One more "fuck the police" from page 8 and onward is going to have an all expense paid weekend to E-Disneyland. It adds nothing to the discussion and as such please refrain from making such posts in this topic and the boards in general.
On May 29 2011 21:30 euroboy wrote: Yea sure they broke the law I think they were aware of it. It's just that the law is stupid...
There's quite a few stupid laws in every country. The fact is, democracy is a somewhat slow and inefficient process, especially when it becomes so bureaucratic. Doesn't mean that the best way to instill change is to break those laws.
I mean, of all the issues in America, you really don't think there's bigger fish to fry than trying to get the "No dancing at Jefferson Memorial" law vanquished?
On May 29 2011 20:12 Ghostcom wrote: The western society is based around freedom under responsibility and well, doing something that can hurt the feelings of so many just because you can doesn't seem very responsible.
No it isn't. Freedom of expression is only limited by the call for others to be harmed. Especially in America. In particular this is because offense is taken, not given. If people would have to refrain from any action thought or speech if one person were to appoint it offensive any expression would be stifled. As I can claim anything is offensive to me and there is no way for you to proof it otherwise.
On May 29 2011 20:12 Ghostcom wrote: That is not to say that I don't think the cops overreacted quite a bit, but then again, it's not like he didn't do anything to annoy them.
Being annoying is not illegal. Also being annoying is subjective, see the above. Pretty sad post comming from someone from Denmark of all places. Cartoons anyone?
Quote my entire post if you want to have a discussion, taking things out of context is never cool. You would notice I promoted freedom under responsibility, why piss off people just to piss them off?
Also, just because I'm from DK, what makes you think I see the drawings as stroke of genious? You don't see me commenting on you being from the Netherlands and Gert Wilders, do you? To generalize only makes you look like a moron, so how about refraining from that mr. Gravybrain... (personal attacks won't get you anywhere either).
Things were not taken out of context. I am adressing pillars of your argument. But I quoted your entire post now, happy? : D
I know you promoted freedom under responsibility. And I made an argument why that is a meaningless statement. Adress or admit I am right.
Also you mist my point about you being from Denmark. I am not attacking the cartoons but instead condemning the reactions by many government around the world on those cartoons. as these actions were precisely the point I made in my previous post.
Finally I don't think I called you names at any given moment in time.
Here's the invite video which provides some background info. There's gonna be another one next Saturday if anyone wants to show your support. Sadly, I'm too far away from DC
Go Adam!
Sounds like some ignorant guy who just wants to break laws and get other people into trouble to be on television. I don't know why the courts have made the ruling they did, but when the people go out of their way to be idiots, they're just asking for trouble. I doubt Adam did any research on the court case before doing his illegal demonstration. Seems pretty immature to me. "We found a weird law, so let's break it and wonder why we're getting arrested!"
Sure, people are more than welcome to disagree with the courts' ruling, but breaking the law and then being stupefied is not how you go about displaying your opinions in a professional manner. Take it up with the courts; don't go breaking the law first. What morons.
Actually he's an Iraq War veteran who is now anti-war, a former congressional candidate from New Mexico, and now hosts a television show which had an episode on Friday which talked about the court case and why he was calling people to dance at the Jefferson Memorial. Here's the 5 minute segment.
I guess Rosa Parks was immature for not moving to the back of the bus then. She should have taken it up with the courts instead of disobeying the law.
Forget arguing with Darkplasmaball, the guy have yet to understand that the "law" is not always something you got to follow. I remember him trashing a homeless woman who got arrested for lying to the school bureaucratie about her adress.
On May 29 2011 21:30 euroboy wrote: Yea sure they broke the law I think they were aware of it. It's just that the law is stupid...
There's quite a few stupid laws in every country. The fact is, democracy is a somewhat slow and inefficient process, especially when it becomes so bureaucratic. Doesn't mean that the best way to instill change is to break those laws.
I mean, of all the issues in America, you really don't think there's bigger fish to fry than trying to get the "No dancing at Jefferson Memorial" law vanquished?
The people arrested are well-known career activists. They fry big fish all the time.
Anyone going "oh dem kids hate the law with their potsmocking" just watch the footage, Adam gets bodyslammed against the ground and held with a chokegrip whilst holding his hands up. That's a huge deal, chokegrip is (atleast in sweden) a huge overstepping of violence. EDIT: To put it in perspective, you could get 6 years in prison in Sweden for that. And yes, it does not have to be with the intent of killing or choking you, just holding a chokegrip is bad enough.
Bodyslamming and chokeholding a person who's not even attacking you.. Isn't that straight up assault?
Then again, this is the US of A...
Would you please actually watch the first video and read the thread before responding? Or is that above you amazing Belgians? Either way you're not even worth a new response so here.
uhuh uhuh, this is why you get original's not videos from news sources, Fox seems to have muted the guy they were talking to yelling the entire time, the guy who was thrown to the ground was only thrown down after being told to put his hands behind his back a half a dozen times, oh and you think he was holding his hands up? Cause I saw him holding his hands away from the police officer who was trying to do his job and arrest him (seriously to everyone yelling at the cops are they supposed to NOT enforce the law as it stands?) Also, just because the news announcer on fox called what he did a "choke hold" does not make it a real choke hold, he put his hand on the guys neck, that was nothing close to an actual choke hold and if you're going to make a point of saying a choke grip is a big deal learn what it actually looks like.
As to the second guy, he was pulling his friend away from a police officer who was putting handcuffs on him (the friend was not resisting) that is absolutely interfering with police and resisting arrest.
I really don't get people who defend fascist ways without any real insight on how laws work:
Firstly, a police officer should warn, then warn again, then try to evict the person from the area (pushing him away etc), after that he can arrest him. He may never use force unless the person resists, even if he resists slightly you are still not allowed to bodyslam him and take a stranglehold. You're a huge idiot if you'd ever defend a police officer using a stranglehold on anyone ever. And you might not consider two hands across a mans throat as a strangehold, but atleast swedish law does and here you'd get fucked for doing shit like that.
I'm a law student, and I got guardian rank education aswell as a bouncer license. I can easily testify that what they're doing is amazingly wrong in swedish standards.
Anyone going "oh dem kids hate the law with their potsmocking" just watch the footage, Adam gets bodyslammed against the ground and held with a chokegrip whilst holding his hands up. That's a huge deal, chokegrip is (atleast in sweden) a huge overstepping of violence. EDIT: To put it in perspective, you could get 6 years in prison in Sweden for that. And yes, it does not have to be with the intent of killing or choking you, just holding a chokegrip is bad enough.
Bodyslamming and chokeholding a person who's not even attacking you.. Isn't that straight up assault?
Then again, this is the US of A...
Would you please actually watch the first video and read the thread before responding? Or is that above you amazing Belgians? Either way you're not even worth a new response so here.
uhuh uhuh, this is why you get original's not videos from news sources, Fox seems to have muted the guy they were talking to yelling the entire time, the guy who was thrown to the ground was only thrown down after being told to put his hands behind his back a half a dozen times, oh and you think he was holding his hands up? Cause I saw him holding his hands away from the police officer who was trying to do his job and arrest him (seriously to everyone yelling at the cops are they supposed to NOT enforce the law as it stands?) Also, just because the news announcer on fox called what he did a "choke hold" does not make it a real choke hold, he put his hand on the guys neck, that was nothing close to an actual choke hold and if you're going to make a point of saying a choke grip is a big deal learn what it actually looks like.
As to the second guy, he was pulling his friend away from a police officer who was putting handcuffs on him (the friend was not resisting) that is absolutely interfering with police and resisting arrest.
I really don't get people who defend fascist ways without any real insight on how laws work:
Firstly, a police officer should warn, then warn again, then try to evict the person from the area (pushing him away etc), after that he can arrest him. He may never use force unless the person resists, even if he resists slightly you are still not allowed to bodyslam him and take a stranglehold. You're a huge idiot if you'd ever defend a police officer using a stranglehold on anyone ever. And you might not consider two hands across a mans throat as a strangehold, but atleast swedish law does and here you'd get fucked for doing shit like that.
I'm a law student, and I got guardian rank education aswell as a bouncer license. I can easily testify that what they're doing is amazingly wrong in swedish standards.
Here's the invite video which provides some background info. There's gonna be another one next Saturday if anyone wants to show your support. Sadly, I'm too far away from DC
Go Adam!
Sounds like some ignorant guy who just wants to break laws and get other people into trouble to be on television. I don't know why the courts have made the ruling they did, but when the people go out of their way to be idiots, they're just asking for trouble. I doubt Adam did any research on the court case before doing his illegal demonstration. Seems pretty immature to me. "We found a weird law, so let's break it and wonder why we're getting arrested!"
Sure, people are more than welcome to disagree with the courts' ruling, but breaking the law and then being stupefied is not how you go about displaying your opinions in a professional manner. Take it up with the courts; don't go breaking the law first. What morons.
Actually he's an Iraq War veteran who is now anti-war, a former congressional candidate from New Mexico, and now hosts a television show which had an episode on Friday which talked about the court case and why he was calling people to dance at the Jefferson Memorial. Here's the 5 minute segment.
I guess Rosa Parks was immature for not moving to the back of the bus then. She should have taken it up with the courts instead of disobeying the law.
Forget arguing with Darkplasmaball, the guy have yet to understand that the "law" is not always something you got to follow. I remember him trashing a homeless woman who got arrested for lying to the school bureaucratie about her adress.
You mean the thread where the majority of people who read the article agreed with me? Oh yeah. Just let bygones be bygones These dancers are not Rosa Parks. It's ridiculous to compare the two.
Current American society allows you to appeal court rulings and approach these judiciary cases in a professional manner. You don't go out of your way to break a law and then claim that *it's a stupid law anyway*.
So if it's ruled to be illegal, why didn't they challenge it in a court of law, instead of breaking the law by dancing? That's completely counterproductive.
You fucking americans keep trying to hurt my brain XD.........
On May 29 2011 21:42 johanngrunt wrote: So if it's ruled to be illegal, why didn't they challenge it in a court of law, instead of breaking the law by dancing? That's completely counterproductive.
That's a very good question!
The simple answer that many people on this thread are giving is:
I find myself filled with such rage when I see a couple who are merely swaying back and forth while cuddling arrested.
I'm not a "fuck da police" kind of person... but those officers are absolute filth. The civilians at the memorial should of gone Egypt on their asses and risen up together in unity. That little fucking badge on your chest doesn't give you the right to oppress freedom, it gives you the right to protect it.
Maaaaaaaan , i have the most terrible way of expressing myself , but there is some valid point in it if you look at it from a particular point of view ....
What you were saying , or whatever I understood by it , is that it is ok to impose more laws after terrorist attacks and so on .. What I said , is that , well ... no it makes no sense to adress the effect instead the cause .People will still die every day because of random reasons ... 3000 is nothing compared to how many people die form car crashes , drug abuse ( inclugind all the substances like : coffee, tabaco , alchool , etc ) , etcetc . We all die mofo , one day or later .. just make the best of it while we are here .... God damn it , this thread exploded ... This wasn't my intention .
My final statement about this incident : The cops did their job correctly , The court ruled in an unmoral manner ( from my pov ) , and the "protestants" civicly disobeyed to show they are not ok with such laws . I don't think they are atention whores .
See the feedback I got from this thread is pretty positive cuz it helped me to get a better understanding of the situation .
And about the left-right brain . I don't know research you have done or whoever foney scietntist did but it has been prooven that kids ability to learn are increased at young age ( well first because the brain is developing ) , but also because they have a balance in their brain chemistry , and the brain "communicates" with both of the sides in a natural manner . As you go in educational institution , you will get mostly left-brain education which inevitably creates an imbalance and the learning abilities are crippled .
If you believe this is b/s you can simply listen to bright people like .... hmmm ... let's say mister Albert ?
“The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.”
As I understand , the rightside of the brain is responsible for intuition , imagination , creation , and the left side , is for reason , logic , etc ( which are all , you should understand , that all of them are purely conceptual )
On May 29 2011 21:46 Tenz wrote: I find myself filled with such rage when I see a couple who are merely swaying back and forth while cuddling arrested.
I'm not a "fuck da police" kind of person... but those officers are absolute filth. The civilians at the memorial should of gone Egypt on their asses and risen up together in unity. That little fucking badge on your chest doesn't give you the right to oppress freedom, it gives you the right to protect it.
Really? You don't think the cops were just... doing their jobs and upholding the law? I mean, they warned the lawbreakers several times that illegal activity was being performed, and then arrested them when they wouldn't stop. What else do you want from the cops? It's their job to arrest criminals.
Sure, you can disagree with the law itself. I personally don't know why the law exists. But it does, so why blame the cops?
On May 29 2011 21:39 Krehlmar wrote: Firstly, a police officer should warn, then warn again, then try to evict the person from the area (pushing him away etc), after that he can arrest him. He may never use force unless the person resists, even if he resists slightly you are still not allowed to bodyslam him and take a stranglehold. You're a huge idiot if you'd ever defend a police officer using a stranglehold on anyone ever. And you might not consider two hands across a mans throat as a strangehold, but atleast swedish law does and here you'd get fucked for doing shit like that.
I'm a law student, and I got guardian rank education aswell as a bouncer license. I can easily testify that what they're doing is amazingly wrong in swedish standards.
That guy was warned to put his arms behind his back 10 times.
This video is from the US, it has nothing to do with Sweden.
I'm sure the US police has a common practice they have to follow in each situation. I'm also sure you're not familiar with this law/practice. If a person doesn't comply after warnings they can use violence. What should they do? Sit there being ignored and disrespected? They displayed a lot of patience and did not really use a lot of force.
Here's the invite video which provides some background info. There's gonna be another one next Saturday if anyone wants to show your support. Sadly, I'm too far away from DC
Go Adam!
Sounds like some ignorant guy who just wants to break laws and get other people into trouble to be on television. I don't know why the courts have made the ruling they did, but when the people go out of their way to be idiots, they're just asking for trouble. I doubt Adam did any research on the court case before doing his illegal demonstration. Seems pretty immature to me. "We found a weird law, so let's break it and wonder why we're getting arrested!"
Sure, people are more than welcome to disagree with the courts' ruling, but breaking the law and then being stupefied is not how you go about displaying your opinions in a professional manner. Take it up with the courts; don't go breaking the law first. What morons.
Actually he's an Iraq War veteran who is now anti-war, a former congressional candidate from New Mexico, and now hosts a television show which had an episode on Friday which talked about the court case and why he was calling people to dance at the Jefferson Memorial. Here's the 5 minute segment.
I guess Rosa Parks was immature for not moving to the back of the bus then. She should have taken it up with the courts instead of disobeying the law.
Forget arguing with Darkplasmaball, the guy have yet to understand that the "law" is not always something you got to follow. I remember him trashing a homeless woman who got arrested for lying to the school bureaucratie about her adress.
You mean the thread where the majority of people who read the article agreed with me? Oh yeah. Just let bygones be bygones These dancers are not Rosa Parks. It's ridiculous to compare the two.
Current American society allows you to appeal court rulings and approach these judiciary cases in a professional manner. You don't go out of your way to break a law and then claim that *it's a stupid law anyway*.
The majority doesn't make you right, but that is something you gotta learn too I think. And I certainly don't think the majority was ok with you, you must remember the fact, you just spammed the whole thread with wall of texts until nobody was there to argue with you anymore. It is ridiculous, but that's liberty. Pretty pointless to stop people from dancing, especially this way (slamming a guy on the ground like all the impotant cops like to do). There are ways to do things, like asking people to leave the memorial, or even pushing them gently. Puting handcuf is something else you know...Don't you see the type of power you are giving to the police officer ? Do you think he actually know the law that he should defend ? Do you know the average salary / grade of that kind of police officer ? You're a sheep. People like you are dangerous, because you need to criticize the society you live in, always and for ever.
On May 29 2011 21:42 johanngrunt wrote: So if it's ruled to be illegal, why didn't they challenge it in a court of law, instead of breaking the law by dancing? That's completely counterproductive.
That's a very good question!
The simple answer that many people on this thread are giving is:
Rosa Parks.
...Which makes absolutely no sense.
It does make sense. Laws are not fixed known entities that somehow follow from the natural order. But are in fact an everchanging set of rules made up by people. Sometimes these rules make no sense and can even be harmfull.
But if you want a more clear example. In occupied europe during WWII it was illegal to hide jews in your house. Moreover it was the law that you had to turn them in to the police. Are you saying people should have just indiscriminately executed these laws whilest trying to alter them through politics / the court?
I'm sorry, did someone die here? Did someone suffer extreme treatment for injuries? An instance that happens everywhere. I don't know why this thread is still going.
And bullshit arguments about WWII, Gandhi, and Rosa Parks can go suck a dick.
On May 29 2011 20:12 Ghostcom wrote: The western society is based around freedom under responsibility and well, doing something that can hurt the feelings of so many just because you can doesn't seem very responsible.
No it isn't. Freedom of expression is only limited by the call for others to be harmed. Especially in America. In particular this is because offense is taken, not given. If people would have to refrain from any action thought or speech if one person were to appoint it offensive any expression would be stifled. As I can claim anything is offensive to me and there is no way for you to proof it otherwise.
On May 29 2011 20:12 Ghostcom wrote: That is not to say that I don't think the cops overreacted quite a bit, but then again, it's not like he didn't do anything to annoy them.
Being annoying is not illegal. Also being annoying is subjective, see the above. Pretty sad post comming from someone from Denmark of all places. Cartoons anyone?
Quote my entire post if you want to have a discussion, taking things out of context is never cool. You would notice I promoted freedom under responsibility, why piss off people just to piss them off?
Also, just because I'm from DK, what makes you think I see the drawings as stroke of genious? You don't see me commenting on you being from the Netherlands and Gert Wilders, do you? To generalize only makes you look like a moron, so how about refraining from that mr. Gravybrain... (personal attacks won't get you anywhere either).
Things were not taken out of context. I am adressing pillars of your argument. But I quoted your entire post now, happy? : D
I know you promoted freedom under responsibility. And I made an argument why that is a meaningless statement. Adress or admit I am right.
Also you mist my point about you being from Denmark. I am not attacking the cartoons but instead condemning the reactions by many government around the world on those cartoons. as these actions were precisely the point I made in my previous post.
Finally I don't think I called you names at any given moment in time.
Perhaps I didn't explain it properly in my first post if you missed the point so blatantly. The thing you quoted was aimed at explaining why the police officers overreacted. They are sent to do a job, they might not agree completely with it, and then this person begins to give them shit and act openly provacative. Whilst that doesn't excuse their actions it explains them. The quoted paragraph obviously wasn't a pillar of my argument about freedom under responsibility - that would be the holding a rave at Arlington part you are looking for. I hope you are now able to understand my post...
This was what you wrote when quoting me:
Pretty sad post comming from someone from Denmark of all places. Cartoons anyone?
You call my post sad, not due to it's content and thus my opinions but because of my nationality and what opinions you believe I should have due to my nationality...
What you are doing is basicly the equivalent of me saying you are an idiot because you come from the Netherlands and thus obviously must agree with Gert Wilders? I'm not willing to go in to such a discussion as it is pointless and I see no reason why I should be held accountable for the actions of other people (whom I might not agree with in the first place). So, thanks but no thanks, I won't discuss with you.
Current American society allows you to appeal court rulings and approach these judiciary cases in a professional manner. You don't go out of your way to break a law and then claim that *it's a stupid law anyway*.
Just to clarify, I'm pretty sure none of the protester's actually have the ability to appeal the court ruling in question. No?
Here's the invite video which provides some background info. There's gonna be another one next Saturday if anyone wants to show your support. Sadly, I'm too far away from DC
Go Adam!
Sounds like some ignorant guy who just wants to break laws and get other people into trouble to be on television. I don't know why the courts have made the ruling they did, but when the people go out of their way to be idiots, they're just asking for trouble. I doubt Adam did any research on the court case before doing his illegal demonstration. Seems pretty immature to me. "We found a weird law, so let's break it and wonder why we're getting arrested!"
Sure, people are more than welcome to disagree with the courts' ruling, but breaking the law and then being stupefied is not how you go about displaying your opinions in a professional manner. Take it up with the courts; don't go breaking the law first. What morons.
Actually he's an Iraq War veteran who is now anti-war, a former congressional candidate from New Mexico, and now hosts a television show which had an episode on Friday which talked about the court case and why he was calling people to dance at the Jefferson Memorial. Here's the 5 minute segment.
I guess Rosa Parks was immature for not moving to the back of the bus then. She should have taken it up with the courts instead of disobeying the law.
Forget arguing with Darkplasmaball, the guy have yet to understand that the "law" is not always something you got to follow. I remember him trashing a homeless woman who got arrested for lying to the school bureaucratie about her adress.
You mean the thread where the majority of people who read the article agreed with me? Oh yeah. Just let bygones be bygones These dancers are not Rosa Parks. It's ridiculous to compare the two.
Current American society allows you to appeal court rulings and approach these judiciary cases in a professional manner. You don't go out of your way to break a law and then claim that *it's a stupid law anyway*.
The majority doesn't make you right, but that is something you gotta learn too I think. And I certainly don't think the majority was ok with you, you must remember the fact, you just spammed the whole thread with wall of texts until nobody was there to argue with you anymore. It is ridiculous, but that's liberty. Pretty pointless to stop people from dancing, especially this way (slamming a guy on the ground like all the impotant cops like to do). There are ways to do things, like asking people to leave the memorial, or even pushing them gently. Puting handcuf is something else you know...Don't you see the type of power you are giving to the police officer ? Do you think he actually know the law that he should defend ? Do you know the average salary / grade of that kind of police officer ? You're a sheep. People like you are dangerous, because you need to criticize the society you live in, always and for ever.
I'm well aware that the majority opinion is not always the correct one. However, you posted my opinion as that of an absurd and outcasted one (not to mention the fact that your description is ridiculous). Furthermore, I have a background in education and actually did recent research in the laws surrounding education, and so my "walls of text" in the other thread were well-researched explanations and valid defenses of my position... which is probably why people agreed with me and not the ridiculous one-liners that other people wrote.
But thanks for calling me a sheep. Can we please focus on this thread and not the other one that happened weeks ago? Thanks again.
On May 29 2011 21:47 bOne7 wrote: Maaaaaaaan , i have the most terrible way of expressing myself , but there is some valid point in it if you look at it from a particular point of view ....
What you were saying , or whatever I understood by it , is that it is ok to impose more laws after terrorist attacks and so on .. What I said , is that , well ... no it makes no sense to adress the effect instead the cause .People will still die every day because of random reasons ... 3000 is nothing compared to how many people die form car crashes , drug abuse ( inclugind all the substances like : coffee, tabaco , alchool , etc ) , etcetc . We all die mofo , one day or later .. just make the best of it while we are here .... God damn it , this thread exploded ... This wasn't my intention .
My final statement about this incident : The cops did their job correctly , The court ruled in an unmoral manner ( from my pov ) , and the "protestants" civicly disobeyed to show they are not ok with such laws . I don't think they are atention whores .
See the feedback I got from this thread is pretty positive cuz it helped me to get a better understanding of the situation .
And about the left-right brain . I don't know research you have done or whoever foney scietntist did but it has been prooven that kids ability to learn are increased at young age ( well first because the brain is developing ) , but also because they have a balance in their brain chemistry , and the brain "communicates" with both of the sides in a natural manner . As you go in educational institution , you will get mostly left-brain education which inevitably creates an imbalance and the learning abilities are crippled .
If you believe this is b/s you can simply listen to bright people like .... hmmm ... let's say mister Albert ?
“The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.”
As I understand , the rightside of the brain is responsible for intuition , imagination , creation , and the left side , is for reason , logic , etc ( which are all , you should understand , that all of them are purely conceptual )
Oh my god that was incomprehensible, I'm just gonna say for the right/left brain thing, the "foney" scientists I have are the college psychology textbook in my lap. You really make it obvious that you don't know what you're talking about though, first it isn't brain chemistry it's neurology, big difference, chemistry is neurotransmitters at the microscopic level, neurology is the formation of the brain itself. This matters because you don't create an "imbalance" in neurology, and really you give, and there is no scientific backing for your statement (if by Albert you mean Albert Einstein you really need to start sourcing people who actually worked in psychology, he was a genius, but in physics not psychology)
EPT
These dancers are not Rosa Parks. It's ridiculous to compare the two. 
