From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 18:27:39 +0800
To: cypherpunks@Algebra.COM
Subject: Re: North CA cops skip preliminaries, get straight to torture
Message-ID: <199710311021.LAA29625@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Tim May wrote:
> 
> At 9:14 PM -0700 10/30/97, Anonymous wrote:
> 
> >  This non-violent demonstrators were willing to accept the agreed
> >upon punishment/cost of their actions in protest of the actions
> >of their public servants. Their public servants, as usual, chose
> >to to act in the manner of savages who are incapable of holding
> >to the rule of law which they use to justify their confiscation
> >of the citizen's right to bear arms in the face of tyranny.
> 
> Excuse me, but this modern notion that protestors get to "make a deal"
> about the fines they'll eventually pay is bogus. If they're trespassing,
> they're trespassing. They don't get to take over Intel's factory, chain
> themselves to the Evil Factory doors, and then make a deal to pay some
> token fine.

  Perhaps I was unclear, but I was refering to the _ancient_ notion
that once one has crawled out of the primeval swamp and begun to walk
upright, that they should work on controlling their animal passions to
the extent that they abide by the agreements they have sworn to uphold,
regardless of whether the people they are being paid to serve have
pissed them off.
  Am I mistaken in my impression that they did not take over Intel's
factory? How is your mind holding up, Tim? Can you remember details
of your life that don't have to do with Intel?
  {Not that I haven't sunken in to remeniscing about my life during
   several posts today. I suppose it is only a matter of time until
   we are all Grouchy Old Cypherpunks inundating the list with posts
   about who died, who has prostrate cancer, and who broke their hip
   trying to close that darned new-fangled nuclear suitcase.}

> Like the AIDS protestors who "arrange" a deal whereby they'll shut down the
> Golden Gate Bridge for several hours and then pay their arranged $50
> tickets.

  Do you know about some 'deal' of which I am not aware in this
situation
or shall we discuss the _real_ events which took place in Humboldt?
 
> Well, what's wrong with me driving up to the head of the sit-down protest
> and saying to the cops standing idly by, "Hey, there are some queers in the
> middle of the road, blocking my trip to Marin. If you're just gonna let em
> sit there for hours, putting my business and plans at risk, I'm just gonna
> gun my engine and drive right over their fairy asses."

  To tell the truth, I really don't have any problem with _you_ doing
so. I _would_ have a problem with the cops doing so, however, which is
a point I am trying to make.
  It may be the policeman's job and/or duty to arrest and imprison the
people involved, but it is in no way their duty or right to _punish_
the people by invoking a level of violence which is not necessary to
accomplish the job.
  I don't really care if it is _difficult_ for the policemen to deal
with the physical details of imprisoning the people. And I don't have
a lot of sympathy for the protesters if they get bumped and bruised
in the process of the police honestly doing their job. However, it
is unconscienable for officers to inflict pain and suffering on 
the protesters for no other reason than to punish them for making
the policeman's job difficult and defying authority.

> Crimes are crimes, not "guerilla theater." Not "performance art."

  Such as dumping tea in Boston harbor to protest oppressive
taxation?
 
> >  Twenty years or so ago, after seeing pictures of mothers and
> >children in chains at a Livermore Labs protest, I wrote a song
> >called "Don't Blame Me, I Voted For The Monkey."
> 
> I had a much better idea back then. Leave the mothers and childrens chained
> to the fences and gates.
> 
> Pull back from them, erect a cordon around them, and block anyone from
> approaching.  They wanted to be chained to the fence, sans keys, so let
> them have their wish.

  Fucking eh! I wish you had been in charge back then. I thought it
was ridiculous for LEA's to play to protesters desires by escalating
situations beyond what was really needed because of some perceived
threat to their authority.
 
> Others could show up to throw stuff at them, and place bets on who would be
> the last to die.
> 
> And, as the flesh dripped off and the bones whitened, it might be a nice
> object lesson for the others.

  Say, that's not a 'red bandana' on your neck, is it?

WhiteSocksAndBlueRibbonBeerMonger