Comments on: What Is So Scary About Occupy Wall Street?

By: MVCasey

MVCasey — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:51:08 +0000

Journalists are still getting arrested and the truth is still being suppressed. http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/journalists-arrested-occupy-oakland.

By: MVCasey

MVCasey — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 20:19:41 +0000

I’m honored that somehow my humble post is making the rounds of the right-wing blogosphere.

Happy Holidays and best wishes in 2012.

By: middleagedhousewife

middleagedhousewife — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 20:16:55 +0000

Since civil disobedience is not a “peaceful assembly” it is not protected under the first amendment. Along with having certain rights comes responsibilities in exercising hem. Abusing those rights is the first step to losing them. It seems to me that this post was not meant to support the Occupy agenda. It was instead meant to promote an anti-law enforcement agenda. The objections to the actions of the police seem to be based more on emotion than an actual understanding of police work, or the circumstances surrounding their actions .

By: MVCasey

MVCasey — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 17:14:06 +0000

Happy holidays, and please pass along the holiday wishes to the Koch Brothers.

By: randy

randy — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:50:31 +0000

Ordinances and laws exist in these circumstances to ensure that protests are conducted peacefully and fairly and within reason.

If these protests were continued then how much do you give until people feel entitled? We saw evidence of this when some OWS protesters stormed Trinity park a few days ago and in Occupy Baltimore where a cancer non-profit had a permit cancelled because they did not feel like they should have to share the space because they filed a permit months prior. And there are more examples…

The police in almost all cases gave several warnings to these camping groups that they had to leave. They stayed. What do you expect police to think and bring when a direct order to vacated has been violated.

Expressing your first amendment rights is very easy. Learing how to do so in conjunction with the rest of society is the hard part.

By: MVCasey

MVCasey — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 18:39:14 +0000

Thanks Rick. In addition to your excellent points, it was the police who made getting around the area difficult because of all the barricades and road blocks that they set up. It was ridiculous.

Also ridiculous and a waste of taxpayer money was the gross amount of police presence for a group of protesters. Couldn’t thousands of cops have been better used fighting crime throughout the city?

Mary V. Casey

By: Rick

Rick — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 22:17:13 +0000

There is no time limit on when you can be on streets or in that particular park and, even if there were, the notion that something is "unpeaceful" because it violates a dubious interpretation of the law is a plain crappy argument. If the authorities were interested in sanitation, they would have provided alternative arrangements while cleaning the park – I'm sure the bone of spending a few hours protesting on already car-free Wall Street while Zucotti Park gets cleaned would have been rather irresistible to most of them, and it would have bothered no one except the sanctimonious types who don't like the First Amendment anyway. Given that we are talking about a flock of doves here, they probably would have (ironically) been quite compliant regardless. That said, the conduct of civil authorities in general and the police in particular has been utter contempt for their own rules, so I think we can drop the facade of concern about sanitation, safety, and rule of law. The real problem is that the uppity kids are bothersome and expressing heretical thoughts, and that just plain pisses the self-appointed guardians of Amerikana off. As to the "cost" to the public of First Amendment rights, it's probably a safe bet that there is little need for incremental policing. I can only roll my eyes at the quantitative illiteracy of the people who think it's smart to sic baton-wielders on a pack of doves and then go on to complain about the price of the baton-wielders' overtime.

By: MVCasey

MVCasey — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 03:41:55 +0000

I read your recent posts on your blog. Best wishes.

Mary V. Casey

By: momizms

momizms — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 03:30:20 +0000

It’s precisely the violation of the law that makes these protests unpeacful. The term civil disobedience implies a willful disregard for the law. And it is the job of the police to enforce the law. As I stated, the protesters were given multiple opportunities to disband before force was used. What if this type of “peaceful” assembly was occurring on the public street in front of your house and interfering with your ability to conduct your daily activities? Would you still want the police to just leave them alone?

By: MVCasey

MVCasey — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 02:55:17 +0000

So, the consequences of violating rules for usage and creating a mess are pepper spray, tear gas and getting beaten with batons? I kind of think that getting proper permits and adhering to rules defeats the purpose of civil disobedience.

Even if you disagree, you may want to read this very interesting post about why police brutality is not the best way to deal with peaceful protest – http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/10/26/how-not-to-respond-to-a-peaceful-protest/

Mary V. Casey