304
305

Activist group: Cops pepper sprayed 10-year-old (wesh.com)

LackingAHeart が 投稿

全 200 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順q&a

[–]CousinBratwurst 104 ポイント105 ポイント  (110子コメント)

In a police report, authorities said the protesters Wednesday night repeatedly “engaged motorists, jumping on cars and trying to pull open doors. Officers pushed back the crowds to get the motorists out of harm’s way. … Chemical aerosol was used to drive back the hostile crowds.”

Who brings a 10yr old to this in the first place?

[–]Sandwiches_INC 53 ポイント54 ポイント  (72子コメント)

the article title is click bait as well. It infers that the police willingly pepper sprayed a 10 year old. Its more like he got crop dusted accidentally.

[–]zomgwtfbbq 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

infer - deduce or conclude (information) from evidence and reasoning rather than from explicit statements.

imply - strongly suggest the truth or existence of (something not expressly stated)

[–]R1CHARDCRANIUM 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Bring your kid to work day

[–]Channel250 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (13子コメント)

What article is that from? Cause if the jumping on cars and trying to pull open doors thing is true then they absolutely deserved to be sprayed.

[–]DiffGreeMega -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Actually they deserve to be shot.

[–]Iron_StarKiller 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Activists bring their kids with them all the time. Depending on the circumstances, it can expose their children to risk of harm, whether they want that or not. On the other hand, why shouldn't children be a part of legitimate peaceful protests?

Reminds me of a video several years ago from Critical Mass, the bicycle protest (mob) that disrupts traffic as a protest to make streets more bike-friendly (??). A bunch of them end up attacking these old people in their van who had no idea wtf was going on, trying to get through an intersection that the cyclists were blowing through. At the end, one of the people who attacked the old people (the camera man) walked over to where his kids were standing (and crying, freaked out) and said, "Sorry you had to see that, kiddo" like it was a necessary evil.

[–]sdfsaerwe 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (0子コメント)

why shouldn't children be a part of legitimate peaceful protests?

Because they have no voice in governance, and its dangerous. Protests are for adult citizens.

[–]Sexpistolz 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

"Don't look away, father will know if you do"

[–]FightingSiouxBaru 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (3子コメント)

why shouldn't children be a part of legitimate peaceful protests?

This wasn't a legitimate peaceful protest. It started out as one, but they did not have permits for blocking traffic and occupying the streets and intersections (not legitimate), there were objects thrown and protests were messing with innocent motorists who were just stuck there (not entirely peaceful). It was mostly harmless, and it wasn't a riot or anything, but it wasn't just some people marching with signs and singing either.

I'm from the Twin Cities, there's been a ton of these lately. They protested at the Mall of America, they were laying down on freeways a couple months ago blocking interstate traffic, and they were occupying intersections and blocking traffic every time they've done this. I'm all for civil disobedience, but they need to remember the disobedience part. You can't just block traffic and start fucking with other people's cars for no reason. That's where your protest rights end if you don't have a permit.

And some idiot brought a 10 year old to this. The cop didn't spray JUST the 10 year old, he sprayed a group of people and the 10 year old happened to be in there.

[–]doomngloom80 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

That's where your protest rights end if you don't have a permit.

Getting a permit for protest is a joke. It's unfortunate that they destroy property of people not involved in whatever they're protesting, but the whole point of protests is to cause inconvenience and disturbance.

And the fact is peaceful protest doesn't accomplish much of anything. Imagine if the civil rights movement only protested from approved zones, or if the those involved at Stonewall were concerned at all about about making sure no one was bothered. Change would be years behind, if it ever happened at all.

Don't forget our history and how rebellion has shaped this country. Refusal to abide by the rules of government gave birth to the US and has shaped it into what we are today. None of it required permits or focused on the convenience of others.

[–]FightingSiouxBaru 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

but the whole point of protests is to cause inconvenience and disturbance.

There are peaceful law abiding protests, and then there are civil disobedience protests. If you are marching down the streets and blocking traffic, that's civil disobedience, and the whole point is to get arrested/detained/sprayed and make the news.

None of it required permits or focused on the convenience of others.

Yeah, we also don't like terrorism and guerilla tactics now but used it to win this country. Doesn't mean it's something that same government would condone once they were in power and the British were out. Our country wasn't founded on blocking traffic. But what about women not being able to vote? And slavery? If our founding fathers were so perfect and the constitution infallible like many here on Reddit pretend it is, why wasn't that stuff in there?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I actually agree with you. I'm just looking at it from a different angle.

[–]weevil_boy 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And civil disobedience doesn't require a permit either. That doesn't change the fact that you're likely to get arrested if you break the law. If you think exemptions should be made for breaking the law because a group is protesting something, that's kind of crazy. If people break the law they should be arrested or otherwise penalized, and that's kind of the entire point of civil disobedience anyways - to get press and make a point.

[–]Deucer22 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (1子コメント)

legitimate peaceful protests

Read the article. When the rioting starts, any parent worth a shit would get their kids the fuck out of there.

[–]themadxcow 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Nah, they use their kids as shields. Then they turn around and spread outrage propaganda when their kid gets pepper sprayed while they were rioting.

[–]zacho3to 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's the first thing I thought.

[–]factspleaz [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I agree in general this is no place for a 10 year old if the police report is true... the thing is cops have been know to file incorrect reports to make them look better.

[–]Incredulous_Bixby -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

According to the interview with the mother on Minnesota Public Radio, the protest was peaceful, and they were maced a few blocks away as they were leaving.

I don't know if thats true or not, but I'm more apt to believe them than the police. The cops, of course, claimed that there were cars being damaged, etc... but MPR wasn't able to actually confirm any damage had been done at all.

[–]afuckingmotherfucker 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The video posted above shows exactly what you're saying. Nobody in the video was doing any of the crap that the police say caused them to use force.

[–]Xatencio 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Are they really protesting the killing of a guy that was attacking people including the cops?

[–]gonnaupvote3 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

nobody said these were smart people

I started ignoring these people when the facts came out in Ferguson and they were running around with hands up don't shoot

[–]FightingSiouxBaru 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Yes.

The Black Lives Matter protests here in the Twin Cities are protesting every national news story you hear about relating to a white cop and a black victim. Doesn't matter if it was deserved or not. If it makes the national headlines they'll be out protesting. It's a mix of actual black people that are upset and have valid grievances, and a bunch of white college kids from the suburbs who just want to protest and post pictures on Facebook.

The protested at the Mall of America, the blocked interstate traffic, they block intersections, they march around randomly on streets and go off their routes. While not riots by any mean, sometimes they get a little out of hand. They intentionally provoke a police response by blocking traffic or laying down on major interstates every single time.

Most of the people in our local subreddits are kind of tired of these "lets go block traffic and freeways" protests.

[–]Xatencio -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

The Black Lives Matter protests here in the Twin Cities are protesting every national news story you hear about relating to a white cop and a black victim. Doesn't matter if it was deserved or not.

So the circumstances don't matter? If I were the protesting type, I'd at least have the decency to wait until evidence and final decisions are made before I protested.

[–]najing_ftw 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Whether the police's use of force was justified or not has become irrelevant.

[–]FightingSiouxBaru 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd at least have the decency to wait until evidence and final decisions are made before I protested.

Nope, they just plan them immediately. They protested the Baltimore guy, in which the cop was pretty much instantly charged with murder and held. There was justice there, sure if the trial goes tits up get out there and protest but why not see how things pan out.

Oh and as soon as the 10 year old got pepper sprayed Weds night, they had another protest last night to protest that. They are getting super meta at this point. After the Mall of America protests, which were held on the busiest shopping day of the year, the leaders of the protests were issued huge fines for their disruption, which they were warned about far ahead of the protest (like a month+ in advance) that they would pursue legal action if the protest went forward. Guess what. They got fined! So the protesters protested the fines for illegally protesting on private property...

You can't write this shit.

[–]gonnaupvote3 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

that is just it

these are the protesting types, they just want to be part of some grand cause

they want to be able to tell their children they marched on Selma

they don't care about the facts

[–]GoSpit -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes. Like most of the protests going on recently.

[–]CoolBr33z3 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (6子コメント)

I believe this a video of the protest and incident for anyone interested (note: I'm not familiar with Minneapolis so I can't be sure)

It does look like they were blocking traffic and harassing drivers so I can see the need for pepper spray

[–]FightingSiouxBaru 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (4子コメント)

They've been protesting for months here. They always end up blocking major interstates, or intersections, or randomly marching around and blocking traffic. They aren't "violent" by any means, but they are certainly disruptive and not with in their rights. I'm all for civil disobedience, but if you are being disobedient and breaking the law, it's not against your rights if you get pepper sprayed because you refuse to move.

[–]doomngloom80 -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I'm all for civil disobedience, but if you are being disobedient and breaking the law

What is it you think civil disobedience even is? It's breaking the law.

Your comments make it seem you're completely clueless about the history of rights movements and protests. Can you name me one movement that accomplished their goals without disruption of peace and even violence?

Our country's very start involved violent disobedience after attempts to peacefully secede from England.

Ending slavery required violence and slaves escaping to freedom were criminals as were those who assisted them. Should they have obtained permits?

The end of segregation started because people refused to follow the law and disturbed the peace with sit-ins and demonstrations. Rosa Parks is only one famous example of many. Do you think they obtained permits?

The civil rights movements were fraught with rioting and "criminal" activity. Even MLK Jr. said he couldn't condemn the rioting while people were forcing their hand. MLK Jr. himself was a repeat offender and criminal in the eyes of the law. Today he's a hero. You think his marches didn't block traffic or inconvenience people?

The Stonewall Riots are considered the turning point for recognition of LGBT rights. They came after years of attempts to peacefully and quietly gain support. The riots destroyed businesses, burned buildings and repeatedly fought and routed police forces. They are considered heroes today and certainly had no permits.

The protests against the government and public refusal to acknowledge HIV and AIDS and attempts to start finding medications and treatment were largely ignored until they started flooding the streets and chaining themselves to buildings, effectively stopping business in those areas. They broke into offices and refused to leave until they were heard, disrupted traffic and ability to work. Thanks to them HIV is no longer a death sentence and people on treatment don't infect others. Millions of lives were saved and will be still.

I'm sure there's plenty more examples, these are just off the top of my head.

So it seems more than a bit ridiculous and naive to think permits and protest zones will accomplish anything. It seems incredibly self centered and short sighted to dismiss a cause because it slows your life down for a few hours. You've bought into the propaganda hook, line and sinker. Does it make you feel good to know people like you have repeatedly been shown to be on the wrong side of history?

[–]FightingSiouxBaru 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Your reading comprehension skills are terrible and you are responding as if I said something entirely different. You just went off on a big wild tangent that had nothing to do with what I said.

I was talking about whether they were breaking the law or not and whether that warrants pepper spray. You went off on a wild tangent as if I had said "civil disobedience doesn't work and I hate people who participate in it and its never accomplished anything!" Seriously, re-read this thread and what I was responding to, my comment, and then re-read what you wrote.

I'm not against any of what you said, but I'm sure you'll reply and tell me I'm wrong. Because you clearly know me better than I do based on your rant. I think you're entirely out of line with your assumptions. You suggested I thought slaves should have sought permits to escape first? Really? You assume I'm on "the wrong side of history" implying I was against the various civil rights movements you mentioned? Come on...

Does it make you feel good to know people like you have repeatedly been shown to be on the wrong side of history?

Does it make you feel better about yourself to go off on wild tangents and make multiple assumptions about complete strangers on the internet? Because it sure seems like it. Obviously I've offended you in some way, so I just won't reply anymore. I don't come to Reddit to read comments from dipshits assuming I'm pro slavery and anti civil rights.

Cheers,

[–]doomngloom80 -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You've made multiple comments in this thread talking about the need for permits and complaining about protesters blocking traffic.

My reply is far from a rant, it's pointing out how ridiculous the idea of protest permits is and that the entire point is to inconvenience people. That's how you get attention.

Of course they're breaking the law. Every successful movement in US history broke the law. Are you trying to say I'm incorrect in thinking you believe they are in the wrong for doing so?

I'm not assuming you're pro-slavery or anti-civil rights, I'm assuming the exact opposite. That's why I provided examples that I would guess you support now, so you can see the correlation and realize how moronic it is to demand protests confined to legal parameters.

It's very simple really. If you think permits, protest zones and demonstrations that don't inconvenience the average person will accomplish anything at all you only need review your history. Providing you examples isn't a "tangent", it's supporting an argument.

[–]7thHanyou [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The point is that they should expect legal repurcussions, regardless of how noble their cause is.

Unless you believe that interference with private property should be permissible under some free speech standard. In that case, I look forward to your response when Westboro Baptist Church starts protesting by vandalizing businesses supportive of same-sex marriage.

I mean, do you really believe the constitutional right to free speech offers such exemptions? I'm confused about what your point is.

[–]Unity77 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

They do block traffic and harass drivers. Drivers in two separate incidents ran over / through "protesters" in Minneapolis back in December.

[–]CoolBr33z3 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (29子コメント)

Don't bring your 10 year old autist to a protest if you don't want him to be exposed to pepper spray; you would think they included that in the owner's manual. I doubt the kid was even directly pepper sprayed.

[–]TheRappture 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Side note, the police chief in that video looks as vapid as Sarah Palin.

[–]Unity77 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Except she (Chief Janeé Harteau) is on the other end of the political spectrum.

[–]LackingAHeart[S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

A few other articles about it.

One

Two

Three

[–]najing_ftw 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I totally understand bringing a 10-year-old to a peaceful rally. This is a great way to teach about Democracy in action. However, once it starts getting less than peaceful, it would be a good idea to leave with the children.

[–]milfBlaster69 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your "freedom of speech" doesnt allow you to interfere jn others' lives by blocking traffic and what-not. Fact of the matter is you shouldn't bring minors to protests. Remember what happened in Baltimore? Well according to "protesters", the ones vandalizing and looting were "misguided youth". So don't tell me your children should be allowed to protest, that's just irresponsible especially given the fact that these protests unfortunately have a history of becoming violently interrupted by police. I do not support police brutality, I do however support responsible parenting.

[–]Koalaeater 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (16子コメント)

Any other sources? The article is only a paragraph long.

[–]T1mac 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

http://www.startribune.com/mpls-officials-want-witnesses-for-protest-investigation/303757551/

[–]LackingAHeart[S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (14子コメント)

Found a couple of others, going to add them in a comment now.

[–]_Sasquat_ 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

How does shit like this even get posted. It's 4 fucking sentences...

[–]Unity77 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

What kind of parent brings her child to an activist event? Susan Montgomery (the kid's mother) should be arrested for child endangerment. The kid, Taye Montgomery, responded, "At least I got maced and not shot." 10 year old kids should not have this attitude.

[–]killswithspoon 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Minneapolis represent!

[–]manazoni1989 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why was a 10 year old at an activist event?

[–]Irishiron28 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

who cares?

[–]Unity77 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

the idiots involved in these so-called protests

[–]Xatencio -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Why does Reddit upvote these stupid, clickbait articles that only contain four sentences?

[–]LackingAHeart[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Because they enjoy watching people such as yourself get distraught over something so meaningless.

[–]gonnaupvote3 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I didn't have to read the article to know this was clickbait b*******