything as long as the title agrees with your existing position.
Agreed. Plus even if you think Cotton wouldn't ever do something, his rhetoric reaches far and it just needs to convince one person to take action. It's not a question of if or when. It's already happened multiple times in recent history.
As to the whole "blocking traffic" debate, I more question how effective it is. If you block traffic that means people are backed up and may not actually see what you're protesting. So you have to rely on the news telling them why they were rerouted or stuck in traffic or whatever. And these days that means you're getting highly curated, often biased reporting telling you about it either pushing the worst aspects or hiding any real issues created by it.
For example:
That you have to tell somebody what the protest was about after the fact means it may not have been as effective as some people are assuming.
I'm confused. Are you talking about other protests you were a part of that involved blocking traffic? Because I thought this was about supporting Palestinians.We used social media to spread the word of it, got it into some papers, including having a small independent outfit who was more connected with the community accompany us.
Out of it we managed to get a meeting with city officials to discuss qualified immunity for the police, youth engagement, and further support for accessible housing and services for the unhoused. Unfortunately, I had to relocate so not sure how long the engagement lasted between them and the government.
Not to say it will have a perfect success rate but not sure what form of protesting will when people deem issues too hard to solve or they are indifferent unless they're directly affected by them.
They'll say it is, but it's actually not.Is publicly encouraging the murder of other people even protected free speech in the US?
Congrats on agreeing with the conservatives that protests should be invisible and convenient for everyone.Protests that target ordinary people with zero power to change things doesn't make sense in many instances. Unless your goal is to generate publicity/awareness, which is needed sometimes. A blockade of our elected representatives driveways would be a lot more effective in this instance. Target the people with the power to do something.
It mostly is. The legal standard for inciting violence is almost never met because it requires someone to knowingly call for a specific violent act to be carried out immediately.Is publicly encouraging the murder of other people even protected free speech in the US?
Congrats on agreeing with the conservatives that protests should be invisible and convenient for everyone.