Posts: 10,288
Threads: 345
Joined: Apr 2009
I'm starting a new thread since the current TMT thread is going in a different direction.
A question for everyone: If you drive on a public highway (i.e., the Daniel K. Inouye Highway) and are stopped by protesters asking what your intentions are and creating a traffic jam while doing so, is that a peaceful and lawful demonstration?
Secondly, if you are on a spur road that has been set aside for access to the mountain with supposedly no restrictions, according to the protesters, is it peaceful and lawful to then have protesters stop you and 1) demand to see your driving license and 2) ask what you do for a living in order to gain access?
Just curious what people think.
Posts: 363
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 10,288
Threads: 345
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 363
Threads: 1
Joined: Apr 2015
quote:
Originally posted by TomK
Intimidating?
That's kind of subjective, but I think I mentioned before that I was deployed to Iraq twice so my view on these kind of things are a little skewed.
Posts: 10,288
Threads: 345
Joined: Apr 2009
Understood, you're coming from a very different perspective and I appreciate that (and I am forever grateful for your service). On the other hand, we have people trying to do their jobs and are surrounded by protesters who block them and then ask for IDs and more while the police stand aside and do nothing.
Military training and experience should not be a requirement for working at an observatory and what's worse is that the protestors have gone back on their word. They cannot be trusted.
Posts: 2,484
Threads: 10
Joined: Feb 2008
Of course it is intimidating. It is inherently so and it is intended to be. What happens if you don't agree or try not to be stopped? Violence happens. From the dawn of civilization there has been a name for those who stop you on the public way without proper authority. The only thing that makes it tolerable when the police do it is the fact or at least perception that there is accountability. You know who their bosses are and supposedly have recourse. The protesters are turning this on its head and are intentionally making a mockery of the concept. That of course is part of the reward for them.
Keeping this sort of thing sorted out is what distinguishes civilization from tribalism.
Posts: 3,212
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2009
There is a strange cat and mouse game it seems about this issue. The observatories say they don't have secure access (although they might mean unfettered) but the protesters say they're not preventing current workers and point to water tucks and such that were recently let through.(while also hemming and hawing about other incidents)
And of course stopping people and asking personal information is an intimidation tactic (papers please). It's a demonstration of power both in the physical prevention of movement and the demand to justify who you are and what you do. I personally would refuse to answer any such questions.
Its easy to say from the sidelines but it seems like the observatories need to regularly send some people up (those comfortable with these sorts of interactions) to test their access and record every encounter for the next steps (media, petitioning the state, lawsuits, etc) IMHO
Posts: 1,457
Threads: 12
Joined: Oct 2016
It is practically inviting someone to say"fawk off". No, I don't see this kind of subtle threat by the protesters as peaceful at all. Unbelievable that law enforcement permits it.
I think the original question should be what is the rightful role of civil disobedience in society?
Civil disobedience has a long history, both in America and world wide. It is a central tenet of a free society. A pillar your original question appears to be an attempt to deny. Which leads one to wonder, what would you do if your interests were best served by an act of civil disobedience? Would you not promote it because of the inconvenience you might cause others?
Posts: 3,212
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2009
Civil Disobedience has been directed at unjust or immoral laws and those who took action against them were arrested for the violations of them (Thoreau, Gandhi, MLK, being the most obvious examples).
What is the unjust law being protested? Why is the law of free travel and access on public lands not being enforced? It's not civil disobedience when no obedience is expected or required.
