Politics Thread ( Don't click if you don't want to see political discussions. )

[paul1598419]

We haven't had privacy in a long time, the Patriot act means alphabets can and do have a record of every phone call, every text, every search, every online purchase, even this conversation is in our forever files.

Remember the Murdauch murder trial, it's was watchable online, all the data was there, his onstar data from his chevy, his cell calls, texts, even the meta data, they knew when he bent over the body, they knew his proximity to the other family members based on their cellphones.

That slick sob had lied his way out until the cellphone data and he wasn't under any special surveillance, this data is collected on everyone everyday, stored in data centers and combed over by AI.

Yes, before you could get a warrant to access everything in a phone. Now, people's phones can be accessed in real time without a warrant. This has been used by autocrats to go after political adversaries through out the world.

 

[paul1598419]

Greg Bovito was dragged into court today to answer to a Federal judge for what she said appears to be violations of her orders. She said ICE cannot use tear gas against peaceful protestors. And, that Bovito wears a video camera by Friday at the latest.

 

[RedCowboy]

Greg Bovito was dragged into court today to answer to a Federal judge for what she said appears to be violations of her orders. She said ICE cannot use tear gas against peaceful protestors. And, that Bovito wears a video camera by Friday at the latest.

The key word here is "peaceful".

Yelling in someone's face from inches away is not peaceful, it's confrontational, invasive, belligerent and is in itself is an act of aggression that puts an officer in fear for his/her safety, maybe we need an arms length law for personal space when confronting others in protest.

I respect an officers right to defend themselves when personal space is invaded in an aggressive confrontational manner.
Maybe as a matter of policy the officer should attempt to issue a verbal warning when his/her arms length personal space is breached, maybe even try to give a 2nd and final warning "This is your final warning" before deploying non-lethal defensive tools, unless the situation dictates immediate defensive measures.

Protestors need to understand they have a right to protest, but they do NOT have any right to obstruct or violate any other laws, such as threatening an officers safety by invading personal space while behaving aggressively in an attempt to intimidate/obstruct.

 

[paul1598419]

The key word here is "peaceful".

Yelling in someone's face from inches away is not peaceful, it's confrontational, invasive, belligerent and is in itself is an act of aggression that puts an officer in fear for his/her safety, maybe we need an arms length law for personal space when confronting others in protest.

I respect an officers right to defend themselves when personal space is invaded in an aggressive confrontational manner.
Maybe as a matter of policy the officer should attempt to issue a verbal warning when his/her arms length personal space is breached, maybe even try to give a 2nd and final warning "This is your final warning" before deploying non-lethal defensive tools, unless the situation dictates immediate defensive measures.

Protestors need to understand they have a right to protest, but they do NOT have any right to obstruct or violate any other laws, such as threatening an officers safety by invading personal space while behaving aggressively in an attempt to intimidate/obstruct.

Speaking loudly, however is still considered to be peaceful. One has to impede the ICE officer. Otherwise, it is permissable protest. If you aren't impeding officers, it is permissable speech.

 

[RedCowboy]

You can speak the word fire in a crowded theatre but if you speak FIRE loudly, you break a law (creating a hazardous/dangerous condition).

That's your opinion that protestors can shout in an officer's face and it's your opinion from afar, but an officer has the right to self defense if he/she perceives the action as blatantly aggressive or threatening, that is their God given, constitutionally recognized right and no judge can take that right from them.

This is not an excuse for an officer to attack someone for exercising freedom of speech, even loudly, rudely cursing from 3-5 feet away is protected, but shouting in someone's face from inches away is an act of aggression and is not a protected activity.

Furthermore, when a protestor is verbally protesting loudly from 3-5 feet away, and the officer moves towards the protestor in the course of their duty, the protestor is obligated to yield the right of way to the officer, such as to allow at least a good arms reach worth of personal space as not to obstruct, otherwise they are likely obstructing.

p.s. Body cameras on officers is a good policy, it protects us and them.

 

[paul1598419]

You can speak the word fire in a crowded theatre but if you speak FIRE loudly, you break a law (creating a hazardous/dangerous condition).

That's your opinion that protestors can shout in an officer's face and it's your opinion from afar, but an officer has the right to self defense if he/she perceives the action as blatantly aggressive or threatening, that is their God given, constitutionally recognized right and no judge can take that right from them.

This is not an excuse for an officer to attack someone for exercising freedom of speech, even loudly, rudely cursing from 3-5 feet away is protected, but shouting in someone's face from inches away is an act of aggression and is not a protected activity.

Furthermore, when a protestor is verbally protesting loudly from 3-5 feet away, and the officer moves towards the protestor in the course of their duty, the protestor is obligated to yield the right of way to the officer, such as to allow at least a good arms reach worth of personal space as not to obstruct, otherwise they are likely obstructing.

p.s. Body cameras on officers is a good policy, it protects us and them.

If an officer changes his route to pursue a protestor, that is trying to stifle free speech. If protestors are following officers at a distance and yelling at them, this is still free speech. This administration just doesn't like it because the vast majority of it is against Trump. That's just too bad for Trump. To speak against the government is absolutely permissable.