Among others, Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! has been arrested on charges of "Conspiracy to insight a riot." This goes along with the armed raids performed on several protest planning organization headquarters, buildings filled with people armed only with words. This is one of the true double edged swords of our generation. How do we ensure security without overstepping constitutional boundaries?

Now, I'm not posting this to cry about The Man or fascism. I'm not going to link you to "liberal" websites or to footage that can easily be dismissed as clever editing. The problem is that while the Bill of Rights secures these people's right to protest, rules can be created on a whim that qualify their protest as an illegal act: stepping off a sidewalk, carrying a fanny pack (back on topic brits!), "looking suspicious", and just generally being at the wrong place at the wrong time. Partisanship aside, the point here is; if or when the day comes when truly innocent protesters are locked up for no other reason than to influence public perception and suppress dissent, how will we know? Is that happening now? Has it happened before? How can we the people secure our right to protest if we aren't the ones making any of the rules? If politicians have the power to keep protesters miles away from the events they are protesting, if they have the authority to declare this sidewalk off limits or define what "suspicious" means, then does that effectively kill the power of protest?

I think this is all very troubling.

Goodman was charged with Obstruction not Felony Riot. Goodman was arrested while trying to stop police from taking in others into custody. You can't complain about getting arrested if you get in the way of the police when they are trying to take someone into custody.

Edit - Well I guess you can complain, but don't be surprised if you get arrested.

I'd like to see a 51 year old woman "get in the way" she claims to have been arrested for simply asking to speak with their commanding officer. What about if my girlfriend happens to walk by these officers making the arrest, and being the hottie that she is, draws their attention. That's obstruction of justice....

BUT that is not the point of this post. Those specifics are petty, I don't care about Ms. Goodman one way or another, she probably is playing the victim card rather heavily. The question is how do we know? Because if we just place unjustified confidence on the police we might be sorely disappointed.

You over stated the facts by suggesting "Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! has been arrested on charges of "Conspiracy to insight a riot.""

My point is not petty, I stated the facts that are public record. I assume you have never worked in law enforcement or within the legal system... Your questions are for the courts to figure out. That is why you are innocent until proven guilty and may ask for reparation should it be found that you were illegally detained or falsely accused. I am fairly confident that anyone that was arrested in this matter will have plenty of "Free" legal representation.

Edit - I need a proof reader.

I simply regurgitated what I read...many places incorrectly had that cited as her charge until she was released and clarified. Evidently that's what her producers were charged with, not her.

Nor did I accuse your point of being petty. Innocent until proven guilty doesn't help out much in this situation, if you are somewhere to protest and have been arrested you'll likely miss your chance to protest... The potential abuse of this causality is what I'm talking about.

I understand what your point is and I respect it, but, without personally witnessing the entire event (I assume you have not either) and without having an account from the law enforcement officers involved, I personally feel you are jumping to conclusions that there was even potential abuse.

US Law Enforcement Officers don't pull out the rubber bullets (or any weapon for that matter) unless they feel there is a threat. The officers should know in the back of their minds that if they do abuse their authority, could potentially lose everything they own if are proven to have been in the wrong.

I live right by Minneapolis and it's a mess :S

Was watching the news and saw pictures of them doing tons of stuff. One had dumped garbage all over the street, one had ripped of a park bench and threw it int he street, another threw a brick through the window of a state patrol car, and they were also blocking streets disallowing buses to leave. To me, I believe some of them she be arrested.

I live less than a half-mile from the convention site (the Excel Enregy Center, home of the Minnesota Wild). I've seen all the news coverage. The police are demonstrating far more restraint with the idiots causing damage than I would. Protesters who do not break the law are being to allowed to protest all they want to. Morons who break the law are being arrested, just as they should be. Your right to free speech does not include breaking laws. Oh, and the police raids were to a known anarchist organization who had weapons and large containers of stored urine to throw at the police. So don't believe everything you hear about the "poor abused protesters". It just aint so.

Can you quote me making such a conclusion?



Thanks for the perspective RainbowViper and Dark55mage. I think it can be easily said that a few rotten eggs can ruin the whole thing, but what I'm worried about is abuse. Officials and politicians have the ability to make protest completely ineffective, at times they do so rightfully, as was done for the funerals victimized by the Westboro Baptist Church extremists. My worry is that a few bad eggs on the other side have the power to ruin freedom for all of us just as the morons ripping up benches ruined protesting for, likely, countless others.

We still don't know exactly what Amy Goodman or her producers actually did to be arrested.

Yes, I believe I may be able to provide where I drew that conclusion. Please see the following quote:

Yes?

You both lost me, lol....


Yes, there's the potential for abuse anytime protestors face off against the police. But in these days of a video camera in seemingly every hand, it occurs so rarely that I simply can't spend any time worrying about it. That's not to say police abuse shouldn't be investigated (if there's at least some credible evidence of it), but rather that there are citizen-represented watchdog groups that do the job, any very well, so I'll let them have at it.

I really think this is worth watching.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTQXRI_IaEE

It has three parts. I'd be interesting in hearing the other side of the story about these 8 specific people and what kinds of things were found in their house/s.

But what bothers me is that the Lawyer's Guild guy is talking about. Like I said, they can just round these people up, and deal with it later, whether their detainment was justified or not. Evidently the city even negotiated a contract with the RNC to pay for the first $10 million dollars in legal costs of law suits as a result of this indescriminatory arrests.

How to really handle hecklers

That said, I don't agree with the people protesting inside the RNC. I don't believe that's an appropriate time to protest, even if it is a right. People should have the decency to let John McCain be nominated by his party and set out his stall, without being protested at that point. That time should be later. People should protest outside if they wish, although clearly violence isn't acceptable. It does nothing for the greater good when you turn up and smash some stuff up.

Well I don't see what you or I disagreeing with the appropriateness of their protest has to do with anything in this conversation. They are, in point of fact, protesting and there are measures in place to deal with protesters that I'm worried about. That's what this topic is about. Not the plight of the protesters or their timing.

What is being suggested by these DemocracyNow videos is that during the RNC in 2004(NYC) when the protesters there were taken to trial a great number of them were acquitted based on video evidence that proved the police testimony to be false. During this convention, the members of DemocracyNow accuse, the riot police are specifically targeting journalistic presence in, as the members of DemocracyNow suggest, an effort to suppress this video evidence. This is not justice, and this is why I worry.

I want people to be safe, and sometimes that includes measures that aren't favorable to protester's agendas, but this accusation suggests that law enforcement is defending it's ability to give false testimony and see these charges through to prosecution.

I had not seen that video of Obama. Thanks for the link.