2 ms·

Simply because police declare a constitutionally-protected protest activity unlawful doesn’t make it so. The police are an authority to make the call, but they

Simply because police declare a constitutionally-protected protest activity unlawful doesn’t make it so. The police are an authority to make the call, but they aren’t the last call on unlawfulness, and they don’t have unlimited lawful uses of power to disperse peaceful assembly. The Geneva Conventions still apply to individual and collective police conduct, as treaties we have signed and ratified are equal to the law of the land under the Constitution. And ultimately, citizens have a right to protest. The police aren’t a part of the Constitution. Police in early America didn’t exist as such. The closest we had were colonial slave catchers. Ultimately, we have direct democracy and direct rule all the time already, right now. It’s just unevenly distributed. Private citizens self-organizing to shield, shelter, protect, and share free speech with protesters, inside their homes, to escape police brutalities outside, all proves that the state needs the people’s authority, not the other way around. The police, private property representatives, politicians, and laws exist as an escape valve, short circuit, methodology, and framework for such a democracy to exist as it was able to be conceived of administered upon its founding. These are not bad ideas or implementations. But we should have more of a say in how our country is run at every level. With current technology, we have the means to enact instant direct democracy with no politicians, only bills, amendments, and voters; with instant implementation, and with instant lawsuit argument and just-in-time adjudication. The question is, do we have the will?

ineedasername 6y ago
I don't disagree with really much of anything you said, but my comments was in regards to the inability to perfectly take pre-existing conditions into account and still perform their job of protecting the public from violent suspects that don't respond to even the best, most perfect de-escalation techniques. A person attacking a bystander, or a cop for that matter, especially with potentially maiming or lethal force, may have to be dealt with using police force. That force, even when it's the minimum necessary to protect the public, may nonetheless trigger a pre-existing condition, and I don't think there is any realistic way of avoiding such edge cases.

ineedasername 6y ago

I don't disagree with really much of anything you said, but my comments was in regards to the inability to perfectly take pre-existing conditions into account and still perform their job of protecting the public from violent suspects that don't respond to even the best, most perfect de-escalation techniques. A person attacking a bystander, or a cop for that matter, especially with potentially maiming or lethal force, may have to be dealt with using police force. That force, even when it's the minimum necessary to protect the public, may nonetheless trigger a pre-existing condition, and I don't think there is any realistic way of avoiding such edge cases.