5 ms·

From the third sentence of the article: "the officers eventually determined that Litrell wasn’t on Amazon’s property and left." He was on public property. Are

From the third sentence of the article: "the officers eventually determined that Litrell wasn’t on Amazon’s property and left." He was on public property. Are you arguing that Amazon doesn't know where their property line is? (Also, comparing classic union organizing to white supremacists who are charged with "seditious conspiracy" in the violent attack on the nation's capital in an attempt to overthrow an election is wild.)

lovemenot 4y ago
Your parent was using those two examples to make a logical point. Not by way of of comparison. You might have got that from the wide political difference between the two examples.
- elicash 4y ago
  It's an absurd example. If you were walking by my apartment building and I called the cops on you, would it be appropriate for me to say "well if you were the KKK, and I mistakenly thought I owned the sidewalk, I'd be right to call the cops!"? Bringing up a violent group like this makes no sense at all. And yes, examples are given specifically as points of comparison.
  - lovemenot 4y ago
    I am pleased to see your rebuttal. Frankly, I initially thought your indignation was disingenuous. Now, I think we have both read that comment differently. >> Would they have done the same thing if animal rights protesters, or the Proud Boys, or whoever came and someone thought they were on Amazon property illegally? I think so. I read it as: take any arbitrary group of people who might organise a protest from any arbitrary political or social position "or whoever". Regardless, Amazon would have reacted the same. There is no implicit comparison to insurrectionists in such a reading.
    - elicash 4y ago
      Maybe it just struck a nerve because I've been watching the Jan 6 hearings with videos of the violent mobs attacking police in my home city, a few blocks from where I used to live. In contrast, people who do this union work are heroes as far as I'm concerned. Using the Proud Boys as an example during a discussion about lawful, non-violent efforts makes no sense at all; this group isn't merely a group with a different political or social position than the union organizers.
oh_sigh 4y ago
Yes, basically. Amazon knows where their property line is, in the sense that the organization could locate it eventually given the need. However, just one person called the sheriff. Maybe they thought their property extended to the roadway, instead of only to the fence line? In either case, it is basically a nothing-burger because the Sheriffs showed up and recognized their right to be where they were, and went on with their day. It seems like the system worked? Feel free to attribute organizational motive to it through your own heuristics, but I expected a little bit better from a globally read newspaper.

lovemenot 4y ago

Your parent was using those two examples to make a logical point. Not by way of of comparison. You might have got that from the wide political difference between the two examples.

elicash 4y ago
It's an absurd example. If you were walking by my apartment building and I called the cops on you, would it be appropriate for me to say "well if you were the KKK, and I mistakenly thought I owned the sidewalk, I'd be right to call the cops!"? Bringing up a violent group like this makes no sense at all. And yes, examples are given specifically as points of comparison.
- lovemenot 4y ago
  I am pleased to see your rebuttal. Frankly, I initially thought your indignation was disingenuous. Now, I think we have both read that comment differently. >> Would they have done the same thing if animal rights protesters, or the Proud Boys, or whoever came and someone thought they were on Amazon property illegally? I think so. I read it as: take any arbitrary group of people who might organise a protest from any arbitrary political or social position "or whoever". Regardless, Amazon would have reacted the same. There is no implicit comparison to insurrectionists in such a reading.
  - elicash 4y ago
    Maybe it just struck a nerve because I've been watching the Jan 6 hearings with videos of the violent mobs attacking police in my home city, a few blocks from where I used to live. In contrast, people who do this union work are heroes as far as I'm concerned. Using the Proud Boys as an example during a discussion about lawful, non-violent efforts makes no sense at all; this group isn't merely a group with a different political or social position than the union organizers.

oh_sigh 4y ago

Yes, basically. Amazon knows where their property line is, in the sense that the organization could locate it eventually given the need. However, just one person called the sheriff. Maybe they thought their property extended to the roadway, instead of only to the fence line? In either case, it is basically a nothing-burger because the Sheriffs showed up and recognized their right to be where they were, and went on with their day. It seems like the system worked? Feel free to attribute organizational motive to it through your own heuristics, but I expected a little bit better from a globally read newspaper.