Trump Sends Unmarked Fed Goons to Kidnap Protesters

I can accept that things might not be great in Portland, I don't know for sure as I'm not there but accepting the argument. I know in Minneapolis I and many of my neighbors were not happy to see our community burn and looted. The issue here though isn't that LE need to enforce the rules this is Federalism 101. It's if LE from outside the state without jurisdiction are operating and taking people in custody without the approval or cooperation of local authorities. We can still say that maybe LE should get tougher on rioters but that doesn't mean that we want Federal authorities doing it.

Again I will point out this is precisely the argument in HK that the PRC can step in if they feel that HK authorities aren't handling things well. That is what the new security laws says overrulling the Basic Law.

Speaking for myself I don't see this as an issue of acceptance or sympathy with protesters or rioters. This is about Federalism. And yes I am obsessed with the Constitution and so should every other American.

 

First of all, it isn't war. There are a tiny minority during protests that engage in violence.

The constitution does require identification, probable cause, warrants, and it all needs to be based on evidence against specific individuals not whole groups of people exercising their 1st amendment rights.

You can take the side against the first amendment, I don't think you'll find many that will follow to that end.

You can read up about the first amendment and the right to assemble. Also the 4th amendment deals with probable cause. There are numerous cases addressing the issue.

 

During Operation Gridlock when armed anti-COVID-19 restriction protesters in Michigan blocked traffic would it have been appropriate for LE there to have used excessive force on them?

Or for that matter was it correct for Federal LE to have used the force that they did on the BRanch Davidians in Waco resulting in the deaths of several of the Branch Davidians?

 

A true Constitution loving patriot right here. Bravo.

 

I'm sure he's stated before how is a LiBeRtArIaN.

 

I'm just going to put you on ignore now. You're exceeded my trolling tolerance.

 

LE that does not follow procedure get investigated by the appropriate authorities who are privy to all the facts - not internet armchair lawyers.

 

And what if those investigations don't happen or are half assed to protect the officers?

 

'DHS officers were assaulted with lasers'

~Chad 'The' Wolf

 

If you love it so much, why do you not speak up for the constitutional rights of the real victims - like the townsfolk instead of these rent-a-crowd fools?
Or are they just collateral damage?

 

Constitutional rights implies the relation between the government and the citizen. Only the government and their enforcement mechanisms (cops) can violate your Constitutional rights.

Another citizen commiting a crime at your expense is not violating your constitutional rights. You are simply a victim of a crime.

Civics 101.

 

There's no constitutional right not to see protests. Just like the "townsfolk" in Charlottesville that had right wing white supremacists descend on their town to create mayhem and eventually ended up murdering a girl. You have convenient memories about the things that go on in this country. The cops that died in that helicopter in Charlottesville, were they collateral damage? What is the death count in Portland right now? Riddle me that one.

 

The constitutional rights are for all of the citizens. Every single one of them. Townsfolk, protestors, people accused of crimes, LEOs, everyone.

Suggesting that some people are more entitled to the rights simply is contrary to the constitution, and principles on which this nation is founded. We are all better off protecting the rights of any and all citizens.

Look at why you are on message boards arguing against constitutional rights.

Do you hate the idea of vandals and people putting up graffiti so much? Why would you choose to abandon the constitution over them.?

 

You wrote “And they then have the temerity to get outraged when LEOs don't follow exact protocol.” that would mean you acknowledge that they aren’t and your think people shouldn’t get outraged over it.

 

I will repeat what troubles me isn’t tolerating vandalism or looting. You can be for cracking down on those while still saying that this goes against the Constitutional principle of Federalism.

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised but it does seem like many here who have previously praised federalism are fine with this because they don’t agree ideologically with the protesters

 

This sounds like it came straight from the Communist China's brainwashing.

" Those democracy activists must have done something wrong to be taken out of their houses "kidnapped" and detained without charge.
If they wanted to avoid being detained they should have shut up and avoid trouble."

You must be a communist.
The far left like you are destroying America.
SAD.

 

I think the second amendment is also in play.

The Oregon state police with their guns should be able to keep their state “free” of unwanted interference from the federal government of King Donald.

 

There were two young black dudes killed at the CHAZ.
Portland is likely to end up with casualties.

 

Dang what's a dude from Texas hanging out in Portland now?
The Rockets don't have any road games for a very long time

he was going to attack all those federal dudes with a hammer? he's not Thor
@Os Trigonum

 

So are you consistent with your disapproval of authoritarian police actions? We know that you are against those of Chinese when they crack down on protestors from Hong Kong who have also had plenty of violent rioters on the side of the Hong Kong protests. I agree with you on that. But do you feel like it's okay for that to happen in the United States or are you against that as well?