6 ms·
Given the amount of vandalism at the pipeline protests, I think that makes sense. If protesters with a history of property destruction were scheduled to come t
by koheripbal 5y ago
Given the amount of vandalism at the pipeline protests, I think that makes sense.
If protesters with a history of property destruction were scheduled to come through my neighborhood, I hope the police would warn me too.
- a3n 5y agoIf corporations with a history of property theft, and property, human and ecologic destruction came through my neighborhood, I hope my neighbors would join me in protest too.
- koheripbal 5y agoProtesting is one thing. Destroying other people's stuff is when the police should get involved.
- klyrs 5y agoIf you leave your stuff on my land, why shouldn't I destroy it?
- koheripbal 5y agoThe pipeline was never on Native land. This is a popular lie propagated in social media. The pipeline was specifically routed AROUND native land, and was indeed even placed exactly on top of an existing 40 year old pipeline.
- wyre 5y agoIt all Native land, perhaps not legally, but at one point it was until it was appropriated by white men.
- vkou 5y agoWhen a protest destroys stuff, the police inflict violence on the protesters. When a pipeline spill destroys people's stuff, do the police then inflict a proportionate amount of violence on the pipeline's owners? If a broken window's worth a tazing, an arrest, two nights in jail, a single court date, and a short or suspended sentence, how many thousands of years of prison should, say, the Exxon-Valdez spill have been worth?
- koheripbal 5y agoPipelines are the most secure method of liquid transport. Leaks are extremely uncommon and far less common than the alternative - trucks. Also, there are plenty of fines and enforcement actions on spills. Police would inflict violence on corporations if corporations break the law. ...which is why they don't. Protesters should try that simple trick.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mellavora 5y agoWhat about if a corporation with a history of property destruction were scheduled to come through your neighborhood? Like, say, a pipeline company? Wouldn't you want the authorities to protect you against that danger?
- drewcoo 5y agoThey primarily protect property. But a pipeline through a neighborhood would mean my land would be seized by eminent domain. So the authorities would protect the pipeline company, who had property in the dispute. The authorities show up to help pipeline companies break treaties. Some now ex-property owner like myself wouldn't even be a speed bump.
- google234123 5y agoThe rules governing Eminent domain is in our constitution. Part of living in a democracy means you have to a accept the rule of law and democratically elected governments. If you want to change this then change the law. If any land is seized the owners will be compensated.
- koheripbal 5y agoIt's crazy that this was downvoted. Eminent domain being used against you is like winning the lottery for most.
- sixothree 5y agoWasn't this the protestors neighborhood?
- kingkawn 5y agoWhat about if a pipeline company with a history of property destruction and abuse of residents comes through the neighborhood?