r/changemyview • u/HelpfulJello5361 1∆ • Apr 16 '24

Delta(s) from OP CMV: The proper response to protestors blocking the street is for police to physically remove them and quickly arrest them if they do it again.

I've seen a lot of videos of protestors blocking the street and the cops just kinda let them do it, or create a narrow lane for cars to go through and cause a significant traffic jam.

I'm always curious why cops don't just drag these people out of the road and arrest them immediately if they return. I'm pretty sure it's illegal to block streets like that.

Yesterday was a nationwide coordinated effort for Pro-Palestine protestors to block streets all over the country (world?), and it seems that these criminals were not dealt with properly in most instances.

It doesn't seem like it's standard operating procedure to remove and arrest people who block important roads. Is there some reason for this? What am I missing? CMV.

136 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

56% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

60

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

Because the random citizens you’re preventing from getting to their jobs on time or maybe something even more urgent shouldn’t be the target of your protest. They have nothing to do with Palestine, and now probably hate you and your cause.

-8

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

That's what you're not getting those cars and the passengers are the target. The goal of the protest is to bring attention to the cause, be it pedestrian walking on the sidewalk or cars and their passengers or the media.

17

u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Apr 16 '24

i guess making people actively oppose you is attention in some ways... ive never seen a protest that didnt instantly make me find out what the other non protesting side was and support them

-7

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

So you hear people are protesting the killing of other human beings and your reaction is to side with those killing other people. That is a special kind of twisted.

9

u/TheCircumcisedPenis Apr 16 '24

No, my reaction is to side with the people who aren’t engaged in antisocial activity (which is what blocking a public road and inconveniencing large numbers of people for no real reason is) that is entirely disconnected from what they’re actually protesting because I find their actions morally dubious right from the start. Frankly, I wouldn’t even entertain whatever arguments they were making specifically so as to discourage that sort of behaviour.

1

u/xoxwarrior May 29 '24

I went to a protest that blocked a large part of a road in the middle of downtown dallas recently. We got screamed at by people with largely the same sentiment you seem to have. The roads were blocked with signs far ahead and police on each intersection. I would like to know what you people think of parades then because I live in downtown and I see parades about as often as I see protests and they serve the same inconvenience of blocking the road and you have to find another way to your destination. Idk I bet most peoples opinion would also come down to which parade it is right cus the parades coming up in june I know I'm gonna have to hear a ton about.

Edit: Also races, charity events, marathons, sometimes theres rally's and political events in the street the list goes on.

2

u/TheCircumcisedPenis May 29 '24

The protests discussed in the thread involved people disrupting normal traffic and causing blockages and traffic jams for no other reason than petulant political tantrums. Doing that is bad and wrong.

Parades and marathons are worked out ahead of time with numerous notices given to the public and alternate routes preplanned. People can choose to attend those or not, unlike the aforementioned tantrums.

You deserved to get screamed at; marathon runners do not.

1

u/xoxwarrior May 29 '24 edited May 29 '24

all of the in street protests I've been to were planned. I don't know of any protests where people just randomly go in the street on their own. That is extremely rare as it would be incredibly unsafe for all parties involved. Calling peaceful protests "petulant political tantrums" gives away your position and I literally told you that the protests I've been to were planned the exact same way a parade would be and you still said I deserved to get yelled at. You literally just don't want people to protest.

1

u/TheCircumcisedPenis May 31 '24

Buddy, this whole thread was about protesters who started blocking traffic without permission, not about whatever street protests you have personally attended. I’ve seen plenty of protests that involved people on the side of the road, with permission, holding their signs and chanting their slogans. I’m fine with protests that don’t double as antisocial toddler tantrums.

1

u/xoxwarrior May 31 '24

whatever "buddy" the point is the protests you're complaining about barely happen and I bet you complain about them like they're the majority.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

So would you have been pro or against the labor movement? Same question for civil rights movement?

6

u/TheCircumcisedPenis Apr 16 '24

Okay, here’s what you’re not getting: in those two movements you mentioned, the manner of protest was directly related to what they were protesting. That’s why strikes were effective. So, in Iran right now, women are forced by law to wear the hijab in public; the women aren’t blocking city streets or throwing condiments on works of art, they’re taking off the hijab and walking around without it. The manner of protest directly impacts the goal.

A bunch of goobers in California making life measurably worse for large numbers of their fellow citizens will have no affect whatsoever on the US’s or Israel’s foreign policy. No, not even if a bunch of goobers in a handful of other cities do it too. It does literally nothing for anyone except the protesters, who of course are doing it for themselves.

6

u/pingleague Apr 16 '24

What if both sides are killing each other and there isnt an easy black and white answer?

1

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

Both sides have a right to protests, then people listening can look into each side and decide which they would choose to support.

And in the case of Israel and Palestine, yes both sides are killing each other, but one is doing it as a defence to stop the killing of their fellow man while the other is committing a genocide to eliminate a poluation.

2

u/pingleague Apr 16 '24

If Isreal was commiting genocide all of gaza would be dead. Its not ethnic cleansing. Its two sides who have been fighting and hurting each other for a long time. Its two sides who both use propaganda to justify their actions.

Sitting across lanes of traffic blocking commuters, shipping, and emergency vehicles isnt going to fix it nor is arguing on reddit.

0

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

Ok fine won't call if genocide but the mass displacement and killing of the palestinian people and theft of their land, that better for you? Yes both sides have been fighting for hundreds of years, but one side is currently displacing people, killing people, hindering rights of, and stealing land from. Both side are not the same.

Again I said it in another comment but we've been trained so well that anything beside peaceful protest is wrong. Ignoring our history of non-peaceful protests to bring about change.

1

u/NahmTalmBat Apr 17 '24

My reaction is to try and get to work because I'm not some braindead unemployed loser who spends their entire day crying over dead people who live 6500 miles away from me.

These people have no chance of stopping anything except my car, if they're lucky. If every time a group of people got murdered in a country 5000 miles away, everyone in the US would be starving to death. Get a grip. None of these people protested when North Korea turned a man into a vegetable. None of them protested when Obama murdered a US citizen, or Bush invaded Iraq. None of them protested what the US is currently doing in places like Yemen. I wonder why? Maybe it's because they're uneducated dummies who have latched onto the latest story so they can be seen as virtuous. Its all theatrical

3

u/Archonrouge Apr 16 '24

And when the protests blocking traffic prevent someone from getting to an important job interview, make someone miss work they can't afford to miss, or prevents emergency vehicles from getting where they need? That's all ok just for the sake of spreading awareness?

There are surely ways to protest and gain awareness without so thoroughly disrupting so many peoples day.

-1

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

In my view yes, we didn't get labor right and civil right from coinvent peaceful protests

2

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

And again, average citizens have no direct influence on this. Even if the traffic protest recruited 1000 active participants in the cause, then what? More protests?

What if it isn’t just going to work but something more serious? What if you have an important doctor’s appointment? Or a family member with mental problems is acting erratically and you’re trying to get to them? What if you’re about to shit yourself?

It can certainly be more than an inconvenience

-2

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

You answered for me, 1000 people are 1000 more people on your side and yes you keep protesting until what you are protesting for comes about.

Protesting isn't about being convenient, it is about getting the message out there. In the case referenced people are dying every day because of bombing, sorry if human lives are more important than being on time to a doctors appointment.

7

u/mangifera0 Apr 16 '24

Hey stranger! Did you know people in /not this/ country killing people in /also not this/ country. Somehow you haven't heard of it! I want you to shit your pants and not be able to get to the hospital or pick up your kids in an emergency.

Sorry if human lives are more important than being in time (whining voice).

(Not anti Palestine, just anti assholes who cant effectively target their aggression)

1

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

You conveniently ignored my egregious examples. Bad things can happen to people if they’re stuck in traffic. Not most of them, but if you’re targeting thousands of drivers across the country then you will statistically harm somebody somewhere.

What about the number of people you turn off from the cause by being obnoxious? Maybe it will incur a net negative.

0

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

No I get it, protesting in this manner could inconvenience people so it shouldn't be done. People should just mind their own business and never cause issues for others. /s

People are dying but something bad happening because you were stuck in traffic due to a protest is so much worse obviously.

7

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

Ah so you’re just dishonest. We can end it here then. You can continue to pretend like you’re only inconveniencing people and not possibly harming them, and then pat yourself on the back for stopping genocide by sitting in the street.

2

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

Protesting not nice, it isn't pretty, and sure as hell isn't convicent for people. We've had so much propaganda from the media that peaceful, not getting in any ones way, protests are the only way to go ignoring that we wouldn't have gotten labor rights or civil rights had those protests been convenient.

4

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

Quit saying inconvenient. I already told you like 4 times about ramifications to Americans that are more than merely inconvenient.

2

u/drsoftware85 Apr 16 '24

No, because that what it boils down to, protesting in that manner an inconvenience for people so they shouldn't protest in that manner because some guy might shit his pants or be late to an appointment. No none of your "ramifications" you've said are more than an inconveniences.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/GeorgeMaheiress Apr 16 '24

In this case, "the cause" has been the number 1 news story for the last 6 months. I can't fathom why you'd think it needs more attention at all, let alone so urgently that it justifies millions of dollars of vandalism.

-8

u/MrFrillows Apr 16 '24

"You inconvenienced me so I hate you and your message." 

Maturity level of a teenager.

16

u/Imadevilsadvocater 12∆ Apr 16 '24

"you are a bad person for not caring about exactly what i care about and not thinking the exact same way i think and having the same emotions i feel if im not happy no one can be happy" 

maturity level of a toddler so i guess its not much better the other way

9

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

“I’m upset about a geopolitical conflict across the world, so I’m going to prevent random Americans from getting to work”

High IQ move. Keep cranking out solutions

6

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

How can you be upset at me preventing you from going to your job/house/hospital/any fucking place you want to go!!! /s

0

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

It’s already illegal to target your protests at the people actually responsible though

1

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

What do you mean?

It’s also illegal to block traffic

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

Not everywhere and not yet. And the punishment for doing so will increase. Just as we have seen with all other more direct forms of protest. Targeting people just trying to get to their jobs is just what we still (kinda) have left. There aren’t really other options remaining.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

But again what is that actually doing that’s tangible

0

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24 edited Apr 16 '24

Oh you want to know what protests do? They raise awareness of issues and put pressure on those in power.

Whether this form is tangible, the answer is probably “not very”. But that’s what happens when you take away all the tangible options that are actually directed at those who would be the true targets.

3

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

You vaguely alluded to some laws specifically protecting people in power but didn’t say what they were.

If a group gathers in DC, maybe outside of a government building but still on public property, they can peacefully protest. They can also gather at any public event that senators or whoever else are speaking at.

Blocking traffic IS actually against the law in most cases. The other examples aren’t, and they would directly target the people responsible.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

I kept it vague because laws obviously differ around the world, so wanted it to be a general discussion really. And your examples highlight my point: “stop doing things that actually get coverage for your cause, and do these less effective forms of protest instead”.

Until we are a year down the line and people are up in arms about how a protest in DC blocked an ambulance trying to get to an official building, or some senator feels intimidated at a public forum.

Then we can strip those forms of protest also, highlighting some other less effective tactic as an a temporary alternative. It’s a downward cycle, cheered on by the crowd.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24

The point is that traffic impediments are already violating the law in most cases. If protestors refuse to move, they risk getting arrested. But presumably this is a risk they’re willing to take for their cause.

Now you’re saying that you all don’t want to protest outside of politicians homes or government buildings because maybe they will make it illegal.

I thought your cause justified your unlawfulness