98 replies to this topic

[and then]

OWS gave us a sample of how legal and proper protesting can be infiltrated and turned into acts of anarchy and violence.  With the external social pressures of unemployment, rising prices and overall fear of future trends, it seems a given that protesting will increase.  As a country how should we respond when groups like the Anarchists push the protests over into violence?  How can cities respond without becoming too heavy handed and making the problems worse while trying to keep the citizenry safe?
I'm curious especially of what OWS folks think of this.

[Robbie333]

and then, on 01 May 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

OWS gave us a sample of how legal and proper protesting can be infiltrated and turned into acts of anarchy and violence.  With the external social pressures of unemployment, rising prices and overall fear of future trends, it seems a given that protesting will increase.  As a country how should we respond when groups like the Anarchists push the protests over into violence?  How can cities respond without becoming too heavy handed and making the problems worse while trying to keep the citizenry safe?
I'm curious especially of what OWS folks think of this.

    In this day and age I guess it is a very tricky thing to do. We have to tip toe so much anymore. Now, I say if there is violence and people are going to get hurt because of some crazies. Take care of business and do what you need to do.

[ninjadude]

and then, on 01 May 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

As a country how should we respond when groups like the Anarchists push the protests over into violence?  How can cities respond without becoming too heavy handed and making the problems worse while trying to keep the citizenry safe?
I'm curious especially of what OWS folks think of this.

"As a country" there should be no response as protests are a local issue. As local law enforcement, the response of say, Oakland, where the police violated local ordinances to provoke the protestors - was the wrong response. I would say some locations did better. Buffalo and some other cities, I think, talked to the protestors (what a concept - actually talking). They had a dialog about what was legal and what was not and when and how to report violence. Certainly police depts need to be vigilant and prepared (since WE've spent a ton of money doing that - no one should be concerned).

[Pyridium]

OWS is the answer to the TEA PARTY.  The Tea Party wants to abide strictly by the Constitution and cut the size of the Federal Govt. and giving more power to the State.  OWS wants to tear up the Constitution and rewrite it.  The OWS would like to make the Govt much larger and provide a means to redistribute wealth from the super rich to each person as he needs.

This next Presidential election will dictate which direction this country goes.

I think it would be really cool to stay at home everyday and rely on the Govt to give me enough money to pay my bills with maybe just a little left over at the end of the month, lol.

[Stellar]

Gee, with all the money you guys have been spending on UAVs, it should be pretty easy to identify the individual causing the virus and arrest him alone, leaving the rest of the protest untouched, no?

[ninjadude]

Pyridium, on 01 May 2012 - 10:53 PM, said:

OWS is the answer to the TEA PARTY.  The Tea Party wants to abide strictly by the Constitution and cut the size of the Federal Govt. and giving more power to the State.  OWS wants to tear up the Constitution and rewrite it.  The OWS would like to make the Govt much larger and provide a means to redistribute wealth from the super rich to each person as he needs.

This is complete nonsense. You have no idea what these organizations are about. I have posted some of the OWS goals here on UM previously. "The movement's goals include a more balanced distribution of income, more and better jobs, bank reform, a reduction in the influence of corporations on politics, and forgiveness of student loan debt" from the Wiki. Please do some research before you post because nearly everything you said is provably false.

[Pyridium]

Wow, Ninja, I wrote all of that with tongue in cheek.  There are 2 sides to this story.  You have identified yourself as an OWS supporter.  I hope Obama is re-elected and your "reforms and ideas" are implemented.  The items you posted I will not read, the titles speak volumns.  The only thing I foresee with your scenario is 150 Trillion in debt, or we just crash before we even get close to that mark.

Obama has a vision for this country, let's follow him.

Back to the topic, I think violence should be met with law and justice.  Long live free speech, to hell with violence.

Edited by Pyridium, 01 May 2012 - 11:25 PM.

[DieChecker]

What should be the reaction by government agents to violent anarchists? I'd respond with less-than-lethal technologies combined with a Summer time desert tent city internment camp waiting on their federal trials in the Fall. Let them occupy the desert and not occupy the media.

Either that or draft them into a "volunteer" branch of the military like the French Foreign Legion, and send them off to Syria to work for the UN.

[DieChecker]

Pyridium, on 01 May 2012 - 11:20 PM, said:

Wow, Ninja, I wrote all of that with tongue in cheek.  There are 2 sides to this story.  You have identified yourself as an OWS supporter.  I hope Obama is re-elected and your "reforms and ideas" are implemented.  The items you posted I will not read, the titles speak volumns.  The only thing I foresee with your scenario is 150 Trillion in debt, or we just crash before we even get close to that mark.

Obama has a vision for this country, let's follow him.

Ninja has repeatedly said that the country can NOT crash, and cannot go bankrupt, and will not go insolvant... regardless of the amount of Debt, the current Deficit, or how much money is being brought in with taxes. He apparently thinks that we can keep running up the credit card forever and never will reach the point where it will not work anymore.

[WoIverine]

How about we, I don't know, work to resolve the root cause of the financial problems the majority faces so that we don't have occupy movements!

Edited by Spid3rCyd3, 01 May 2012 - 11:25 PM.

[F3SS]

Why should student loan debt be "forgiven"? I was young and naive when I signed the dotted line for mine. I though my school sucked a bit but I never faulted them or anyone for the debt I had taken on. I never got a job in my field of schooling either. Ended up working for myself. I went for graphic design, now I do construction. Sure I was better but I never once thought my debt should be erased. I've been paying for my loans and the loans my parents consigned for me every single month for the last ten+ years. The whole time I've never borrowed a penny from anyone to help out. Just doing what I gotta do. On the plus side, next month, after more than a decade, I make my final payment and those loans are history!!!
If education was free, then who would teach? Oh gee, would it be government? Lots of people are lazy and suck at school when they have to pay for it themselves, I know I was at times. Point is, free gov education would be a complete waste of tax payer money. If you want to go to school, you pay for it. I know most of us don't want to pay for a bunch of youngsters who will be partying or dropping out. Make your own choices and pay for your mistakes or benefit from your achievements. My wallet isn't going to help you make that choice.

[Slave2Fate]

DieChecker, on 01 May 2012 - 11:21 PM, said:

What should be the reaction by government agents to violent anarchists? I'd respond with less-than-lethal technologies combined with a Summer time desert tent city internment camp waiting on their federal trials in the Fall. Let them occupy the desert and not occupy the media.

Either that or draft them into a "volunteer" branch of the military like the French Foreign Legion, and send them off to Syria to work for the UN.

That seems a bit totalitarian doesn't it?

[Stellar]

Is it for real, on 01 May 2012 - 11:25 PM, said:

If education was free, then who would teach?

I dont see why free education = lack of teachers. Just have the government pay the tuition from the taxes it receives from the people.

From http://www.census.go...010/tables.html we see that there are approximately 12 million students between the ages of 15-24 enrolled in post secondary institutions. From http://nces.ed.gov/f...splay.asp?id=76 we see that the average yearly tuition for a 4-year public post-secondary institution is approximately $15 000. That means that under $190 billion is being spent on tuition annually.

The US defense expenditure is $672 billion alone. The country with the next highest military spending is China, at $143 billion dollars. Your defense budget alone could pay for the tuition, while still having a higher military expenditure than any other country.

Or perhaps take some money from the police forces, who seem to have money to spend on UAVs for policing...

Of course, if you have a free tuition, many more students will want post secondary education, thus skyrocketing the amount payed by the US, right? Well, you can simply increase the entry requirements so that *only the best* get in. This will increase the value of the post secondary education, it'll increase its importance and it'll encourage people to do well in high school. Furthermore, all those people who go to college, get drunk and barely pass, yet still get the degree, will probably not make the cut anyway. What's there to lose?

[F3SS]

Stellar, on 02 May 2012 - 12:16 AM, said:

I dont see why free education = lack of teachers. Just have the government pay the tuition from the taxes it receives from the people.


Furthermore, all those people who go to college, get drunk and barely pass, yet still get the degree, will probably not make the cut anyway. What's there to lose?

Problem one: I don't want the government deciding the curriculum.
Problem two: I don't want government involved in education because of problem one.
Problem three: What's there to lose? Tax payer money misused, misappropriated and wasted on mediocre education or likely indoctrination.
Problem four: Folks who believe free gov education is free and think it's good idea.
Problem five: Government just needs to stay the heck out of every facet of our lives and just pave our roads, deliver my mail, defend our borders and defend the fundamental ideas of which we were founded. We don't need or want a fundamental change with a false sense of hope. What we need is a restoration and a lot less give me give me free free I'm entitled let's not keep score and hurt feelings everyone wins PC hope and change crap.

[F3SS]

Stellar, on 02 May 2012 - 12:16 AM, said:

The US defense expenditure is $672 billion alone. The country with the next highest military spending is China, at $143 billion dollars. Your defense budget alone could pay for the tuition, while still having a higher military expenditure than any other country.


Of course, if you have a free tuition, many more students will want post secondary education, thus skyrocketing the amount payed by the US, right? Well, you can simply increase the entry requirements so that *only the best* get in. This will increase the value of the post secondary education, it'll increase its importance and it'll encourage people to do well in high school. Furthermore, all those people who go to college, get drunk and barely pass, yet still get the degree, will probably not make the cut anyway.

I'd like to add that I like the fact that our military out-spends and out-powers the rest of the civilized world.
Secondly, our government these days would rather not reward an achieve and succeed attitude these days. There is so much PC wimpyness that the "only the best" get in system would be so unfair and blasphemous in their eyes they could never consider making such "cruel" requirements.