HB is defending that the protest was peaceful even after a bottle was thrown at a cop😂
does freedom mean so little to you that you will look for literally any excuse to crush people's constitutional rights?
Throwing a bottle at a cop isn’t a constitutional right, nor is protected under the 1st Amendment
one person out of thousand did something that didn't harm anyone. So we should violently suppress the peaceful people? How does that make any sense? That is the most flimsy pretext for a police state that I have ever heard.
Yes. Notice how conservatives weren’t throwing things at cops a couple of weeks ago. But we also forget to mention that all of them were asked to back up a number of times and they didn’t. “Peaceful.”
wait, so you are redefining peaceful to mean that they have to obey orders that they are not required to follow? So anyone who ever protests and doesn't immediately surrender to the police is now "violent" to you? Again, you are describing a police state.
Resisting the police isn't peaceful, nor is it lawful.
resisting the police isn't peaceful, nor is it lawful.
ox v New Hampshire and Sections 1.5 and 1.6.
No, my response is I don't give a fuck what Trump does with a camera, I want him to do his job and secure property and clear the streets of rioters. If protesters want to resist the police, I hope they get a pepper ball in the eye for their violent decision.
that case was about parading without a permit. as far as I know no one needed a permit to protest in that park, so that case is not relevant.
that case was about parading without a permit. as far as I know no one needed a permit to protest in that park, so that case is not relevant.A.) Precedents are broad in designB.) Please read Sections 1.5 and 1.6
Can we agree that throwing a bottle of water at a cop is a violent action? If not then I’m done with this conversation.
ok, in the same sense that throwing a tiny piece of candy is technically a violent act.
A bottle of water is 3 times heavier than a baseball. Let's see you take one.
the case was about whether or not they needed a permit. They did. They didn't need a permit to protest in that park. So how exactly are the cases related?
ok, in the same sense that throwing a tiny piece of candy is technically a violent act. But that doesn't justify shooting someone. Police are supposed to engage in a proportional response. If someone throws a small object at a cop, the cop is not legally justified in drawing their gun. Similarly, if someone throws an open water bottle that lands no where near a cop, they are not justified in opening fire on an entire crowd of people.
If it was a peaceful protest, police wouldn't HAVE to wear riot gear. It was mob violence and was dealt as mob violence.
And riot gear doesn't protect against all impacts. Many baseball players had concussions THROUGH A HELMET from a 5 oz ball.
You are talking like you never experienced a violent moment in your life, and that's scary because you are pretending like you know what the fuck you are talking about.
of course they do, because an average pitch is being thrown at 90 miles an hour. That is nothing like what happened here and is therefore completely irrelevant.
the case was about whether or not they needed a permit. They did. They didn't need a permit to protest in that park. So how exactly are the cases related?Clearly you haven’t read sections 1.5 and 1.6. Stop being ignorant and read.
The minute you throw anything at a police officer during a peaceful protest, it’s no longer a peaceful protest. It’s not hard to understand.
I can imagine being that rookie cop told to go in a small 4 man squad to try to pick out the anarchists. It would be like finding out you were spearheading the Normandy Beach invasion.
He’s probably a highschool student that thinks he’s preaching social justice. I know a lot of em
