Occupy Wall St. and the Second Amendment

[KrazyHorse]

This article http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stori...day-of-action- is full of lulz

On the mass mobilization they've managed:

While the encampment is gone, there are still dozens of people committed to the cause and living elsewhere.

On their plan to do the best they can to disrupt New Yorkers' morning commute:

"They make rules for themselves and not for us," said one protester.

"We still can rise against oppression," said another.

On police brutality:

“I was suddenly taken down, even putting my head against the street. I have also a scratch," said Rodriguez.

On the technical abilities of most protestors (and what that might mean for their job prospects):

Nkrumah Tinsely, 29, was arrested Wednesday at the encampment after a video was posted online in which he said, “In a few days, you're gonna see what a Molotov cocktail does to Macy's."

Tinsley also said he was going to "burn down the city."

Police say it wasn't clear if Tinsley had the ability to make a bomb.

[Dinner]

I'm more interested in how Mayor Bloomberg could, by himself, announce a news blackout in a public place. He not only blocked off the streets to reporters but also declared parts of NYC a no fly zone to prevent news reporters filming the clearance of the OWS protest camp. WTF happened to the public's right to know and how can he declare public places off limits to reporters?

[KrazyHorse]

1) Given that the cops were actively clearing the square for cleaning, it makes sense that reporters (like everybody else) could be temporarily required to leave
2) I don't know how far they were forced to move; I've seen some reports claim that they were allowed to stay on the western edge of the park and others that they were moved 2+ blocks away. The first is eminently reasonable; given the scale and general lack of effective resistance, the second is probably not. Good luck trying to bring action, though.
3) I don't know if the treatment of reporters was a Bloomberg directive or a decision of police on scene.
4) Overall, the mayor's been quite reasonable in dealing with what was essentially a couple of hundred filthy vagrants camping in a place where police have never allowed camping and disrupting the daily routines of thousands of taxpaying New Yorkers.

[Kidlicious]

They're being sent "home" in Dallas. Apparently, enough is enough. I'm surprised they made it this long, when you have to leave a public park after sundown.

Samething in Tulsa, but after they arrested 300 people. I wasn't expecting protests here. And Dalas?!

[Elok]

I have a feeling you are underestimating this.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-favor-fading.html

SUCCESS!

[Kidlicious]

Public opinion always shifts against protests initially, but like with the Vietnam protests, the protesters win out mostly because people get sick of the protests and they realize the cops aren't going to stop them.

[Elok]

Did you just say people support the protesters because they get sick of the protests?

[Kidlicious]

No. They hate the protests, so they will make policy that will take the energy out of the movement. Right now they think that police power will do the job, but hey, did I ever mention how stupid most people are?

[Dinner]

1) Given that the cops were actively clearing the square for cleaning, it makes sense that reporters (like everybody else) could be temporarily required to leave

No it doesn't. By all accounts criminal violations of human rights occurred so obviously Bloomberg was attempting to stop the media from witnessing violations of the law. There is no other reason to have a media blackout. At the very least allowing helicopters to film from over head wouldn't have gotten in the way but Bloomberg specifically disallowed those because he didn't want any film of what occurred. There is no reason to hide what happened unless you're breaking the law.

[Kidlicious]

He puts the Krazy in Krazyhorse

It's a no brainer that in order to have a democracy the media needs to be able to do it's job.

[Elok]

There is no reason to hide what happened unless you're breaking the law.

Or are perfectly within your rights but want to avoid a (bigger) media circus. I mean, I know very little about the whole affair, but if I were driving hippies out of a park I wouldn't want cameras there either. Some of them will invariably resist and get their asses beat, and you don't want that on the news even if you're in the right. Which is not to say that everything that happened that night was necessarily within the bounds of the law, but that's hardly the only explanation for not wanting the media present.

[KrazyHorse]

No it doesn't. By all accounts criminal violations of human rights occurred so obviously Bloomberg was attempting to stop the media from witnessing violations of the law. There is no other reason to have a media blackout. At the very least allowing helicopters to film from over head wouldn't have gotten in the way but Bloomberg specifically disallowed those because he didn't want any film of what occurred. There is no reason to hide what happened unless you're breaking the law.

You're a ****ing moron. No, it doesn't make sense that when cops clear an area for legitimate reasons reporters don't get a special pass to stay? Also, back off the idiotic hyperbole, you twit. "Criminal violations of human rights" Get a ****ing grip, you loony toon.

[Dinner]

What would you call beating people with battons so badly they need to be hospitalized? If that's not some sort of violation of rights what the **** is?

Also even Bloombergs own claim was that media had to be kept out of the area for their own safety. So... Why clear the airspace around the park and prevent helicopters from filming it? Unless your goal was to make sure there were no pictures which could come back to haunt you in court. Face it, you're the moron here.

[Dinner]

Clearly Rodney King didn't have his rights violated and instead the problem was that someone had a camera around to document events. Brilliant, you stupid ****.

[Elok]

No. They hate the protests, so they will make policy that will take the energy out of the movement. Right now they think that police power will do the job, but hey, did I ever mention how stupid most people are?

I don't know much about Vietnam, since I was a sperm at the time, but I always thought that by the seventies, there were three normal people sick of war for every one hippie holding a whatever-in for protest. That is, they didn't want peace "just to make those annoying protesters go away," everybody was actually sick of kids coming home in body bags.

I also doubt the staying power of this batch.