More "largely peaceful" Portland protests

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-07-2020, 12:14 PM)GMDino Wrote:

What's the word for someone who loots, burns and attacks other people?  I mean if just standing around with a firearm makes you a terrorist then the rioters must be double secret terrorists.  Or how about terrorist supreme?


I do appreciate your perfectly proving my earlier point though.  Peacefully protesting while carrying a gun makes you a terrorist to the far left but physically attacking people, throwing molotov cocktails, looting businesses and committing arson is "largely peaceful" protest.  The mask is slipping, and more people are starting to notice.

[fredtoast]

(09-07-2020, 07:44 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: "Portland, Oregon has quiet night after 100 days of protest."

I was confused considering SFGate has "Dozens arrested as violent Portland protests continue." right below it. So I clicked on the ABC link and despite it's title which is now "Portland, Oregon, demonstrators gather near police precinct." the actual article itself mentions a mattress fire the fire department had to put out, and molotov cocktails being thrown with the police responding with tear gar, and 59 people being arrested.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

News standards have gone to absolute shit in the 24/7 digital age.

The article about a "quiet night" was from Monday the 7th.  It was talking about Sunday night.  The molotov cocktails and 59 arrests were from Saturday night.

Reading comprehension has gone to absolute shit in the 24/7 digital age.






BTW, technically a burning mattress is "quiet".  You can't really hear one. 

[GMDino]

I wonder how much more peaceful the protests could be if the police went after the violent protesters rather than using their toys on the peaceful ones?

Police officer tells protestor “hiding behind the press like a coward” pic.twitter.com/XzgAbj90WA

— Sergio Olmos (@MrOlmos) September 6, 2020

 


It's almost like they pick the low hanging fruit to pump up their numbers while escalating the violence.


Weird.

[GMDino]

(09-07-2020, 01:05 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: What's the word for someone who loots, burns and attacks other people?  I mean if just standing around with a firearm makes you a terrorist then the rioters must be double secret terrorists.  Or how about terrorist supreme?


I do appreciate your perfectly proving my earlier point though.  Peacefully protesting while carrying a gun makes you a terrorist to the far left but physically attacking people, throwing molotov cocktails, looting businesses and committing arson is "largely peaceful" protest.  The mask is slipping, and more people are starting to notice.

Oh, we always saw behind the masks.

[fredtoast]

(09-07-2020, 11:00 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: It gets even more interesting when you contrast that with the media coverage of the Virginia pro 2A rally and the Michigan state capital protest.  Events were there was zero violence, one arrest between them

Number of arrests is really meaningless.  Police usually don't arrest the people they agree with.

Armed "patriots" surrounded the Kentucky Governor's mansion after a 2nd Amendment rally May 24th.  This was after Bashear had been hung in effigy on the state Capitol grounds with a sign saying "sic semper tyrannis" around his neck.  Basically a threat to assassinate the governor if he did not comply with their demands. But not a single one was arrested.  However the governor was intimidated enough that he is now having a huge fence built around the mansion.

Two weeks later unarmed peaceful protestors surround the Kentucky Attorney Generals house to protest the handling of the Brianna Taylor killing and 87 of them are arrested on felony charges.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

GMDino, living proof that the left can't meme.

Also, quit derailing my thread.

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2020/09/police-arrest-59-a-new-peak-on-101st-night-of-portland-protests.html

Fifty-nine arrested. But it's OK, they're the same as the troops at the Normandy landings.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-07-2020, 02:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Number of arrests is really meaningless.  Police usually don't arrest the people they agree with.

You mean police don't arrest people who don't break the law.

Quote:Armed "patriots" surrounded the Kentucky Governor's mansion after a 2nd Amendment rally May 24th.  This was after Bashear had been hung in effigy on the state Capitol grounds with a sign saying "sic semper tyrannis" around his neck.  Basically a threat to assassinate the governor if he did not comply with their demands. But not a single one was arrested.  However the governor was intimidated enough that he is now having a huge fence built around the mansion.

I assume the DA later filed charges based on this criminal activity, correct?  Oh wait, they didn't.

Quote:Two weeks later unarmed peaceful protestors surround the Kentucky Attorney Generals house to protest the handling of the Brianna Taylor killing and 87 of them are arrested on felony charges.

What was the law that they broke?  You're back to this example where you refuse to actually provide the reason for the arrests and why they don't apply to the protest outside the governor's residence.

[GMDino]

(09-07-2020, 02:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: GMDino, living proof that the left can't meme.  

Also, quit derailing my thread.

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2020/09/police-arrest-59-a-new-peak-on-101st-night-of-portland-protests.html

Fifty-nine arrested.  But it's OK, they're the same as the troops at the Normandy landings.  

Look, I know a lot of your brethren really are itching for a fight but the truth is there just isn't enough there to fight.

https://time.com/5886348/report-peaceful-protests/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_term=u.s._&linkId=98926806&fbclid=IwAR2oaZcDZSOqZmHuwPXBRk_YEKykc4F87Pfdw-209nKGWrkyeaEaS3piBbU

Quote:BY SANYA MANSOOR SEPTEMBER 5, 2020 11:47 AM EDT

The vast majority of Black Lives Matter protests—more than 93%—have been peaceful, according to a new report published Thursday by a nonprofit that researches political violence and protests across the world.

The Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) analyzed more than 7,750 Black Lives Matter demonstrations in all 50 states and Washington D.C. that took place in the wake of George Floyd’s death between May 26 and August 22.

Their report states that more than 2,400 locations reported peaceful protests, while fewer than 220 reported “violent demonstrations.” The authors define violent demonstrations as including “acts targeting other individuals, property, businesses, other rioting groups or armed actors.” Their definition includes anything from “fighting back against police” to vandalism, property destruction looting, road-blocking using barricades, burning tires or other materials. In cities where protests did turn violent—these demonstrations are “largely confined to specific blocks,” the report says.

The ACLED report includes protests toppling statues of “colonial figures, slave owners and Confederate leaders” as violent incidents. “Since Floyd’s killing, there have been at least 38 incidents in which demonstrators have significantly damaged or torn down memorials around the country,” the report states.


Inside Barcelona’s Unfinished Masterpiece
Still, many people continue to believe that Black Lives Matter protests are largely violent—contrary to the report’s findings. ACLED highlights a recent Morning Consult poll in which 42% of respondents believe “most protesters (associated with the BLM movement) are trying to incite violence or destroy property.” ACLED suggests this “disparity stems from political orientation and biased media framing… such as disproportionate coverage of violent demonstrations.”


U.S.-based ACLED is funded by the State Department’s Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations as well as foreign governments and other organizations, including the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the German Federal Foreign Office, the Tableau Foundation, the International Organization for Migration, and The University of Texas at Austin. It relied on data collection from the U.S. Crisis Monitor—a joint project led by ACLED and Princeton University’s Bridging Divides Initiative—that tracks and publishes real-time data on political violence and demonstrations in the U.S in order to “establish an evidence base from which to identify risks, hotspots and available resources to empower local communities in times of crisis.”

ACLED also highlights a “violent government response,” in which authorities “use force more often than not” when they are present at protests and that they “disproportionately used force while intervening in demonstrations associated with the BLM movement, relative to other types of demonstrations.” The report also references “dozens of car-ramming attacks” on protesters by various individuals, some of whom have ties to hate groups like the Ku Klux Klan.

ACLED warns in the report that the U.S. “is at heightened risk of political violence and instability going into the 2020 general election,” citing trends in mass shootings, violent hate crimes and police killings. The authors of the report say the Trump administration has exacerbated tensions caused by racial inequality and police brutality. President Donald Trump and high-ranking members of his administration have frequently generalized protesters as violent anarchists.

Your individual examples and willingness to ignore the escalation caused by Right wing agitators and the police themselves don't prove anything other than your own bias.  While the rest of us have said the vandalism and looting at not right (even given the historical sense of how things have been changed via such protests) you have maintained one narrative that will disregard any and all facts to the contrary.  I feel bad for you.

[GMDino]

(09-07-2020, 02:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Number of arrests is really meaningless.  Police usually don't arrest the people they agree with.

Armed "patriots" surrounded the Kentucky Governor's mansion after a 2nd Amendment rally May 24th.  This was after Bashear had been hung in effigy on the state Capitol grounds with a sign saying "sic semper tyrannis" around his neck.  Basically a threat to assassinate the governor if he did not comply with their demands. But not a single one was arrested.  However the governor was intimidated enough that he is now having a huge fence built around the mansion.

Two weeks later unarmed peaceful protestors surround the Kentucky Attorney Generals house to protest the handling of the Brianna Taylor killing and 87 of them are arrested on felony charges.

Yep.  The numbers look good but how many fire starters and looters have been arrested?  That takes hard work.

[fredtoast]

(09-07-2020, 02:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Fifty-nine arrested.  But it's OK, they're the same as the troops at the Normandy landings.  

Still nothing compared to the 1000+ arrests of protestors Birmingham Police Chief Bull Conner made in just one week in 1963. 

Now there is a guy all the "law and order" types would LOVE.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

I must say, it is interesting the lengths the far left will go to justify their violence and paint those opposed to the violence as the real problem. Also, in comparing the current violence to WW2, the Civil War and the American Revolution they make a very compelling case for Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act.

I'll now leave you three to your Mean Girls reenactment.

[fredtoast]

(09-07-2020, 02:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: What was the law that they broke? 

Disorderly conduct.   Criminal trespass.  

(09-07-2020, 02:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You're back to this example where you refuse to actually provide the reason for the arrests and why they don't apply to the protest outside the governor's residence.

Sorry, but I don't see why the same charges don't apply to both groups.  The main difference is that the 2A group was displaying weapons when they committed the criminal trespass.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

More people showing up to the nightly riots with weapons.

https://katu.com/news/local/more-weapons-seen-at-portland-protests-experts-expect-more-violence

On Saturday night during a declared riot, police reported that people were carrying daggers, knives and body armor. Police also deployed tear gas, the first time in weeks.


Also, to preempt the predictable "whatabout" from the usual suspects, please name the last time a pro 2A assembly was deemed a riot. I know, they made you feel scared, but scaring you isn't against the law, hurling molotov cocktails, assaulting the police and arson are. Oh, and hunting (yes hunting was used deliberately) down a political opponent and murdering them in cold blood, that's also against the law. Interesting that the person defending that murderer hasn't commented on that case since. I get it though, defending a murderer is probably very embarrassing.


I suppose the far left protesters were emboldened by those who compare their actions to our troops in WW2.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-07-2020, 03:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Disorderly conduct.  Aggravated (displaying firearms) criminal trespass.  



Sorry, but I don't see why the same charges don't apply to both groups.  The main difference is that the 2A group was displaying weapons when they committed the criminal trespass.

Incorrect, and a simple google search would have revealed this.  A more cynical person would accuse you of being deliberately untruthful because the actual facts destroy your narrative.  But I'm not cynical and would never do that.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-07-15/87-protesters-arrested-at-kentucky-attorney-generals-home#:~:text=Gen.,Daniel%20Cameron%20in%20Louisville.&text=Eighty%2Dseven%20demonstrators%20who%20gathered,%E2%80%9D%20the%20prosecutor%2C%20police%20said.&text=Daniel%20Cameron%20on%20Tuesday%20afternoon%2C%20news%20outlets%20reported.


Protesters were charged with “intimidating a participant in a legal process,” a class D felony in Kentucky that is punishable with one to five years in prison upon conviction. That charge is related to Cameron’s role as prosecutor of the Taylor investigation.



As the governor is not a prosecutor, or otherwise involved in "a legal process" the protests outside their residence could not be criminal conduct under the statute the other protesters were arrested for.  Hence your comparison is as inaccurate as it is misleading.  Honestly, I'd have thought an attorney would have been able to figure this out.

[fredtoast]

(09-07-2020, 03:14 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Incorrect, and a simple google search would have revealed this.  A more cynical person would accuse you of being deliberately untruthful because the actual facts destroy your narrative.  But I'm not cynical and would never do that.

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-07-15/87-protesters-arrested-at-kentucky-attorney-generals-home#:~:text=Gen.,Daniel%20Cameron%20in%20Louisville.&text=Eighty%2Dseven%20demonstrators%20who%20gathered,%E2%80%9D%20the%20prosecutor%2C%20police%20said.&text=Daniel%20Cameron%20on%20Tuesday%20afternoon%2C%20news%20outlets%20reported.


Protesters were charged with “intimidating a participant in a legal process,” a class D felony in Kentucky that is punishable with one to five years in prison upon conviction. That charge is related to Cameron’s role as prosecutor of the Taylor investigation.



As the governor is not a prosecutor, or otherwise involved in "a legal process" the protests outside their residence could not be criminal conduct under the statute the other protesters were arrested for.  Hence your comparison is as inaccurate as it is misleading.  Honestly, I'd have thought an attorney would have been able to figure this out.

Simple google search also shows that the people arrested outside the Attorney Generals home were charged with disorderly conduct and criminal trespass.

Why not the same charges for the 2A guys who surrounded the Governors Mansion?

I did not address the felony charges for exactly the same reason you mentioned here.  Also I was wrong about Kentucky having an aggravated criminal trespass law for displaying firearms.  Still the question is legit.  Why weren't the 2A guys charged with at least criminal trespass and disorderly conduct.  Based on the burning in effigy with the threat to kill the Governor if he did not comply with their demands (Sic Tyrannis Semper) they should have actually been charged with felony assault.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-07-2020, 03:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Simple google search also shows that the people arrested outside the Attorney Generals home were charged with disorderly conduct and criminal trespass.

Why not the same charges for the 2A guys who surrounded the Governors Mansion?

I did not address the felony charges for exactly the same reason you mentioned here.  Also I was wrong about Kentucky having an aggravated criminal trespass law for displaying firearms.  Still the question is legit.  Why weren't the 2A guys charged with at least criminal trespass and disorderly conduct.  Based on the burning in effigy with the threat to kill the Governor if he did not comply with their demands (Sic Tyrannis Semper) they should have actually been charged with felony assault.

Because they didn't break the law.  You already know why one group got those charges and the other didn't.  Burning in effigy, or the sign around the neck, is protected speech as confirmed by the SCOTUS.  Why are you anti First Amendment?


https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/394/705/

Petitioner's remark during political debate at small public gathering that, if inducted into Army (which he vowed would never occur) and made to carry a rifle "the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J.," held to be crude political hyperbole which, in light of its context and conditional nature, did not constitute a knowing and willful threat against the President within the coverage of 18 U.S.C. § 871(a).




I'll get some aloe vera gel for you.

[fredtoast]

(09-07-2020, 03:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Because they didn't break the law.  You already know why one group got those charges and the other didn't.  Burning in effigy, or the sign around the neck, is protected speech as confirmed by the SCOTUS.  Why are you anti First Amendment?

How was there no criminal trespass or disorderly conduct when they surrounded the Governors Mansion?  They did not have permission to be there.

As far as "free speech" not all hate speech is protected.  For example burning a cross with the intent to intimidate is not protected speech and can be prosecuted.  If the 2A crowd had just burnt the effigy then I don't see a good case to prosecute, but when they followed up the burning with an armed intrusion on the private grounds of the governors mansion I think there would have been plenty of evidence that they intended to intimidate and cause fear.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-07-2020, 06:09 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How was there no criminal trespass or disorderly conduct when they surrounded the Governors Mansion?  They did not have permission to be there.

Neither did the people in the gated community of the McCloskey's.  How many of those protesters were charged?

Quote:As far as "free speech" not all hate speech is protected.  For example burning a cross with the intent to intimidate is not protected speech and can be prosecuted.

 
Oh, the protesters burned a cross?  

Quote:If the 2A crowd had just burnt the effigy then I don't see a good case to prosecute, but when they followed up the burning with an armed intrusion on the private grounds of the governors mansion I think there would have been plenty of evidence that they intended to intimidate and cause fear.

If there was then why didn't the DA file charges?  Your story presupposes that the fact that the police didn't arrest anyone precluded charges from ever being filed.  I have to say, Fred, you display an odd amount of naivete where criminal law is concerned.

[*bfine32*]

You want to riot, pillage, and burn? OK, we're not going to try to stop you.

You want to peacefully assemble for a prayer rally practicing social distancing? Are you crazy, you'll threaten the welfare of our city!!

https://mynorthwest.com/2146300/rantz-seattle-closes-religious-rally-allows-anti-cop-protests/

Quote:The City of Seattle completely fenced off Gas Works Park ahead of a prayer rally and peaceful protest. This was a targeted closure to prevent outside, socially distanced worship by Christians. It’s a new low for Seattle.

Meanwhile Cal Anderson Park escapes fencing, despite serving as a staging ground for anti-cop demonstrations that inevitably become riots. But since they don’t pray at those rallies — they simply target cops with Molotov Cocktails — Mayor Jenny Durkan stays silent.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-04-2020, 01:19 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I missed all these. FWIW, it was Charlottesville, not Charlotte.

Doh!