Since when has dealing with protesters, angry or not, been justification for denying their civil rights to anyone?
Fred,
Anytime the activities of one group become a physical threat to the life and/or property of other citizens. That's when.
I have the constitutional inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
When someone else stands in the way of my exercising the above they have violated my civil rights. At which point I authorize my elected govt leaders to restore the environment wherein I may, once more, practice my civil rights in a peaceful and non-violative manner.
And police brutality? You justify it
because of police stress? You are a dangerous man.
I justify no such thing. All I say is that I understand how it could happen.
When you are a cop, sitting in riot gear for hours on end outside, listening to the vulgar threats and name-calling by a bunch of hooligans who refuse to follow your lawful orders, that is stressful. You're asking yourself "Is this what I signed on for"? "Why do I have to take this Sh*t"?
So when the violence commences, people start throwing bottles, bricks, rocks, and bashing cars and storefront windows,...
When the looting begins and protesters turn into common thieves...
When police realize that many of these protesters don't even live in Seattle, yet they feel they have to right to trash the city these police take pride in serving....
Then I can understand how these guys, who would rather be home off duty, or patrolling the neighborhoods they are used to, can lose their cool when faced with insulting and violent rioters.
I bet if I came up to you and spit in your face, broke the windows on your home or business, threatened you and called you vulgar names....... I just bet it would be hard for you to contain yourself as well.
You can discuss fantasy... but I discusss reality. People are people. We all lose our cool and do things that we later realize were irrational or out of line. But we have emotions and sometimes those emotions get the best of us.
Violent protest is NEVER an option during a protest. When violence breaks out, the message of the protest is forever lost and undermined. People forget the message and remember the violence and damage that was inflicted.
And police brutality? You justify it
because of police stress?
I don't justify anything of the sort.
Like I said above, I'm merely am stating a reality. Whether it be My Lai, or the Watts Riots, or the Chicago riots in '68, Rodney King, Reginald Deming, or other atrocities, people often act out their frustrations when all rational efforts have failed. It doesn't make it "right". It merely reflects the "reality" of how difficult it is to maintain professional bearing and not lose your cool.
What you refer to as a "minor incident" could very well have gotten completely out of hand and built momentum. Such are the ways of mobs. If you don't make the "cost" of such violent activities unbearable, then you only encourage them. You apparently have no idea how quickly a small demonstration can lead to outright civil upheaval.
I'n not sure what color the sky is in your world, Fred, but let me suggest that I may not be the one who is an idiot here.
|
