Protests

[J-mobzz]

My understanding is a lot of federal agents are not wearing badges, not identifying themselves other than federal agents and not wearing uniforms. Stormtroopers are not the best reference since they are easily identified as foot soldiers for the Imperial Army.
I don’t condone the vandalism or breaking of laws but creating a federal guerilla army since you can’t legally use the military against American people doesn’t seem like it’s any lesser of an evil to me.

 

[TRD270]

My understanding is a lot of federal agents are not wearing badges, not identifying themselves other than federal agents and not wearing uniforms. Stormtroopers are not the best reference since they are easily identified as foot soldiers for the Imperial Army.
I don’t condone the vandalism or breaking of laws but creating a federal guerilla army since you can’t legally use the military against American people doesn’t seem like it’s any lesser of an evil to me.

I'm far from wanting big government oversight. But at the same time since i'm actually a working citizen I don't want my tax dollars going to repairing things destroyed by these "protesters".

And if they want communism let them have a taste, let the unmarked van roll up full of people not in uniform and let the protesters disappear. You want communism welcome to its world.

If these "leaders" like Nancy would take care of business on their own instead of inciting the outrage mob the feds wouldn't have take care of business.

 

[J-mobzz]

I’m also a citizen and hate to see my tax dollars going to form grey area police force enforcing laws using grey area or down right illegal policing tactics. Especially when they can set new standards that won’t go away like covering badge numbers or not wearing them at all.

 

[J-mobzz]

It’s also not fair to set a standard you should comply to police or federal agents not properly identified. This seems like a great way to open the door for any a**hole to pretend he is something he isn’t. A couple years ago Utah Highway patrol advised people If they are stopped by unmarked cars to pull in the slow lane and drive until a marked vehicle shows up because we had a problem with someone impersonating police.
Bottom line my opinion is if you want to arrest people wear a badge and uniform and properly identify yourself.

The information about the unmarked cars came from locker room talk after one of my hockey games from a detective on my team. I remember he made it out to be a real issue.

 

[TRD270]

Funny thing about badge numbers, or at least at the department I worked for. Yeah my badge had a number on it, but it wasn't the number I put on citations or how the department tracked my reports. Honestly I seriously doubt if you took the actual number on my badge that it would have been linked to me.

Also let me be clear i'm certainly not advocating the gestapo rolling around and snatching people up. Don't want more money wasted either. However I'm certainly more a fan of this BS being nipped in the butt and these terrorists being dealt with now, rather than waiting for the bleeding hearts in control of these cities to do something about it. The outrage mob is destroying this country and I fear not enough of the silent majority are going to vote this November, and that a record amount of people are going to vote on emotion rather than fact and more "leaders" promising change and promising to end suffering and racism are going to be voted into office. But since they actually can't fulfill those promises they will continue to incite the outrage mob who will continue to destroy this nation.


I also just might not be looking in the right places, but every video/photo i've seen of these alleged encounters. The agents have been in uniform, sure they were camo, and basically in riot gear (can't blame them). But they've all had patches with the agency and POLICE identifiers. Fully support the unmarked car aspect given the behavior of the "protesters" in the last few weeks with marked units

 

[Houndoc]

I’m also a citizen and hate to see my tax dollars going to form grey area police force enforcing laws using grey area or down right illegal policing tactics. Especially when they can set new standards that won’t go away like covering badge numbers or not wearing them at all.

And is what I don't understand is the same "Conservatives" who defend Trump's use of these forces are often the same ones complaining that mask mandates are a violation of the Constitution, not to mention during the previous administration being angry about any hint of 'federal police.'

And let's be honest, the use of arguably abusive police practices in response to protests over abusive police practices does not solve anything.

 

[SAMI]

You waive your Constitutional rights when participating in activities deemed as terrorist. Doesn't seem too difficult to understand really..

 

[Unimog]

And let's be honest, the use of arguably abusive police practices in response to protests over abusive police practices does not solve anything.

As I see it, there are two things happening here.
1- Some people are offended by the way our system treats some groups of people.
2- The offended people are destroying the real property of innocent people or property that belongs to all of us.

By not solving anything, I guess we need to decide if we are going to try to solve one of the problems, both of them, or we are willing to ignore one of the problems because of the other one. I am of the opinion that both problems need to be addressed. The next question is what means are reasonable? And that is a great question to discuss...

 

[Jesser04]

Can we go down the rabbit hole that they were pulling out all the special ops that infiltrated “antifa”. Saw a couple videos on twitter and it was pretty convincing but so are the flat earth ones if you watch enough of them.

 

[anderson750]

Can we go down the rabbit hole that they were pulling out all the special ops that infiltrated “antifa”. Saw a couple videos on twitter and it was pretty convincing but so are the flat earth ones if you watch enough of them.

I have not watched any of those videos but i would not be surprised if they were not targeted arrests focused on the paid protesters.

 

[TRD270]

110% pure grade A horsesh*t

They weren't waving guns at a protest.... they were arming themselves on their own ************* property. Where the "protesters" were trespassing.

This American is getting outraged

St. Louis couple charged for pulling, waving guns at protest

St. Louis’ top prosecutor on Monday charged a husband and wife with felony unlawful use of a weapon for displaying guns during a racial injustice protest outside their mansion.

www.ksl.com

 

[Unimog]

A good commentary comparing the woke movement to mao’s red guard.

JOHN GRAY: Not exaggeration to compare 'woke movement' to Red Guards

JOHN GRAY: Today we are no longer living in a free society. Instead, we are ruled by those who try to enforce their extreme views by shaming and ruining those who think differently.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[mbryson]

A good commentary comparing the woke movement to mao’s red guard.

JOHN GRAY: Not exaggeration to compare 'woke movement' to Red Guards

JOHN GRAY: Today we are no longer living in a free society. Instead, we are ruled by those who try to enforce their extreme views by shaming and ruining those who think differently.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Lots of thoughts ring true in that article to me

 

[SAMI]

Lots of thoughts ring true in that article to me

Agreed

 

[Unimog]

All this being said, the things going on in Portland leave me pretty conflicted from a state's rights point of view. I don't think that lawlessness and destruction in the name of protest should be allowed in any way. On the other hand, I think the feds should stay out of state and local government business unless invited in. However, if the protesters are destroying federal buildings and intimidating federal workers and the most the local mayor can do is complain that the feds haven't cleaned all the graffiti off their buildings from the previous weeks unrestrained protests, maybe it is time to step in and deal with the problem.

 

[Houndoc]

All this being said, the things going on in Portland leave me pretty conflicted from a state's rights point of view. I don't think that lawlessness and destruction in the name of protest should be allowed in any way. On the other hand, I think the feds should stay out of state and local government business unless invited in.

The frustrating thing to me is that during the previous administration "conservatives" where outraged at the very idea of federal police and they at least used to talk about state's rights, fear of armed government forces acting against civilians etc.

Now, based on the fact that the protestors are "leftists" (although I also fail to see how civil rights and protection from police brutality are not issues Republicans should support) there is suddenly strong calls for violent responses from federal agencies, up to and including the military, even against the wishes of state and local governments.

Kind of strikes me as "I believe in the rights of everyone who agrees with me" mentality.

Yes, violent protests and destruction of property is wrong (although with a long and at times proud history in our country), but no one should find loss of civil rights acceptable just because the object to the protests.

 

[Unimog]

It is pretty maddening how every statement is turned into "Trumper" or "non-Trumper". While I think the general election is important and everyone should pay attention, constitutional issues should stand on their own principle without politics. Now if one party or another is trampling what I believe to be constitutional issues, then it is time to call that out, and IMO, there is blame on both sides in the current environment.

 

[SAMI]

.... but no one should find loss of civil rights acceptable just because the object to the protests.

Even if those violent protests are aimed at deteriorating the fabric of our society? Aimed at erasing our history because someone disagreed with what happened in the past? Aimed at breaking down and eliminating the nuclear family? Aimed at defunding police?

Where do you draw the line Houndoc?

 

[mbryson]

The frustrating thing about the protests to me is that the point has been made (for weeks now). Why are we prolonging this? Let's sit down and find out specifics of what needs to change (police brutality and selective enforcement seems like the big thing here?) and decide how to fix that/those. Why hasn't an affected state governor or mayor asked for a representative committee to come and give grievances rather than continued protest? (maybe they have and I don't trust the "news"/sensationalized bullshit/indoctrination/propoganda enough to even give it the time of day?)

... However, if the protesters are destroying federal buildings and intimidating federal workers and the most the local mayor can do is complain that the feds haven't cleaned all the graffiti off their buildings from the previous weeks unrestrained protests, maybe it is time to step in and deal with the problem.

I'm all for Oregon burning their own shit to the ground. Go for it. When it comes to Federal funds, I have a problem with that. Burn everything they want but keep the US tax dollars out of the line of fire. Don't ask for Federal relief funds for destruction of state property because of the tantrums though. I truly feel for the business owners, families etc that can't live a "normal" life due to the social activism. Isn't the point made that there needs to be some discussions (not riots) on change? Do the rioters/demonstrators know they can meet and discuss with their elected representatives on changes that should be made? (maybe this has happened?)

The frustrating thing to me is that during the previous administration "conservatives" where outraged at the very idea of federal police and they at least used to talk about state's rights, fear of armed government forces acting against civilians etc.

Now, based on the fact that the protestors are "leftists" (although I also fail to see how civil rights and protection from police brutality are not issues Republicans should support) there is suddenly strong calls for violent responses from federal agencies, up to and including the military, even against the wishes of state and local governments.

Kind of strikes me as "I believe in the rights of everyone who agrees with me" mentality.

Yes, violent protests and destruction of property is wrong (although with a long and at times proud history in our country), but no one should find loss of civil rights acceptable just because the object to the protests.

I didn't see the "conservatives" burning buildings and throwing tantrums for 60 days. I think there was a "conservative" tantrum thrown for approx 8 years but the response was pretty different. Obama was the best AR15 salesman the world has ever seen. I didn't always (ok, rarely) agree with Obama but I have yet to participate in looting, public property destruction, et all.

 

[Houndoc]

Even if those violent protests are aimed at deteriorating the fabric of our society? Aimed at erasing our history because someone disagreed with what happened in the past? Aimed at breaking down and eliminating the nuclear family? Aimed at defunding police?

Where do you draw the line Houndoc?

I draw the line at over-reaching government response, police brutality and violation of constitutional protections. I don't care what you are protesting for or against, your rights are the same as mine.

Punish those who commit crimes in relation to protests (as SLC has been doing after careful investigations), but do so following proper procedures.

The frustrating thing about the protests to me is that the point has been made (for weeks now). Why are we prolonging this? Let's sit down and find out specifics of what needs to change (police brutality and selective enforcement seems like the big thing here?)

The problem is, as usual, one side talks and the other refuses to listen. And yes, that is a two way problem on this and most issues. If we can get past the name calling (Marxist, Leftists, thugs, white supremist etc.) then common ground is usually fairly easy to find.

Not wanting to make it Trump/Anti-Trump but the president did not create an environment were GOP is going to listen or negotiate on solutions with his tweets and rhetoric. The fact that the House Democrats and Senate Republicans both passed legislation that neither will negotiate on is absurd.