5 ms·

I'm not talking about emergency vehicles or people who get escorts. I'm talking about the doctors who have to make their own way in their own vehicles.

by msla 6y ago

Dylan16807 6y ago
It's okay, the minor negative effects of that are never going to be more important than the ability to protest effectively. Just like nobody blames normal traffic for killing people via doctor delays.
- msla 6y ago
  > It's okay, the minor negative effects of that are never going to be more important than the ability to protest effectively. Are you even theoretically willing to discuss this in good faith? > Just like nobody blames normal traffic for killing people via doctor delays. That's because normal traffic jams aren't intentional.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    You're accusing me of bad faith. When all I did was disagree with you. What is wrong with your ability to have a discussion? Edit: It's ridiculous to me that someone flagged this but not the person accusing me of bad faith based on absolutely nothing. Whoever did that, I beg you to explain.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      In the future, it's considered bad form to complain if your posts are flagged. That said, I agree that it certainly wasn't bad faith to argue that in some cases the downsides of protests are worth how vital it is, and it was a very cheap shot. FWIW, my city had 35% of its population, over half a million people, entirely fill almost every street downtown, and there were no catastrophic events. Worse comes to worst, alternative routes will need to be planned. I think the most catastrophic thing that happened is that the cellular systems crashed, but for the most part GSM still held out so it was okay, and the stores had landlines that were used when worse came to worst. Same during the Hong Kong protests, I never saw anyone complain about such things, and indeed I don't believe it had catastrophic effects.
  - austhrow743 6y ago
    People pretending every life has infinite and unsurpassable value are the ones unwilling to discuss in good faith. There's nowhere to go from "people will die!"
- jariel 6y ago
  "It's okay, the minor negative effects of that are never going to be more important than the ability to protest effectively." No way. You do not have the right to arbitrarily lock down traffic for some arbitrary reason. Wait until Trump supporters lock down traffic in LA all day because they legitimately believe the 'election was stolen'. You can protest in the park or city square or somewhere where it doesn't stop a large number of people from going about their business. You don't get to suppress others with your ideology.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    > Wait until Trump supporters lock down traffic in LA all day because they legitimately believe the 'election was stolen'. Good for them? That's a valid protest. You don't have to stay out of the way in the free speech zone. (Not to say that separation is never appropriate, but not most of the time.)
    - jariel 6y ago
      "That's a valid protest." It's valid to protest things which are not true? So we can block traffic in LA to raise awareness that 'Aliens are coming'? No - absolutely not. Your arbitrary definition of what you consider to be a 'valid protest' is not relevant. You 100% do not have the right to block highways under any circumstances. Full stop. You can of course, block highways if you use force to do it, i.e. by amassing such a large, unlawful group so that 'nobody can do anything about it' - which is of course illegal and completely trampling other people's basic rights.
      - jacobkania 6y ago
        I firmly believe that if you have enough people who think it’s important enough to block traffic to make a point — if their belief is that aliens are coming to destroy earth — they’re allowed to do that. Sure, it’s illegal, but they’ll do it anyways. I think it’s unlikely that so many people will come together to block traffic, but if it’s so important to them, then I’m all for it. They’ll definitely get to make their argument to the news and American people, who get to decide if their point is valid or not. But that’s the point of free speech.
- msla 6y ago
  > Just like nobody blames normal traffic for killing people via doctor delays. That's because normal traffic jams aren't intentional.

I'm not talking about emergency vehicles or people who get escorts. I'm talking about the doctors who have to make their own way in their own vehicles.

by msla 6y ago

I'm not talking about emergency vehicles or people who get escorts. I'm talking about the doctors who have to make their own way in their own vehicles.

Dylan16807 6y ago

It's okay, the minor negative effects of that are never going to be more important than the ability to protest effectively. Just like nobody blames normal traffic for killing people via doctor delays.

msla 6y ago
> It's okay, the minor negative effects of that are never going to be more important than the ability to protest effectively. Are you even theoretically willing to discuss this in good faith? > Just like nobody blames normal traffic for killing people via doctor delays. That's because normal traffic jams aren't intentional.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  You're accusing me of bad faith. When all I did was disagree with you. What is wrong with your ability to have a discussion? Edit: It's ridiculous to me that someone flagged this but not the person accusing me of bad faith based on absolutely nothing. Whoever did that, I beg you to explain.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    In the future, it's considered bad form to complain if your posts are flagged. That said, I agree that it certainly wasn't bad faith to argue that in some cases the downsides of protests are worth how vital it is, and it was a very cheap shot. FWIW, my city had 35% of its population, over half a million people, entirely fill almost every street downtown, and there were no catastrophic events. Worse comes to worst, alternative routes will need to be planned. I think the most catastrophic thing that happened is that the cellular systems crashed, but for the most part GSM still held out so it was okay, and the stores had landlines that were used when worse came to worst. Same during the Hong Kong protests, I never saw anyone complain about such things, and indeed I don't believe it had catastrophic effects.
- austhrow743 6y ago
  People pretending every life has infinite and unsurpassable value are the ones unwilling to discuss in good faith. There's nowhere to go from "people will die!"
jariel 6y ago
"It's okay, the minor negative effects of that are never going to be more important than the ability to protest effectively." No way. You do not have the right to arbitrarily lock down traffic for some arbitrary reason. Wait until Trump supporters lock down traffic in LA all day because they legitimately believe the 'election was stolen'. You can protest in the park or city square or somewhere where it doesn't stop a large number of people from going about their business. You don't get to suppress others with your ideology.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  > Wait until Trump supporters lock down traffic in LA all day because they legitimately believe the 'election was stolen'. Good for them? That's a valid protest. You don't have to stay out of the way in the free speech zone. (Not to say that separation is never appropriate, but not most of the time.)
  - jariel 6y ago
    "That's a valid protest." It's valid to protest things which are not true? So we can block traffic in LA to raise awareness that 'Aliens are coming'? No - absolutely not. Your arbitrary definition of what you consider to be a 'valid protest' is not relevant. You 100% do not have the right to block highways under any circumstances. Full stop. You can of course, block highways if you use force to do it, i.e. by amassing such a large, unlawful group so that 'nobody can do anything about it' - which is of course illegal and completely trampling other people's basic rights.
    - jacobkania 6y ago
      I firmly believe that if you have enough people who think it’s important enough to block traffic to make a point — if their belief is that aliens are coming to destroy earth — they’re allowed to do that. Sure, it’s illegal, but they’ll do it anyways. I think it’s unlikely that so many people will come together to block traffic, but if it’s so important to them, then I’m all for it. They’ll definitely get to make their argument to the news and American people, who get to decide if their point is valid or not. But that’s the point of free speech.
msla 6y ago
> Just like nobody blames normal traffic for killing people via doctor delays. That's because normal traffic jams aren't intentional.