Mostly peaceful protesting

9,952 Views | 151 Replies | Last: 14 days ago by bear2034
BearForce2
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:52p, 5/7/22



Pro-abortion protestors march on homes of Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and Chief Court Justice Roberts. The protestors were chanting "No Uterus, no opinion." This wasn't the first time a protest has been organized outside of Kavanaugh's home.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
NVBear78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:34p, 5/7/22
I find the doxxing of Supreme Court Justices extremely troubling
Reply Quote
7
Eastern Oregon Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to NVBear78 • 11:20p, 5/7/22
NVBear78 said:
I find the doxxing of Supreme Court Justices extremely troubling
How do you feel about the doxxing of liberal politicians?
Reply Quote
3
BearForce2
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Eastern Oregon Bear • 1:52a, 5/8/22
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
NVBear78 said:
I find the doxxing of Supreme Court Justices extremely troubling
How do you feel about the doxxing of liberal politicians?


"I think there's a lot of passion."
Reply Quote
4
dajo9
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:20a, 5/8/22
The Supreme Court and its justices are entitled to the same level of protection from the 1st amendment they allow for abortion clinics. No more. No less. If healthcare providers have to feel harassed and threatened then I don't see why the justices should get different treatment.
American Vermin
Reply Quote
5
2 edits
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearForce2 • 8:30a, 5/8/22
BearForce2 said:
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
NVBear78 said:
I find the doxxing of Supreme Court Justices extremely troubling
How do you feel about the doxxing of liberal politicians?


"I think there's a lot of passion."

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.
Reply Quote
1
NVBear78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Eastern Oregon Bear • 8:55a, 5/8/22
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
NVBear78 said:
I find the doxxing of Supreme Court Justices extremely troubling
How do you feel about the doxxing of liberal politicians?



That would be wrong and very troubling as well., can you give an example? Only ones I recall were by BLM protestors.
Reply Quote
7
BearForce2
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 12:36p, 5/8/22
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim
Reply Quote
6
dajo9
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearForce2 • 12:54p, 5/8/22
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim


To me that seems like a violation of the 1st amendment, based on how the justices view free speech and abortion clinics. You think these justices might arbitrarily rule differently just because it's for themselves?
American Vermin
Reply Quote
2
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearForce2 • 12:55p, 5/8/22
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim

So you think these protesters should be prosecuted, even if there is no violence to the protest? That's your position?
Reply Quote
4
NVBear78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dajo9 • 1:14p, 5/8/22
dajo9 said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim


To me that seems like a violation of the 1st amendment, based on how the justices view free speech and abortion clinics. You think these justices might arbitrarily rule differently just because it's for themselves?


No, the point is that it's a federal crime to harass a judge for the purpose of attempting to influence his or her decision.
Reply Quote
8
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to NVBear78 • 1:20p, 5/8/22
NVBear78 said:
dajo9 said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim


To me that seems like a violation of the 1st amendment, based on how the justices view free speech and abortion clinics. You think these justices might arbitrarily rule differently just because it's for themselves?


No, the point is that it's a federal crime to harass a judge for the purpose of attempting to influence his or her decision.

This is for criminal trials, by the way. Not clear this applies to SCOTUS.
Reply Quote
4
dajo9
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to NVBear78 • 2:16p, 5/8/22
NVBear78 said:
dajo9 said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim


To me that seems like a violation of the 1st amendment, based on how the justices view free speech and abortion clinics. You think these justices might arbitrarily rule differently just because it's for themselves?


No, the point is that it's a federal crime to harass a judge for the purpose of attempting to influence his or her decision.


But you can't make it a crime to harass a healthcare worker trying to go about their day? Judges will block a legislature from trying to do that. That doesn't strike you as judges giving themselves preferential treatment?
American Vermin
Reply Quote
3
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to NVBear78 • 3:54p, 5/8/22
NVBear78 said:
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
NVBear78 said:
I find the doxxing of Supreme Court Justices extremely troubling
How do you feel about the doxxing of liberal politicians?


That would be wrong and very troubling as well., can you give an example? Only ones I recall were by BLM protestors.

Not a politician, but . . .

Reply Quote
4
calpoly
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to NVBear78 • 4:18p, 5/8/22
NVBear78 said:
Eastern Oregon Bear said:
NVBear78 said:
I find the doxxing of Supreme Court Justices extremely troubling
How do you feel about the doxxing of liberal politicians?



That would be wrong and very troubling as well., can you give an example? Only ones I recall were by BLM protestors.
Hmmm. How quickly republicans forget Jan. 6th!
Reply Quote
4
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:54p, 5/8/22
Saying that it is okay to harass supreme court justices because nut jobs harass abortion clinics is an unfortunate extremist liberal view.
Reply Quote
6
dajo9
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to oski003 • 5:46p, 5/8/22
oski003 said:
Saying that it is okay to harass supreme court justices because nut jobs harass abortion clinics is an unfortunate extremist liberal view.


My view is that both the Supreme Court Justices and abortion clinics should receive protection. It is the Supreme Court that wants protection for themselves but not for others. I think Congress should pass a law that Supreme Court Justice 1st amendment protection must be equivalent to that allowed by the Court for abortion clinics. No more. No less.
American Vermin
Reply Quote
4
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dajo9 • 6:00p, 5/8/22
dajo9 said:
oski003 said:
Saying that it is okay to harass supreme court justices because nut jobs harass abortion clinics is an unfortunate extremist liberal view.


My view is that both the Supreme Court Justices and abortion clinics should receive protection. It is the Supreme Court that wants protection for themselves but not for others. I think Congress should pass a law that Supreme Court Justice 1st amendment protection must be equivalent to that allowed by the Court for abortion clinics. No more. No less.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/law/2014/jun/26/buffer-zone-rule-abortion-clinics-supreme-court

Interesting read. It is notable that they ruled that the buffer zone law was not the least restrictive means for the lawmakers to achieve their goals here, and the buffer zones in Colorado are Constitutional.
Reply Quote
2
dajo9
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to oski003 • 6:11p, 5/8/22
oski003 said:
dajo9 said:
oski003 said:
Saying that it is okay to harass supreme court justices because nut jobs harass abortion clinics is an unfortunate extremist liberal view.


My view is that both the Supreme Court Justices and abortion clinics should receive protection. It is the Supreme Court that wants protection for themselves but not for others. I think Congress should pass a law that Supreme Court Justice 1st amendment protection must be equivalent to that allowed by the Court for abortion clinics. No more. No less.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/law/2014/jun/26/buffer-zone-rule-abortion-clinics-supreme-court

Interesting read. It is notable that they ruled that the buffer zone law was not the least restrictive means for the lawmakers to achieve their goals here, and the buffer zones in Colorado are Constitutional.


The Supreme Court wrote, "public streets and sidewalks have developed as venues for the exchange of ideas"

Streets and sidewalks around abortion clinics are the same as streets and sidewalks where the Justices live.
American Vermin
Reply Quote
2
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dajo9 • 6:37p, 5/8/22
dajo9 said:
oski003 said:
dajo9 said:
oski003 said:
Saying that it is okay to harass supreme court justices because nut jobs harass abortion clinics is an unfortunate extremist liberal view.


My view is that both the Supreme Court Justices and abortion clinics should receive protection. It is the Supreme Court that wants protection for themselves but not for others. I think Congress should pass a law that Supreme Court Justice 1st amendment protection must be equivalent to that allowed by the Court for abortion clinics. No more. No less.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/law/2014/jun/26/buffer-zone-rule-abortion-clinics-supreme-court

Interesting read. It is notable that they ruled that the buffer zone law was not the least restrictive means for the lawmakers to achieve their goals here, and the buffer zones in Colorado are Constitutional.


The Supreme Court wrote, "public streets and sidewalks have developed as venues for the exchange of ideas"

Streets and sidewalks around abortion clinics are the same as streets and sidewalks where the Justices live.


People wanting the opportunity to convince those getting abortions to not get abortions fought the buffer law and won because the law was too broad. If the law were more narrowly tailored to prevent harassment of workers at the business, like somebody in their home, it may have passed. The law was struck down unaninmously in 2014 by a less conservative court. And, yes, "public streets and sidewalks have developed as venues for the exchange of ideas"
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:55p, 5/8/22
The bigger question still has not been answered here:

Do you think the right to peaceful demonstration should be abridged here? I don't care what the letter of the law says; we all know that many laws are selectively enforced and subject to interpretation. Do you think that protesters should be arrested if they try to protest Supreme Court decisions (or pending decisions)? Is that a good precedent to set for the country?
Reply Quote
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 6:56p, 5/8/22
sycasey said:
The bigger question still has not been answered here:

Do you think the right to peaceful demonstration should be abridged here? I don't care what the letter of the law says; we all know that many laws are selectively enforced and subject to interpretation. Do you think that protesters should be arrested if they try to protest Supreme Court decisions (or pending decisions)? Is that a good precedent to set for the country?


Protesters should be able to protest at courthouses and other public places, not harass people outside their homes.
Reply Quote
8
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to oski003 • 8:20p, 5/8/22
oski003 said:
sycasey said:
The bigger question still has not been answered here:

Do you think the right to peaceful demonstration should be abridged here? I don't care what the letter of the law says; we all know that many laws are selectively enforced and subject to interpretation. Do you think that protesters should be arrested if they try to protest Supreme Court decisions (or pending decisions)? Is that a good precedent to set for the country?


Protesters should be able to protest at courthouses and other public places, not harass people outside their homes.

The law BearForce quoted says you can't do it at the courthouse either. So you disagree with the law? Why make a distinction about homes versus places of business?

If public places are allowed, then you're cool with protesters coming up to them at restaurants and the like?
Reply Quote
1
BearForce2
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:31p, 5/8/22


This is a screen grab at the 0.15 mark of the first video I posted during a protest outside Justice Robert's home. Notice anything strange?
Reply Quote
3
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearForce2 • 9:06p, 5/8/22
BearForce2 said:


5/9 insurrection planned at Justice Alioto's house.

Do you want to offer up an opinion on the topic here (should protesting be illegal?) or are you just going to start spamming?
Reply Quote
3
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 9:56p, 5/8/22
sycasey said:
oski003 said:
sycasey said:
The bigger question still has not been answered here:

Do you think the right to peaceful demonstration should be abridged here? I don't care what the letter of the law says; we all know that many laws are selectively enforced and subject to interpretation. Do you think that protesters should be arrested if they try to protest Supreme Court decisions (or pending decisions)? Is that a good precedent to set for the country?


Protesters should be able to protest at courthouses and other public places, not harass people outside their homes.

The law BearForce quoted says you can't do it at the courthouse either. So you disagree with the law? Why make a distinction about homes versus places of business?

If public places are allowed, then you're cool with protesters coming up to them at restaurants and the like?


I am not cool with protestors coming up to individuals while eating at restaurants.
Reply Quote
5
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to oski003 • 10:35p, 5/8/22
oski003 said:
sycasey said:
oski003 said:
sycasey said:
The bigger question still has not been answered here:

Do you think the right to peaceful demonstration should be abridged here? I don't care what the letter of the law says; we all know that many laws are selectively enforced and subject to interpretation. Do you think that protesters should be arrested if they try to protest Supreme Court decisions (or pending decisions)? Is that a good precedent to set for the country?


Protesters should be able to protest at courthouses and other public places, not harass people outside their homes.

The law BearForce quoted says you can't do it at the courthouse either. So you disagree with the law? Why make a distinction about homes versus places of business?

If public places are allowed, then you're cool with protesters coming up to them at restaurants and the like?


I am not cool with protestors coming up to individuals while eating at restaurants.
So there are some public places where you would say protesting is not allowed?
Reply Quote
1
dajo9
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:08p, 5/8/22
I think what oski003 is saying is that people should be able to recess into their private lives without disturbances from protesters. I generally agree with that but to me that privilege also must extend to abortion clinic patients and workers. We either all get that privilege or none of us do. To me, the Supreme Court has chosen that none of us get that privilege.
American Vermin
Reply Quote
2
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dajo9 • 11:14p, 5/8/22
dajo9 said:
I think what oski003 is saying is that people should be able to recess into their private lives without disturbances from protesters. I generally agree with that but to me that privilege also must extend to abortion clinic patients and workers. We either all get that privilege or none of us do. To me, the Supreme Court has chosen that none of us get that privilege.

Seems to me that any protest in any public place will disturb someone's private life. It seems like everyone's objections are entirely tied to how much they agree with the politics of the protest.
Reply Quote
4
BearForce2
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 11:49p, 5/8/22
sycasey said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim

So you think these protesters should be prosecuted, even if there is no violence to the protest? That's your position?

Absolutely.
Reply Quote
2
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearForce2 • 12:28a, 5/9/22
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim

So you think these protesters should be prosecuted, even if there is no violence to the protest? That's your position?

Absolutely.

Does the same apply to the Canadian trucker protests?
Reply Quote
2
BearForce2
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 12:37a, 5/9/22
sycasey said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim

So you think these protesters should be prosecuted, even if there is no violence to the protest? That's your position?

Absolutely.

Does the same apply to the Canadian trucker protests?
I don't know what the Canadian law says regarding trucker protests.
Reply Quote
1
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 2:33a, 5/9/22
sycasey said:
oski003 said:
sycasey said:
oski003 said:
sycasey said:
The bigger question still has not been answered here:

Do you think the right to peaceful demonstration should be abridged here? I don't care what the letter of the law says; we all know that many laws are selectively enforced and subject to interpretation. Do you think that protesters should be arrested if they try to protest Supreme Court decisions (or pending decisions)? Is that a good precedent to set for the country?


Protesters should be able to protest at courthouses and other public places, not harass people outside their homes.

The law BearForce quoted says you can't do it at the courthouse either. So you disagree with the law? Why make a distinction about homes versus places of business?

If public places are allowed, then you're cool with protesters coming up to them at restaurants and the like?


I am not cool with protestors coming up to individuals while eating at restaurants.
So there are some public places where you would say protesting is not allowed?


No, you asked me my opinion on what I think should and should not be allowed. Protesting is good. When it is harassment, it is not. I feel that protesting outside a judges house is almost always obvious harassment. Protesting outside abortion clinics is probably harassment as well. You now seem to be mixing my answer here with the discussion on constitutionality of laws that disallow protesting. They are different discussions.
Reply Quote
2
dajo9
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 4:16a, 5/9/22
sycasey said:
dajo9 said:
I think what oski003 is saying is that people should be able to recess into their private lives without disturbances from protesters. I generally agree with that but to me that privilege also must extend to abortion clinic patients and workers. We either all get that privilege or none of us do. To me, the Supreme Court has chosen that none of us get that privilege.

Seems to me that any protest in any public place will disturb someone's private life. It seems like everyone's objections are entirely tied to how much they agree with the politics of the protest.


How so? I brought up 2 protests on opposite ends of the spectrum and my whole point is they should be treated equally.
American Vermin
Reply Quote
1
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BearForce2 • 7:21a, 5/9/22
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:

Your first post notes that there had already been protests at Kavanaugh's house in the past. That tells you that it's pretty easy to find information about Supreme Court justices.

No one needs to doxx them. They are public figures.


It's a criminal offense to picket or parade outside a justice's home. So far, the FBI, DOJ or any Democrat politician have not condemned the threatening protests including the President.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim

So you think these protesters should be prosecuted, even if there is no violence to the protest? That's your position?

Absolutely.

Does the same apply to the Canadian trucker protests?
I don't know what the Canadian law says regarding trucker protests.

What about the trucker convoys that attempted to replicate the same actions in the US? I seem to recall you posting approvingly about those.

Should Pelosi protesters be prosecuted and jailed?

Reply Quote
5
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.