5 ms·

I've read a bunch about this situation and I still cant for the life of me understand why so many people are stressed out about people getting together and taki

I've read a bunch about this situation and I still cant for the life of me understand why so many people are stressed out about people getting together and taking a bus to work.

dreamdu5t 13y ago
Because the media has created fake controversy in order to fill their papers/columns.
- muzz 13y ago
  Agreed, something like 1 window has been broken on a tech bus, yet media reports often use plural, not singular, to describe the number of acts of violence by protestors.
mcphilip 13y ago
I don't necessarily agree with the frustrations expressed in the article, but it does make it clear that stopping buses is just the focal point used to air protesters' larger grievances. From the article: >Robles said the protests that he and his group are involved with aren't about the buses but about unaffordable rents and the wave of evictions of seniors and the disabled. >"That's why we're stopping the damn Google buses!" he said. "You think I'm doing this for my health? I want to go out there and stop buses? No, I don't want do that, but I'm forced to do that!..."
ekianjo 13y ago
Basically it's the principle of terrorism applied to buses. They are using it as a tool to advance a political agenda. Make the daily life of users unbearable so that it changes things. Needless to say, this kind of action should be outlawed.
- busterarm 13y ago
  Revolution happens in the mind. Yeah it's a bit silly to target the people on the bus just going to work...but a) A lot of these commuters have spent their entire lives in an exceptionally privileged and insulated social bubble. The buses are really the _only_ way to reach these people and open their minds a little even if they only get a few of them. b) It's their community and their streets. The Google campus is private property and they wouldn't have any standing to take the problem there.
  - ekianjo 13y ago
    Sorry but i disagree on b). The streets don't belong to anyone, they are a public space and they are paid by everyone who lives and does not live there. It's not because a street goes in front of your house that you own it. Therefore any action preventing free circulation on public streets should be outlawed.
    - busterarm 13y ago
      Sidewalks and public "spaces" I'll give you, but access to actual roads themselves is in every legally defined way a privilege. Traffic laws are laws that "prevent free circulation on public roads". Communities end up getting some control over what goes on with the roads that pass through them in the form of: speed limits, crossing signs, speed bumps, bike lanes, third party bus stops (as in non-city transit, these do exist), parking spots, etc. While there's nothing legally binding yet, communities do exert a degree of control over what goes on around them and they could theoretically block the Google busses. Local DOTs respond to community action.
- smacktoward 13y ago
  You throw out that word "terrorism" awfully casually. You might want to talk to some people who have actually survived real acts of terrorism, which are very different than having to deal with some picketers on your way to work.
  - ekianjo 13y ago
    Yeah, but that's exactly what it is - it's just that they are putting people's life at danger yet, but their actions are to put stress and nervousness on users, which is very much the same goal as terrorism. Terrorism is not just about putting bombs on the streets, when you get death/serious threats in your mailbox it's also terrorism.
    - wpietri 13y ago
      You have a right not to be blown up. You have a right not to be threatened. You do not have a right to remain free of uncomfortable feelings that come when people tell you what they think of your views and actions. Protest is a vital part of democracy.
      - ekianjo 13y ago
        > You have a right not to be threatened. Didn't one of these protesters put up a webpage not too long ago, specifically targeting a Google Employee and showing up his house and where he lives, and using very strong language against him just because he's earning more than them and using the Google bus in their neighborhood ? If that's not a threat, I don't know what is. > Protest is a vital part of democracy. Blocking buses which are allowed to freely run on public streets is not a reasonable form of protest. The transportees are using these buses to go to work, their work is taxed and the taxes go back in one way or another to the community. They should be allowed to use them as freely as they can use their car. Unless you have a strange conception of Freedom.
        wpietri 13y ago
        A threat is where you say something threatening. So no, you don't know what one is. Civil disobedience is a time-honored protest tradition. Your "if it makes money it's good" is one theory of community, but not the only possible one.

I've read a bunch about this situation and I still cant for the life of me understand why so many people are stressed out about people getting together and taking a bus to work.

dreamdu5t 13y ago

Because the media has created fake controversy in order to fill their papers/columns.

muzz 13y ago
Agreed, something like 1 window has been broken on a tech bus, yet media reports often use plural, not singular, to describe the number of acts of violence by protestors.

mcphilip 13y ago

I don't necessarily agree with the frustrations expressed in the article, but it does make it clear that stopping buses is just the focal point used to air protesters' larger grievances. From the article: >Robles said the protests that he and his group are involved with aren't about the buses but about unaffordable rents and the wave of evictions of seniors and the disabled. >"That's why we're stopping the damn Google buses!" he said. "You think I'm doing this for my health? I want to go out there and stop buses? No, I don't want do that, but I'm forced to do that!..."

ekianjo 13y ago

Basically it's the principle of terrorism applied to buses. They are using it as a tool to advance a political agenda. Make the daily life of users unbearable so that it changes things. Needless to say, this kind of action should be outlawed.

busterarm 13y ago
Revolution happens in the mind. Yeah it's a bit silly to target the people on the bus just going to work...but a) A lot of these commuters have spent their entire lives in an exceptionally privileged and insulated social bubble. The buses are really the _only_ way to reach these people and open their minds a little even if they only get a few of them. b) It's their community and their streets. The Google campus is private property and they wouldn't have any standing to take the problem there.
- ekianjo 13y ago
  Sorry but i disagree on b). The streets don't belong to anyone, they are a public space and they are paid by everyone who lives and does not live there. It's not because a street goes in front of your house that you own it. Therefore any action preventing free circulation on public streets should be outlawed.
  - busterarm 13y ago
    Sidewalks and public "spaces" I'll give you, but access to actual roads themselves is in every legally defined way a privilege. Traffic laws are laws that "prevent free circulation on public roads". Communities end up getting some control over what goes on with the roads that pass through them in the form of: speed limits, crossing signs, speed bumps, bike lanes, third party bus stops (as in non-city transit, these do exist), parking spots, etc. While there's nothing legally binding yet, communities do exert a degree of control over what goes on around them and they could theoretically block the Google busses. Local DOTs respond to community action.
smacktoward 13y ago
You throw out that word "terrorism" awfully casually. You might want to talk to some people who have actually survived real acts of terrorism, which are very different than having to deal with some picketers on your way to work.
- ekianjo 13y ago
  Yeah, but that's exactly what it is - it's just that they are putting people's life at danger yet, but their actions are to put stress and nervousness on users, which is very much the same goal as terrorism. Terrorism is not just about putting bombs on the streets, when you get death/serious threats in your mailbox it's also terrorism.
  - wpietri 13y ago
    You have a right not to be blown up. You have a right not to be threatened. You do not have a right to remain free of uncomfortable feelings that come when people tell you what they think of your views and actions. Protest is a vital part of democracy.
    - ekianjo 13y ago
      > You have a right not to be threatened. Didn't one of these protesters put up a webpage not too long ago, specifically targeting a Google Employee and showing up his house and where he lives, and using very strong language against him just because he's earning more than them and using the Google bus in their neighborhood ? If that's not a threat, I don't know what is. > Protest is a vital part of democracy. Blocking buses which are allowed to freely run on public streets is not a reasonable form of protest. The transportees are using these buses to go to work, their work is taxed and the taxes go back in one way or another to the community. They should be allowed to use them as freely as they can use their car. Unless you have a strange conception of Freedom.
      - wpietri 13y ago
        A threat is where you say something threatening. So no, you don't know what one is. Civil disobedience is a time-honored protest tradition. Your "if it makes money it's good" is one theory of community, but not the only possible one.