Politico: Occupy Wall Street crashes Ron Paul event

Canderson said:
I agree, but if they don't they shouldn't be assaulted in the process of being removed. The funny thing is the police stepped of the human circle, removed the tents they were ordered to remove, came back and sprayed the students then left. The students were stupid for violating the school administration by being there, but the police acted with overwhelming force and violated their own regulations. It would be like a cop pulling you over for speeding giving you a ticket, then pulling you out of the car and tazing you.

Yes the Chancelor is responsible for the school and had the right to ask the police to intervene to inforce the schools property rights, but that doesn't justify assault. Thats like saying the shootings at Kent State were justified due to property rights.
Click to expand...

Pepper spray is better than physical violence.
 
JoshLowry said:
Obviously, this would tarnish OWS in the eyes of many Paul supporters.

If I was in charge of the divide and conquer department, this is exactly what I'd do. Then I'd make sure that the story got legs.
Click to expand...

What the hell, Josh, I thought you were against OWS? Now all you're doing is popping out possible conspiracy conjectures to make us sound like the bad guy.
 
69360 said:
Doesn't endanger the officers.
Click to expand...
I thought they were brave and putting their life on the line.

How does carrying out non-violent protesters one at a time endanger the police? Doesn't initiating force against peaceful people in fact endanger the officers? Why resort to violence when simply carrying them away will do?
 
Haha let's go to local OWS groups and convince them to crash Ron Paul events. "Alright guys, we'll sit here quietly to the end then we shout 99%!" And by the end most of'em will be converted to ours ways. Muawahhaa :)
 
They waited until the end. If they had just randomly burst in and interrupted it right in the middle I would be upset, but they waited till the end and made it short. I'm just confused why they would do this at a Ron Paul event.
 
It was indeed courteous for them to wait and not interrupt. We shall remember that when we respond to OWS directly.
 
Great job on the Ron Paul supporters in the room staying positive and not booing the protesters. Paul and the supporters totally nailed it on the response where so many audiences and speakers have failed before.
 
kylejack said:
I thought they were brave and putting their life on the line.

How does carrying out non-violent protesters one at a time endanger the police? Doesn't initiating force against peaceful people in fact endanger the officers? Why resort to violence when simply carrying them away will do?
Click to expand...

Basic officer safety. If you can defuse the situation without contact, you do.

You have no idea what somebody might do once you make contact with them. It's avoided if possible.
 
PaulConventionWV said:
What the hell, Josh, I thought you were against OWS? Now all you're doing is popping out possible conspiracy conjectures to make us sound like the bad guy.
Click to expand...

Nope, you have me confused with someone else.

Yep, that's all I do.
 
69360 said:
Basic officer safety. If you can defuse the situation without contact, you do.

You have no idea what somebody might do once you make contact with them. It's avoided if possible.
Click to expand...
Well, most people look unfavorably on violence against people who have not initiated force. Certainly most libertarians believe in the non-aggression principle.

Force should be proportional. Passive resistance? Handcuff and carry to the car. Active resistance? Pepper spray or baton strikes. Threats of violence that could cause death or grievous bodily harm? Lethal force. There should be a 'logic' to use of force. Attacking peaceful people because they're not following park rules is absurd and is likely to make the crowd hostile.

In fact, that nearly happened. Props to the crowd for remaining peaceful and not backing down to the unjustified violence.
 
Last edited:
kylejack said:
Well, most people look unfavorably on violence against people who have not initiated force. Certainly most libertarians believe in the non-aggression principle.

Force should be proportional. Passive resistance? Handcuff and carry to the car. Active resistance? Pepper spray or baton strikes. Threats of violence that could cause death or grievous bodily harm? Lethal force. There should be a 'logic' to use of force. Attacking peaceful people because they're not following park rules is absurd and is likely to make the crowd hostile.

In fact, that nearly happened. Props to the crowd for remaining peaceful and not backing down to the unjustified violence.
Click to expand...
Right it's called the "Use of Force Continuum." Working in corrections we are taught that you are allowed one level above the level of resistance you are faced with. It basically breaks down to exactly what you described here.
 
Traditional Conservative said:
...these greedy, evil corporations.
Click to expand...

They certainly can be.

The West Virginia coal mine companies come to mind, as I happen to have a close friend who lived through it as a youngster.

These outfits were brutal, basically nothing more than "legit" mafia, and not above using private security forces to bust into troublemakers homes and drag them off to be shot in the woods.
 
Off Topic, but how many reps are allowed in a career? I'm afraid Anti-Federalist is going to break this forum with all those green bars! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ronpaulhawaii
Ron Paul BBQ team looking to expand event size
Replies
6
Views
105
ronpaulhawaii
ronpaulhawaii
PAF
With Its Latest Rate Cut, the Fed Serves Wall Street and the Regime
Replies
0
Views
103
PAF
PAF
Occam's Banana
The lessons of Ron Paul
Replies
12
Views
219
acptulsa
acptulsa
PAF
Cronyism in America
Replies
0
Views
17
PAF
PAF
PAF
Las Vegas Chokes the Golden Goose
Replies
4
Views
120
PAF
PAF
Back
Top