3 ms·
I feel like this is really hard to answer with a simple yes or no. I would say that when things are limited to speech, the police should use restraint in collec
by hdlothia 2y ago
I feel like this is really hard to answer with a simple yes or no. I would say that when things are limited to speech, the police should use restraint in collecting information
When there is criminal activity in the mix I think the police should be allowed to get info on potential subjects or instigators as long as they are following the law strictly.
- mulmen 2y agoIt's easy to answer. The answer is no. The answer is never yes.
- hdlothia 2y agoThe police can't ever maintain lists of people suspected of criminal behavior?
- mulmen 2y agoIn the United States speech is not a crime.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> In the United States speech is not a crime Fraud. Perjury. Violent threats.
- scarecrowbob 2y ago"Speaking out against the police" is not "criminal behavior".
- hdlothia 2y agoI agree but stop cop city also does vandalizing, breaking and entering and arson.
- mulmen 2y agoWell, no, that’s not correct. This is exactly the kind of mistake the police make as well. Some vandals, robbers, and arsonists are affiliated with Stop Cop City. That correlation does not imply causation. You cannot transfer blame or infer approval through Stop Cop City to nonviolent citizens. Attending a meeting is not a crime. Attending a meeting is not cause for suspicion. Expressing an opinion is not a crime. Expressing an opinion is not cause for suspicion.