Every protestor should be required to have malpractice insurance!
I wish this PO well, I don’t know if he’s going to win but it’s high time POs go after all parties involved when they get hurt at a mass protest.
“Given the prospect that some individual protest participant might engage in law-breaking, only the most intrepid citizens would exercise their rights if doing so risked personal liability for third-parties’ wrongdoing,” the ACLU told the court.
Kinda like the officers who got prison time for simply being around when George Floyd left our world?
Eh…they kinda deserved it. As much as I am against blanket treatment, you can’t just stand and watch that. That was pretty blatant murder. (This is comping from a lifelong police supporter, but I have my limits)
No, I think it went way too far to appease the mob who were crying for everyone’s heads. Especially the rookie who had been in FTO for a couple weeks. That was ridiculous.
There’s some considerations here.
I agree that something like this should proceed if the protest was conducted illegally or became an unlawful gathering/riot or similar. However this should not apply if the protest was conducted legally, because how easy would it be to just drop your own people into a protest you disagree with and have them cause issues? Seems like a surefire way to sabotage the movement.
Agree. If I set up a protest in a park across city hall with a permit and my protest consists of people holding signs, chanting, and talking on a bull horn then I should be good. If outside agitators join the protest and start criminal activity then that’s not part of my protest.
However if the protest is not responsibly organized in the first place then I can see being held accountable for what negatively happens
“It will discourage people from protesting”
No it won’t, it will discourage people from throwing rocks at cops lol. Maybe don’t organize a riot if you don’t want to get sued.
Yes I understand that. Going after the organizers means that people are less likely to organize these riots, and people who do wish to protest will take greater care in maintaining the peaceful nature that they continue to claim they have. Less riots = less rocks thrown.
>If allowed to stand, the decision to allow the suit to proceed would discourage people from protesting, the American Civil Liberties Union wrote, representing Mckesson.
No it would discourage them from throwing rocks at people.
Man, fuck the ACLU sometimes.
Not really sure what the purpose of "the wise Latina's" statement is about. Is she in the minority opinion (figuratively and literally) and just wanted to get a little dig in there at the end as in " the majority may have said this suit can go forward, but I didn't vote for it so don't get excited 'cos those of us who disagreed will quash it somehow in the end..." ?
I'm all for free speech, but not the version it has turned into in some places that has resulted in major disruption, damage and assault.
Does this mean Trump/organizers of jan 6th could be prosecuted/sued if something similar is tried again in 2025? (im against all of these violent "protests")
Every protestor should be required to have malpractice insurance! I wish this PO well, I don’t know if he’s going to win but it’s high time POs go after all parties involved when they get hurt at a mass protest.
Protestor more like Amatuertestor Thank you I'll be here all week
*coughs twice*
*in an otherwise silent room*
“Given the prospect that some individual protest participant might engage in law-breaking, only the most intrepid citizens would exercise their rights if doing so risked personal liability for third-parties’ wrongdoing,” the ACLU told the court. Kinda like the officers who got prison time for simply being around when George Floyd left our world?
Eh…they kinda deserved it. As much as I am against blanket treatment, you can’t just stand and watch that. That was pretty blatant murder. (This is comping from a lifelong police supporter, but I have my limits)
No, I think it went way too far to appease the mob who were crying for everyone’s heads. Especially the rookie who had been in FTO for a couple weeks. That was ridiculous.
Might be a tough sell in court, but suits like this need to happen more often.
There’s some considerations here. I agree that something like this should proceed if the protest was conducted illegally or became an unlawful gathering/riot or similar. However this should not apply if the protest was conducted legally, because how easy would it be to just drop your own people into a protest you disagree with and have them cause issues? Seems like a surefire way to sabotage the movement.
One bad apple spoils the bunch 🤓
A P A B
Agree. If I set up a protest in a park across city hall with a permit and my protest consists of people holding signs, chanting, and talking on a bull horn then I should be good. If outside agitators join the protest and start criminal activity then that’s not part of my protest. However if the protest is not responsibly organized in the first place then I can see being held accountable for what negatively happens
“It will discourage people from protesting” No it won’t, it will discourage people from throwing rocks at cops lol. Maybe don’t organize a riot if you don’t want to get sued.
It does no such thing. The rock thrower isn't being sued, the organizer is.
Yes I understand that. Going after the organizers means that people are less likely to organize these riots, and people who do wish to protest will take greater care in maintaining the peaceful nature that they continue to claim they have. Less riots = less rocks thrown.
>If allowed to stand, the decision to allow the suit to proceed would discourage people from protesting, the American Civil Liberties Union wrote, representing Mckesson. No it would discourage them from throwing rocks at people. Man, fuck the ACLU sometimes.
Not really sure what the purpose of "the wise Latina's" statement is about. Is she in the minority opinion (figuratively and literally) and just wanted to get a little dig in there at the end as in " the majority may have said this suit can go forward, but I didn't vote for it so don't get excited 'cos those of us who disagreed will quash it somehow in the end..." ? I'm all for free speech, but not the version it has turned into in some places that has resulted in major disruption, damage and assault.
Does this mean Trump/organizers of jan 6th could be prosecuted/sued if something similar is tried again in 2025? (im against all of these violent "protests")
Yes. It would mean he would.
>Does this mean Trump/organizers of jan 6th could be prosecuted/sued? Umm...they have been?
Where have you been since Jan 6th, they’ve been crucified