How much disruption by a protester(s) is acceptable? (Congress, illegal, soldiers)

[Cape Cod Todd]

How much disruption by a protester or a protesting group is acceptable?



I'm talking about the likes of the latest protester that tried to climb the Statue of Liberty as well as many other so called Social Justice Warriors through the years.



Several years ago around the country we had people blocking intersection by standing, sitting or laying down in the road like they were dead.

In Boston we had 2 groups that chained themselves to barrels filled with cement which blocked 2 major highways into the city for hours as fire crews cut the chains off them. There were thousands of people that were inconvenienced that day from people that missed their flights out of Logan airport, to Doctors and patients that could not get to the many hospitals for their medical procedures to the average worker that missed his shift and who might have really needed that pay day.

They were all arrested, went before a judge, were not even fined or made to make a public apology but the victims of their "protest" probably spent the rest of the week catching up on that lost day, much needed medical procedures were rescheduled and vacations shortened or lengthened. The thing is nothing happened to these people and on the way out of the court they asked one of the young women if she would dare pull that stunt again and she smirked and said yes.



This brings us to the ridiculous stunt that disrupted so many people on the 4th at the Statue of Liberty.
Statue of Liberty climber speaks outside court, says decision to scale monument was 'spur of the moment' | Fox News


A woman from the Congo was part of a group that went to the Statue to protest ICE. She got excited and decided to start climbing because Michelle Obama told her that "when they go low we go high" so she climbed as high as she could get. The park service had to shut down the island for 4 hours and move people off while they tried to arrest this woman and get her down.



I have been to the Statue 5 years ago and if you wanted to get in to the base you had to get on the limited list, or to actually go up inside there was a reservation list that was months out.
Imagine having planned your trip months in advance, saved up your money to pay the park fees and you were so excited to bring your family there and then a "protester" shuts down your dream?



They arrested her and charged her with trespassing and resisting arrest. She was let go with no bail. The judge asked her if she would try such a stunt again and at least she said no.



I'm sure there are those out there that applaud this woman for doing what she did, in fact near 50 of them met her when she was let go but what about the victims that had their day disrupted and ruined? They may actually be sympathetic to her protest but why should they or any of us have to pay the price?




What should be done to a protester or group that disrupts anyone or even thousands of people.

I think they deserve more than a slap on the wrist. Why are the victims of such stunts never given a podium to share their frustrations?



What should we do about this?

[ColoGuy]

Not as much as we accept. Holding a sign while not interfering is OK.

[Gusano]

They shouldn’t be allowed to block highways or given “space to destroy.”

[my54ford]

Modern protesters are lightweights... They should protest like their parents did in '68.. Blow stuff up burn, pillage. get the National Guard involved. These modern day protesters are a joke. They don't have the courage of the convictions ( I know I repeat that all the time)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_of_1968

[katharsis]

IMO, no protests should be allowed that interfere with the public's right to conduct their business as they normally would. If a protest causes any kind of financial or personal loss to an "innocent party" -- or causes harm to ANYONE, the protesters who were directly involved should be personally liable and subject to both legal penalties and personal lawsuits.

And, yes, I definitely DO support the right to protest -- I have participated in a few myself -- but I support only those protests that are peaceful and that negatively affect in a major way ONLY the company or organization that they are protesting. (Meaning that I don't consider it a major deal if people protesting racial discrimination of a restaurant at the restaurant's entrance, leading would-be patrons to consider going elsewhere, but I would consider it a major problem worthy of prosecution if protestors blocked the entrance to a hospital or a major thoroughfare.)

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by Cape Cod Todd

How much disruption by a protester or a protesting group is acceptable?



I'm talking about the likes of the latest protester that tried to climb the Statue of Liberty as well as many other so called Social Justice Warriors through the years.



Several years ago around the country we had people blocking intersection by standing, sitting or laying down in the road like they were dead.

In Boston we had 2 groups that chained themselves to barrels filled with cement which blocked 2 major highways into the city for hours as fire crews cut the chains off them. There were thousands of people that were inconvenienced that day from people that missed their flights out of Logan airport, to Doctors and patients that could not get to the many hospitals for their medical procedures to the average worker that missed his shift and who might have really needed that pay day.

They were all arrested, went before a judge, were not even fined or made to make a public apology but the victims of their "protest" probably spent the rest of the week catching up on that lost day, much needed medical procedures were rescheduled and vacations shortened or lengthened. The thing is nothing happened to these people and on the way out of the court they asked one of the young women if she would dare pull that stunt again and she smirked and said yes.



This brings us to the ridiculous stunt that disrupted so many people on the 4th at the Statue of Liberty.
Statue of Liberty climber speaks outside court, says decision to scale monument was 'spur of the moment' | Fox News


A woman from the Congo was part of a group that went to the Statue to protest ICE. She got excited and decided to start climbing because Michelle Obama told her that "when they go low we go high" so she climbed as high as she could get. The park service had to shut down the island for 4 hours and move people off while they tried to arrest this woman and get her down.



I have been to the Statue 5 years ago and if you wanted to get in to the base you had to get on the limited list, or to actually go up inside there was a reservation list that was months out.
Imagine having planned your trip months in advance, saved up your money to pay the park fees and you were so excited to bring your family there and then a "protester" shuts down your dream?



They arrested her and charged her with trespassing and resisting arrest. She was let go with no bail. The judge asked her if she would try such a stunt again and at least she said no.



I'm sure there are those out there that applaud this woman for doing what she did, in fact near 50 of them met her when she was let go but what about the victims that had their day disrupted and ruined? They may actually be sympathetic to her protest but why should they or any of us have to pay the price?




What should be done to a protester or group that disrupts anyone or even thousands of people.

I think they deserve more than a slap on the wrist. Why are the victims of such stunts never given a podium to share their frustrations?



What should we do about this?

There are so many things wrong with your post. And overarching all of them is the idea that there is simply one answer that fits all scenarios.

But let's take a look at some protests in our history:

Legislatures in several of the BRITISH colonies passed resolutions against the Stamp Act. Not just a protest, but treason.

Patriot organizations (such as The Sons Of Liberty) popped up throughout the colonies. Again, treason

Smuggling increased dramatically after the Townshend Act of 1767. Illegal and treasonous

The growing refusal of colonists to buy British imports became an important stimulus to the quality and capacity of their own manufacturing. By 1773 this became formalized in a number of localities by making agreements not to import or buy British goods.

Beginning in the late 1760s, street fights between the King's soldiers and colonists grew. Treasonous..

In 1770 the Boston Massacre resulted from relatively peaceful protest; 5 were killed. Treasonous

The Tea Act led to wonton destruction of property in 1773 (the Boston Tea Party of 1773). Destruction of property and treason.

The First Continental Congress. Illegal assembly and possibly treason.

In South Carolina the formation of the Continental Association. Illegal assembly

Battles of Lexington and Concord in 1775. Clearly treason and murder.

George Washington and Continental Army. Treason.

[bellebud]

Shutting down highways and roads should = arrest and fine (in my opinion). I'm also now not listening to what you have to say. Most other protests = good for you for standing up for something, even if I don't agree with it.

[kitty61]

First amendment.

[Fat Freddy]

All forms of protest from singing sit-ins to bombings and assassinations are acceptable, depending on who and what is being protested.

[jetgraphics]

A protest that trespasses upon the rights of others is no longer a protected right, but a nuisance to be prosecuted.
Your "right to protest" ends when it violates the rights of others.