The clear answer is yes. This is exactly like the people who say they won’t be allies anymore if we LGBT+ people aren’t polite enough.
No halfway decent person who isn’t a steaming pile of excrement would be deterred by such a protest. That user’s take stems from discourse specifically designed to shut down protests, and it’s imperative that we do not let it work.
So no, the “dude” doesn’t have a “point.” It’s all horseshit. Shut them down immediately when they start flapping their pie hole with that shit.
No halfway decent person who isn’t a steaming pile of excrement would be deterred by such a protest.
You assume there are significantly more “halfway decent people” than “steaming piles of excrement”. If your assumption were true, we would have abandoned fossil fuels in favor of electric vehicles at least 40 years ago, and wouldn’t be having this argument today. Humanity leans far more to the “excrement” side of this particular debate.
You need the support of quite a lot of the people you describe as “steaming piles of excrement”, and all you’re doing is driving them straight to the first politician who says “I’ll lock up every last one of these asshole protesters as soon as they step in the street” while taking the money of every oil tycoon on the planet.
No, OP’s idea is infinitely superior to those jobless, orange-coated jackasses.
You suggested they are ready, willing, and eager to go to jail, and now you’re arguing I’m some kind of bad guy because I share their desire for them to be jailed. And somehow, I’m the hypocrite?
Protests are supposed to raise awareness and motivate people to join their cause. These particular protests are turning away far more people from this cause than they are gaining.
These protests are ideal for promoting stricter laws against jaywalking and unlawful detention, but not so much for reducing the use of fossil fuels.
Oh, there is no implication about it: you need one hell of a justification to deliberately infringe on freedom of movement. It should be a criminal offense on the same level as “harassment” or “simple assault” to deliberately prevent someone from traveling. Each of these protesters should be charged with a separate count for each and every vehicle so delayed.
And, anyone so impeded should be justified in using any force necessary to end that unlawful impediment.
Reasonable person standard applies to all use of force, so no, not really.
The right to protest does not extend to infringing on the rights of another. My right to protest does not supersede your right to leave your home and travel in public. I cannot detain you or deny your free movement.
You do not have a monopoly on the use of public roads, sidewalks, etc. “Taking” the public roads or sidewalks for your private use is not reasonable.
The problem is studies have demonstrated it’s counterproductive both in the popular debate and at driving policy, it can actually set back the green movement.
Just because you agree with their idealism doesn’t mean you need to agree with their behaviour, if I burn tires to get awareness for climate change that isn’t something a sensible person supports
The dude has a point whether we like it or not. Public support makes a difference. Losing it is a cost. Is what they’re accomplishing worth that cost?
The clear answer is yes. This is exactly like the people who say they won’t be allies anymore if we LGBT+ people aren’t polite enough.
No halfway decent person who isn’t a steaming pile of excrement would be deterred by such a protest. That user’s take stems from discourse specifically designed to shut down protests, and it’s imperative that we do not let it work.
So no, the “dude” doesn’t have a “point.” It’s all horseshit. Shut them down immediately when they start flapping their pie hole with that shit.
You assume there are significantly more “halfway decent people” than “steaming piles of excrement”. If your assumption were true, we would have abandoned fossil fuels in favor of electric vehicles at least 40 years ago, and wouldn’t be having this argument today. Humanity leans far more to the “excrement” side of this particular debate.
You need the support of quite a lot of the people you describe as “steaming piles of excrement”, and all you’re doing is driving them straight to the first politician who says “I’ll lock up every last one of these asshole protesters as soon as they step in the street” while taking the money of every oil tycoon on the planet.
No, OP’s idea is infinitely superior to those jobless, orange-coated jackasses.
Removed by mod
If.
Removed by mod
So they say.
There’s a lot of jail space to hold them.
Removed by mod
You suggested they are ready, willing, and eager to go to jail, and now you’re arguing I’m some kind of bad guy because I share their desire for them to be jailed. And somehow, I’m the hypocrite?
Protests are supposed to be disruptive. Standing in traffic is disruptive. What’s the problem?
Protests are supposed to raise awareness and motivate people to join their cause. These particular protests are turning away far more people from this cause than they are gaining.
These protests are ideal for promoting stricter laws against jaywalking and unlawful detention, but not so much for reducing the use of fossil fuels.
anyone who’s not already on board the climate change cause is either too stupid or too rich to care. neither of which can be fixed.
None of that is a justification for obstructing traffic.
Removed by mod
Oh, there is no implication about it: you need one hell of a justification to deliberately infringe on freedom of movement. It should be a criminal offense on the same level as “harassment” or “simple assault” to deliberately prevent someone from traveling. Each of these protesters should be charged with a separate count for each and every vehicle so delayed.
And, anyone so impeded should be justified in using any force necessary to end that unlawful impediment.
Removed by mod
Reasonable person standard applies to all use of force, so no, not really.
The right to protest does not extend to infringing on the rights of another. My right to protest does not supersede your right to leave your home and travel in public. I cannot detain you or deny your free movement.
You do not have a monopoly on the use of public roads, sidewalks, etc. “Taking” the public roads or sidewalks for your private use is not reasonable.
The problem is studies have demonstrated it’s counterproductive both in the popular debate and at driving policy, it can actually set back the green movement.
Just because you agree with their idealism doesn’t mean you need to agree with their behaviour, if I burn tires to get awareness for climate change that isn’t something a sensible person supports
deleted by creator