Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would rather have protests be illegal w/o registering first, and pre-paying in bank checks, a $5,000 per attendee security bond. Have the damage assessed afterwards, and return the excess to the folks registering.
If the crowd exceeds the registered quantity, use the pd to end the protest and return $0.
I think that would limit it to only richer people and I’m pretty sure that’s not in the spirit of a protest.
The daylight protests don't seem to cause problems. It's the night protests that seem to devolve into chaos. So does the city need to impose an absolute ban on protests of over 10 people after dark? If a protest brews up, the cops give them one chance to disburse. If they don't, the get locked up with a mandatory 90 day sentence.
They can have their 1st Amendment rights to protest, but only during the day.
this is what curfew was for, and look what happened
It puts pressure on those gathering to keep it law-abiding.
MLK was up to that. Diane Nash was up to that. It's not difficult. 99% of citizens are law-abiding.
Vast majority of people out were in somewhat organized protests that did not involve looting or rioting. It's hard to say if the concentration of law enforcement resources spent on the organized and large protests really made that much sense rather than having allocated those resources to actual looting. It seems like an odd inefficiency to me, and one that doesn't necessarily make all that much sense. This suggestion of making these protests controlled might just make a simmer go into a roaring boil which would be a bad turn from the case the kind of controlled protests such as what we have in NYC now which seems separate from the looting that appears to be mostly opportunistic and could ostensibly be controllable. It seems like a poor strategy if put in effect while also being quite difficult to do from a legal and political perspective.
Vast majority of people out were in somewhat organized protests that did not involve looting or rioting. .
MLK 100% non violent.
Lunch counter protestors 100% non violent.
That's the % they need to achieve. Until they do, nothing changes. Protests w/o effecting change are meaningless. Once riots start, any message does not resonate. Its not about preaching to other protestors. Its about getting those in the middle to back a cause.
MLK did that. Diane Nash did that. The kids Bull Connors hosed did that.
It would also behoove the protestors to not try to connect Atlanta & Mn. In Mn, the accused was 100% co-operative. The distinction maters. The folks seeking to sit on buses where they chose to were wise to not back Claudette Colvin, who was the 1st Rosa Parks, due to her dubious history of not being fully law-abiding. Focus solely on the clear cut. Chauvin and the thug who essentially played offensive line for him = Bull Connors 2020.
No it would limit it to peaceful folks, as the wealthy would put $ up for them.
But what if wealthy folks don’t agree or don’t care? Why would they pay 5k for someone who they don’t know and don’t care. I’m super generous and even I wouldn’t. Many people who protest are not rich and have issues that rich people don’t care about. You may to rethink this idea.
That's the % they need to achieve. Until they do, nothing changes. Protests w/o effecting change are meaningless. Once riots start, any message does not resonate. Its not about preaching to other protestors. Its about getting those in the middle to back a cause.
MLK did that. Diane Nash did that. The kids Bull Connor hosed did that.
It would also behoove the protestors to not try to connect Atlanta & Mn. In Mn, the accused was 100% co-operative. The distinction maters. The folks seeking to sit on buses where they chose to were wise to not back Claudette Colvin, who was the 1st Rosa Parks, due to her dubious history of not being fully law-abiding.
I understand what you're saying, but at the same time, I think there's a conflation of protestors versus looters and rioters. There has certainly been many protests prior to this as well which were nonviolent, though smaller in scale, but oddly accomplished very little.
These protests have effected change--like I mentioned before, for NYC, 50-A was repealed and parts of City Council are now serious about taking at least some funding from the NYPD which makes sense in the midst of the massive coming budge crisis and how the NYPD has been burdened with just way too many tasks. Chokeholds which were prohibited as department policy are now actually illegal which could potentially be a larger deterrent for its use. I think that's pretty obvious signs that the protests have effected change.
Now, would I like to see this done and more without any violence? Absolutely. However, I don't see a massive protest fee as a particularly intuitive way to do so. Like I said, it makes me think of a lid over a simmer and it all boiling over. I'm also curious about the massive show of force by law enforcement for the marches that happened where protesters were nonviolent and the rather meagre presence in areas where there was substantial looting. It does seem like a suboptimal deployment of resources, but it is pretty confusing times.
I also think MLK is an odd citation--his nonviolence did do good, but he himself ended up dead from some very direct violence and the subsequent civil unrest and actual rioting that happened afterwards did really put the pressure on to push the Civil Rights Act of 1968 into law real quick. That also ended up being a very suboptimal method.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 06-15-2020 at 04:34 PM..
But what if wealthy folks don’t agree or don’t care? Why would they pay 5k for someone who they don’t know and don’t care. .
Many would donate, very much agree, very much care.
The white Freedom Riders were usually beaten more, and knew that would occur. They stayed peaceful!
W/O the riots, IMO Floyd was a potential game-changer of the same magnitude as Bull Connors with the firehose. IMO that did more to engage middle class whites against Jim Crow from thousands of miles away than anything else.
We should be asking why MLK, Diane Nash, Rosa Parks, had so much more self control than the thugs rioting in NYC last week, as well as many other cities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
