Geezer

Domestic Terrorist

Recommended Posts

I saw on the news that a petition has been started on the White House web site to classify these groups that use violent demonstrations to promote their agenda as domestic terrorist, with appropriate criminal penalties. 

 

I think classifying them as domestic terrorist is going too far, but I do think legislatures need to enact severe criminal penalties for those who commit violent acts. I would be in favor of a minimum of 5 years in prison for a violent act against a police officer, National Guard, etc that results in bodily injury.

 

Many of these demonstrations are intended to turn into a riot. There needs to be stiff penalties for committing violent acts during a demonstration or the violance will continue to escalate & more people will die. 

 

Just being jn in possession of a weapon of any kind including rocks & clubs, at a demonstration, should put the offender in jail for a minimum of 2 years. And a license to legally carry a weapon should be suspended if the person is participating in a public demonstration. No guns allowed under any circumstances.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Keeping this site online isn't free, so we need your support! Make a one-time donation or choose one of the recurrent patron options by clicking here.



     I don't like mandatory minimums.  They're too often abused by prosecutors.  And they don't act as deterrents anyhow.  So you wind up with a lot of people stuck in prison with the taxpayer footing that bill or, more likely, taking pleas.

 

     Seems best to give the courts leeway to decide on a case by case basis.  Some first timer may not need the same punishment as a repeat offender.  At least to me they don't.  Especially equal years worth of punishment.  That will just turn some one time idiot into a full time one once they're released.

 

          mwc

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You post includes a lot of assumptions. If punishment isn't a deterrent for criminal acts,  then it at least keeps criminals off the streets. If criminals come out of prison more dangerous than when they went in then put them in prison for life. The cost will save lives & property. 

 

Minimum sentencing can be abused but there are no perfect solutions. Protestors are abusing the 1st Amendment now & the violance has got to be brought under control. If your face is being smashed with a club or your business is being looted & burned to the ground I think you might think the violence needs to be stopped too.

 

It seems to me many of these so called protesters are common street thugs & punks. The protest is just providing them cover to hurt people, loot, & damage property. I suspect many of them don't have a clue what they're even protesting. 

 

I try to be open minded when it comes to politics, but when it comes to these protest enough is enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to sense an assumption in the OP, namely that the "other side" - the police - are beyond any suspicion.

 

There has been evidence over here, and more than once, that police are sending agents provocateurs into the demonstrators' crowd who then conveniently throw stones or similar, so that the uniformed forces have "reason" to use force to end the demonstration.

 

What to make of this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Thurisaz said:

I seem to sense an assumption in the OP, namely that the "other side" - the police - are beyond any suspicion.

 

There has been evidence over here, and more than once, that police are sending agents provocateurs into the demonstrators' crowd who then conveniently throw stones or similar, so that the uniformed forces have "reason" to use force to end the demonstration.

 

What to make of this?

 

Does the term fake news mean anything to you? Both camps use rhetoric to whip up emotions & that quickly 

leads to violence. I'm all for free speech I just want the protesters to be unarmed while they are screaming at each other.

And it would be helpful if the police kept the protesters away from each other. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true of course. Sadly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If expedience were the only measure, then swiftly executing anyone who disliked crime would solve the problem completely.

Why use half-measures like mandatory minimun sentencing when you could implement a flawless solution that worked 100%?

Better yet, if you executed everyone, everywhere, you'd eliminate all crime, and end world hunger, to boot.

 

If you care about pesky details like morality, then of course you can't throw someone in jail for 5 years for being beaten up by police. Don't be ridiculous.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rounin said:

If expedience were the only measure, then swiftly executing anyone who disliked crime would solve the problem completely.

Why use half-measures like mandatory minimun sentencing when you could implement a flawless solution that worked 100%?

Better yet, if you executed everyone, everywhere, you'd eliminate all crime, and end world hunger, to boot.

 

If you care about pesky details like morality, then of course you can't throw someone in jail for 5 years for being beaten up by police. Don't be ridiculous.

 

I think I'm detecting an anti police bias here. Many police dept's offer a ride along option for private citizens, where citizens can ride along with real officers on real patrol. 

 

Before criticizing someone it's sometimes beneficial to walk in their shoes for awhile. In this case riding with real officers in real police situations would at least give you a real life perspective of what real police work is like. That might not change your feeling about police officers but it would give you a look at the other side of the coin. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people in the crowd were armed, an instigator might not live long and there would be less liklihood for more violence.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me a tin foiler, but I believe there are such things as agent provocateurs. The gov just loves to find excuses for further stripping rights and discouraging people from exercising them. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/24/2017 at 2:17 AM, Geezer said:

 

I think I'm detecting an anti police bias here. Many police dept's offer a ride along option for private citizens, where citizens can ride along with real officers on real patrol. 

 

Before criticizing someone it's sometimes beneficial to walk in their shoes for awhile. In this case riding with real officers in real police situations would at least give you a real life perspective of what real police work is like. That might not change your feeling about police officers but it would give you a look at the other side of the coin. 

 

US prison pop 25% of the world total even though the US represents 5% of the world pop. 

US cops shoot 5,000 people per year and kill over 1,000 of them. No other country in the first world is even in the same ballpark. Most kill one or two people at most. 

US cops steal more money from people via civil forfeiture, which requires no warrant or court oversight than all criminals, including armed robbers, muggers, etc... combined. 
US cops deny people of their constitutional rights as part of their job description. They stop and frisk (violation of the 4A), they do checkpoints (violation of the 4A), they use tanks and other military equipment on par with soldiers in Iraq (violation of Posse Comitatus), the use violence to break up non violent, legal protests (violation of the 1A)

US cops are out of control where it comes to shooting dogs and other animals. Somehow mailmen do their jobs just fine without killing a single dog, but the pussies in blue act like they are swimming in a sea of sharks. 
US cops are held to entirely different legal standards than citizens. They kill at will and then get paid leave and promotions for the effort. 

 

Bias against the cops means you're paying attention. 

 

If the US were an oil rich country that wasn't playing along with the US empire, my list above here would be used as propaganda to get the US people behind a regime change effort/war. 

  • Like 2
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I worked for a while as a newspaper photographer and got to see police from perhaps a different vantage point. What I saw was that some cops are great folks and some are not. I've had cops help me out on a story by giving me a ride in their car or tell someone who was hassling me to leave me alone, and other cops hassle me for no reason other than that they could. But I found that the specific jurisdiction made a big difference. Cops are sort of like soldiers; they follow orders from above. If the high command had an attitude, that followed down the ranks.

 

I also know for a fact that cops have infiltrated entirely peaceful, legal groups whose political views are opposed by the local chief or other lawmakers. My sister recently attended a rally that was organized by a peaceful protest group, but black-clad creeps showed up uninvited and caused trouble. I agree with Geezer that these characters should be prosecuted.

 

But much of what Vigile says above is true. Outside my role as a photojournalist, I'd say that my other interactions with police are about 50/50. About half the time they are OK and about half the time they act like jerks for no reason. And I think that 50 percent jerk level is much higher than it is in the general population. (By the way, cops often refer to citizens as "civilians." That concerns me. How many of our cops come from the military where they are taught to react in a way that is not appropriate for working in a community? Another problem I see is that personnel evaluations of cops often include the number of citations written and felony arrests made but have little way of measuring "community relations." So the cops are motivated to arrest people.)

 

I recently looked at the police shooting level between New Zealand and the US. In NZ in a recent year (don't remember if it was 2016 or 2015) there was one. The guy was shooting at the cops (beat cops do not carry guns in NZ). In the US there were over 900. When I corrected for the population difference, it worked out to something like 1 to 135 or so (again, I don't remember the exact numbers). To be fair, I did not look to see how many people shot at cops in the two countries.

 

Sadly, violence is part of the DNA of America. There was a book I read about the history of violence in America. Some of the Europeans who came here in the pre-colonial and colonial eras were escaping horrific violence (often by religion). They brought those attitudes with them and committed violence against the Native Americans and against each other. Violence has continued as part of our culture, and each level is too often met with increased violence in response. As to cops vs. citizens, it's a chicken/egg proposition. But that does not excuse the cops who wham on people just because they can.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now