To: The Philosopher who wrote (64712 ) 12/2/1999 11:45:00 AM From: Neocon Respond to of 108807
That is certainly a silver lining<g>....On the question of police action: there are always time/place restrictions on assembly, since are generally issues like traffic to consider. During the civil rights era, although events like the rally on the Mall were legal, most of the marches on cities like Selma were acts of civil disobedience. In fact, the precise point was that they were not permitted reasonable access to public spaces, and were met with undue force. Without making those points, the stupidity and brutality of the system of racial oppression would have not been dramatized, and turned the country around..... Among the reasonable considerations in determining permitted demonstrations is the likelihood of the assembly being used principally to harass and intimidate. Although people are at liberty to promulgate their beliefs, no matter how hateful, they are not necessarily allowed to "stalk" just because they are massed. That is why I thought the ACLU wrong in the Skokie case. The sole purpose of the Nazis insisting upon that venue was in order to garner publicity by baiting a bunch of Holocaust survivors.... Anyway, on a similar principle, pro- life demonstrators are enjoined to keep back a certain distance from clinics, and to control their behavior. It seems to me that the Zone was a reasonable way of ensuring that the participants in the WTO meeting were allowed to go about their business without undue interference. Once having established ground rules, they must be enforced. Since I have not followed the situation in detail, I will not give the police blanket support, but merely note that they were supposed to enforce time/place restrictions, not just restrain vandals.....