STORM2K

Since when is it illegal to protest? I thought we had right to free speech in this country? Since when is it legal to use a sonic weapon on our citizens? This doesn't look like America.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xqg-sW6bCTo[/youtube]

I think the question should be, why was tear gas needed? What people did that police had to use tear gas?

If you do a peaceful protest, no tear gas will be used.

HURAKAN wrote:I think the question should be, why was tear gas needed? What people did that police had to use tear gas?

If you do a peaceful protest, no tear gas will be used.

Not just tear gas but they used a sound weapon, and fired off non lethal rounds of pellets at the crowd. They were peaceful they were marching to the G-20 to protest but they were cut off. The police called it an unlawful assembly and said they had to leave. It is our right to protest. The same thing happened at the University of Pittsburgh campus.

Lurker wrote:

HURAKAN wrote:I think the question should be, why was tear gas needed? What people did that police had to use tear gas?

If you do a peaceful protest, no tear gas will be used.

Not just tear gas but they used a sound weapon, and fired off non lethal rounds of pellets at the crowd. They were peaceful they were marching to the G-20 to protest but they were cut off. The police called it an unlawful assembly and said they had to leave. It is our right to protest. The same thing happened at the University of Pittsburgh campus.

In the video you can see that they are moving a large garbage can towards the police. Also, the police clearly said that they were violating the Pennsylvania Police Code or something like that. If you follow the law, nothing will happen. This is America and nothing will change that.

HURAKAN wrote:

Lurker wrote:

HURAKAN wrote:I think the question should be, why was tear gas needed? What people did that police had to use tear gas?

If you do a peaceful protest, no tear gas will be used.

Not just tear gas but they used a sound weapon, and fired off non lethal rounds of pellets at the crowd. They were peaceful they were marching to the G-20 to protest but they were cut off. The police called it an unlawful assembly and said they had to leave. It is our right to protest. The same thing happened at the University of Pittsburgh campus.

In the video you can see that they are moving a large garbage can towards the police. Also, the police clearly said that they were violating the Pennsylvania Police Code or something like that. If you follow the law, nothing will happen. This is America and nothing will change that.

Here's my issue with it - they wanted to march to where the G-20 leaders were meeting and the authorities would not let them pass. Before they tried to ram their way through they were using the sonic weapon and calling it an unlawful assembly which clear it was not unlawful. They were using loud speakers and saying anyone there no matter the purpose would be arrested. That isn't right. A lawsuit needs to be filed against the city. There's also a video showing some miliatry people forcing someone in a car looks like a military arrest but I won't post it because of foul language.

I think rolling a garbage dumpster towards the police is a non-peaceful sign. It tells me and probably the police that they are going to ram their way through an established security line. They also rolled that dumpster AFTER the police announced that they must leave. I think that they received a fair warning.

We are also under heightened security because of the potential threats to stadiums, rail stations, etc. THAT isn't right.

Stephanie wrote:I think rolling a garbage dumpster towards the police is a non-peaceful sign. It tells me and probably the police that they are going to ram their way through an established security line. They also rolled that dumpster AFTER the police announced that they must leave. I think that they received a fair warning.

We are also under heightened security because of the potential threats to stadiums, rail stations, etc. THAT isn't right.

I personally do not support the anarchy"movement". But what I do support is freedom to demonstrate and protest. There are other videos that show the police marching in and right away started telling them to leave or they'd be arrested no matter their purpose (there is foul language so I won't post it). They should not have tried to ram past the police line agree. But they also should have been let through IMO. The g-20 leaders were hiding away and can't take the heat for all their mistakes.

The most disturbing video of the day was the forced capture of a protester in an unmarked car. They were held by police gunpoint and three huge marine looking guys forced this guy away in the car. There was foul language so I won't post it here.

Lurker wrote:

Stephanie wrote:I think rolling a garbage dumpster towards the police is a non-peaceful sign. It tells me and probably the police that they are going to ram their way through an established security line. They also rolled that dumpster AFTER the police announced that they must leave. I think that they received a fair warning.

We are also under heightened security because of the potential threats to stadiums, rail stations, etc. THAT isn't right.

I personally do not support the anarchy"movement". But what I do support is freedom to demonstrate and protest. There are other videos that show the police marching in and right away started telling them to leave or they'd be arrested no matter their purpose (there is foul language so I won't post it). They should not have tried to ram past the police line agree. But they also should have been let through IMO. The g-20 leaders were hiding away and can't take the heat for all their mistakes.
The most disturbing video of the day was the forced capture of a protester in an unmarked car. They were held by police gunpoint and three huge marine looking guys forced this guy away in the car. There was foul language so I won't post it here.

So are you suggesting that the G-20 leaders come outside and take a public flogging? They're the leaders of countries. Of course they're going to be hidden and they are under the US's protection. I'm sure that there are places for them to protest and the G-20 is fully aware of their presence.

Stephanie wrote:

Lurker wrote:

Stephanie wrote:I think rolling a garbage dumpster towards the police is a non-peaceful sign. It tells me and probably the police that they are going to ram their way through an established security line. They also rolled that dumpster AFTER the police announced that they must leave. I think that they received a fair warning.

We are also under heightened security because of the potential threats to stadiums, rail stations, etc. THAT isn't right.

I personally do not support the anarchy"movement". But what I do support is freedom to demonstrate and protest. There are other videos that show the police marching in and right away started telling them to leave or they'd be arrested no matter their purpose (there is foul language so I won't post it). They should not have tried to ram past the police line agree. But they also should have been let through IMO. The g-20 leaders were hiding away and can't take the heat for all their mistakes.
The most disturbing video of the day was the forced capture of a protester in an unmarked car. They were held by police gunpoint and three huge marine looking guys forced this guy away in the car. There was foul language so I won't post it here.

So are you suggesting that the G-20 leaders come outside and take a public flogging? They're the leaders of countries. Of course they're going to be hidden and they are under the US's protection. I'm sure that there are places for them to protest and the G-20 is fully aware of their presence.

They should be protected but the people have a right to let them know how they feel. The point is we the people have a right and the freedom to demonstrate no matter who we are demonstrating against. The video of the marine looking personal is going to get a lot of run. They just need to edit the bad language. I might have cussed if I saw that live too though.

ERM, if you're attempting to break down a police barricade with a dumpster are you REALLY surprised that you got a facefull of tear gas and whatever other options the police had at their disposal? In alot of places in the world that were represented at the G-20 and aren't the United States, you know dang well their security forces would have responded the same way but with real bullets.

I mean, if you're protesting close enough to the leaders that they can clearly see and hear you, you are close enough to make those leaders' security details VERY nervous. It's not like this is a new policy....for at least the past decade all protesters have been corralled in "free speech zones" and other nonsense like that. I agree that it's not right and feels downright un-American at times but it is what it is and it has been for a while.

somethingfunny wrote:ERM, if you're attempting to break down a police barricade with a dumpster are you REALLY surprised that you got a facefull of tear gas and whatever other options the police had at their disposal? In alot of places in the world that were represented at the G-20 and aren't the United States, you know dang well their security forces would have responded the same way but with real bullets.

I mean, if you're protesting close enough to the leaders that they can clearly see and hear you, you are close enough to make those leaders' security details VERY nervous. It's not like this is a new policy....for at least the past decade all protesters have been corralled in "free speech zones" and other nonsense like that. I agree that it's not right and feels downright un-American at times but it is what it is and it has been for a while.

Well said. Before they tried to ram the police line they were hit with the sonic weapon and told to leave no matter the purpose. It bothers me to see that.

An even bigger issue that I want answers on is why is the military making citizen arrest?

[quote="Lurker]
Well said. Before they tried to ram the police line they were hit with the sonic weapon and told to leave no matter the purpose. It bothers me to see that.

An even bigger issue that I want answers on is why is the military making citizen arrest?[/quote]

I'm sure that it's posted somewhere - they did announce that they were going to arrest people if they did not disperse.

The video is on youtube but contains bad language so I won't put it here. But you can see three guys (looks like marines) get out of an unmarked car (while the police are standing in the upper left hand corner with rifles drawn) and with brute strength force the guy in the car and take off. Arrests aren't supposed to happen that way.

Lurker, what you fail to touch on here is -as it a lawful protest? Most protests, no matter what they are about, that include marching down streets-public thoroughfares-require a permit to happen. If they did not have a permit then they were violating the law. I will be the first person to defend a persons right to lawful assembly, but that assembly has to take place within some parameters if we are to avoid anarchy. And as others have said, it doesn't appear to me that this was a peaceful assembly. NOTHING in the laws of this country gives people who are assembling to protest the right take others property and use it as part of their protest, no matter the purpose, and NOTHING gives protesters the right to throw rocks or other objects to harm others and/or damage others property just because they are in disagreement with what is happening.

Lurker wrote:The video is on youtube but contains bad language so I won't put it here. But you can see three guys (looks like marines) get out of an unmarked car (while the police are standing in the upper left hand corner with rifles drawn) and with brute strength force the guy in the car and take off. Arrests aren't supposed to happen that way.

You are working with limited knowledge here. You have no idea what that alleged arrest was about unless you were there and privy to all the information involving the "incident". Making assumptions(especially based on a you tube video) can get one into waters they may find it hard to swim out of.

vbhoutex wrote:

Lurker wrote:The video is on youtube but contains bad language so I won't put it here. But you can see three guys (looks like marines) get out of an unmarked car (while the police are standing in the upper left hand corner with rifles drawn) and with brute strength force the guy in the car and take off. Arrests aren't supposed to happen that way.

You are working with limited knowledge here. You have no idea what that alleged arrest was about unless you were there and privy to all the information involving the "incident". Making assumptions(especially based on a you tube video) can get one into waters they may find it hard to swim out of.

Yes you are correct regarding assumptions and limited knowledge as I was not there. But I didn't think the military could make arrests in such a matter.

vbhoutex:

I see what you are saying and absolutely do not promote violence, property destruction or any non peaceful protest. But these guys filed for the permits by their legal folks. I really hope lawsuits are filed against Pittsburgh for the way they fired off the sonic weapons.

Only two permits for G-20 protests predicted to fail

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsbu ... 41712.html

As the clock ticked down Friday on an ultimatum leveled by dozens of protest groups demanding unconditional permits to demonstrate during the G-20 economic summit, Pittsburgh officials worked to avoid lawsuits from the organizations.

An attorney for the protest groups predicted the city would grant all but two permits next week.

Mayor Luke Ravenstahl's staff, Public Safety Director Mike Huss, police brass and city solicitors met yesterday morning to discuss requests for 15 permits. Officials said they were trying to balance the public's right to demonstrate with the Secret Service's mandate to safeguard world leaders and their delegates at the Sept. 24-25 meeting.

Mayoral spokeswoman Joanna Doven said leaders would continue to work with national and local protest groups and federal authorities to arbitrate requests to occupy choice Downtown real estate.

"We're trying to be approachable and to work it out for everyone," Doven said. "Believe it or not, we want these marches to occur, but we also realize that the Secret Service needs to have security at these events.

"There still are pieces to the puzzle we haven't worked out. There are places where the Secret Service wants to stage security resources that also have been requested by protesters, but we're trying to accommodate everyone."

Doven said Assistant Solicitor Yvonne Schlosberg is talking with the protest groups' legal team, especially Witold "Vic" Walczak, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania.

"The bottom line is that the city will be granting almost all the permits on Tuesday," Walczak predicted. "There are two that will be denied."

He said those permits were filed by peace activists with Pittsburgh's Code Pink chapter and environmentalists represented by the Three Rivers' Convergence group, which is acting as an umbrella for dozens of green causes.

Ravenstahl announced two weeks ago the city would grant all eight permits for demonstrations that were submitted at that time.

Walczak said city officials invited him, group organizers and representatives from the Thomas Merton Center in Garfield to meet Tuesday to talk about alternate sites and possible changes to a planned "People's March" Sept. 25 through Downtown streets.

"We were told that on Tuesday we would find out more," Walczak said. "This isn't important only to those who want to peacefully assemble Downtown, but also everyone who lives and works there and who are affected by all of this."

In Washington, Special Agent Darrin Blackford with the Secret Service said security perimeters would be published Tuesday, when maps and other documents showing barriers would be released to news outlets. He said city officials would announce a transportation plan the following week that includes restrictions for traffic patterns and garages near the David L. Lawrence Convention Center, where world leaders will meet.

Blackford said federal authorities likely would forbid some activities that protest groups are contemplating, such as a low-altitude flyover to snap photos of a Sept. 25 march and picnic Downtown.

"We are cautious every step of the way about this," Blackford said. "We have a legal subcommittee, one of 21 subcommittees that have been meeting, and the legal subcommittee has been in step with the others. ... The Secret Service encourages the exercise of everyone's right to demonstrate in a lawful manner."

The Three Rivers' Convergence group plans to demonstrate against the G-20 and the International Coal Conference, scheduled for Sept. 20-23 at the Westin Convention Center. Organizers said they would talk this weekend about sites.

Possibilities are sleeping in Schenley Park or the Hill District's Kennard playground, they said. If the city carries out its intention of banning tents on municipal property after 11 p.m., activists could camp outside town and take buses Downtown.

"No one really knows how many people are coming," said Casey Capitolo, an East Liberty organizer for Three Rivers' Convergence. "Efforts to delay or deny permits, the announcements that trickle out about the large numbers of police and now military personnel — these tactics have been used in the past by other cities to keep people from coming to these kinds of events. All we're asking is that the city change the tone."

Lurker wrote:

vbhoutex wrote:

Lurker wrote:The video is on youtube but contains bad language so I won't put it here. But you can see three guys (looks like marines) get out of an unmarked car (while the police are standing in the upper left hand corner with rifles drawn) and with brute strength force the guy in the car and take off. Arrests aren't supposed to happen that way.

You are working with limited knowledge here. You have no idea what that alleged arrest was about unless you were there and privy to all the information involving the "incident". Making assumptions(especially based on a you tube video) can get one into waters they may find it hard to swim out of.

Yes you are correct regarding assumptions and limited knowledge as I was not there. But I didn't think the military could make arrests in such a matter.

I saw the video and while it doesn't look good, we do seem to agree that we don't know all the circumstances. There could very well be just reason for that... I certainly hope there is.

Agree 100% I really want answers.

Think about it. MP's have authority anywhere in this world, if I am not mistaken, when it comes to military personnel. Was that protester an AWOL soldier? We don't know.

BTW, since when is it unlawful to use a sonic(sound) weapon in this country? I don't know if it is or not, but I don't know of any laws prohibiting it.

Just in case you think I am some right wing kook. I am far from i, I have been arrested for protesting before. When I was younger and less knowledgeable about everything I was one of the "radicals" among other names I was called.

And yes, if there were violations of the rights of the protesters, then by all means action needs to be taken.