Apologies in advance: this is a post and run thread.
I have time to open this thread, but am unlikely to have time to participate actively in it until apple season is over. But I wanted to post excerpts from these news story, and links to the stories, while these are still current and while they are still available on-line, since links to news stories sometimes expire. This is something I plan to use as an example in another thread later this year, and I'd rather people have a chance to read the original now rather than simply my re-typing or cut-and-paste of the story later.
One thing people may be interested in discussing in this thread is this particular incident, in which stun guns were used on non-violent (and non-resisting) protesters in order to obtain compliance with a police order (for the protesters to unchain themselves from a barrel). I believe this was an improper action on the part of police. Protesters who chain themselves to heavy objects in order to prevent their removal from a site -- be it a construction site, as in this case, or abortion clinics, as was frequently done in the late 1980s and early 1990s by abortion protesters -- are committing civil disobedience and should be subject to arrest.
But the use of violence by police -- be it beating with clubs, stunning with tasers, or physically striking or kicking people -- should be limited to preventing people from engaging in actions, not to compelling people to engage in actions. If the protesters had been advancing threateningly toward the police, for instance, the use of violence could be appropriate. If the protesters were refusing to move, on the other hand, the use of violence to compel them to move would be inappropriate. And I believe this principle should be applied independent of the cause the protesters represent. I want to see anti-abortion protesters treated with the same respect and according to the same rules as anti-war protesters are treated. I want to see school prayer activists treated with the same respect and according to the same rules as gay rights activists.
And that's not what I see happening, which is the other thing people may be interested in discussing in this thread. Are protesters for different causes treated equally? Or are protesters for some causes treated better (or worse) than protesters for other causes?
In a thread in Religion and Philosophy about Thomas Jefferson, a tangent has developed about a case in which an unauthorized demonstration was held at an Illinois school by school prayer activists -- adults who had no permission to be on school property, as well as by students who did. The police were called to break up the demonstration, and two of the students who refused to comply with the police order to disperse were handcuffed, taken to a police car, and detained for 15 minutes before being released without any charges being filed.
To some Christian activists, this case is evidence that Christians are being singled out for persecution. To me, the rarity of such incidents in relation to school prayer demonstrations, and the relative mildness of the alleged mistreatment, indicates just the opposite. But I would be interested in collecting more examples of mistreatment of protesters in a thread such as this in an effort to see whether incidents of mistreatment are more or less common and more or less severe, depending on the cause involved, or whether incidents of mistreatment are equally likely to occur regardless of the cause involved.
Both these news stories appeared in the Brattleboro Reformer (and both were written by Patrick J Crowley of the Reformer staff). I have excerpted out the key points relative to what I am interested in discussing, but I encourage people to click on the links for more details about these cases.
I have time to open this thread, but am unlikely to have time to participate actively in it until apple season is over. But I wanted to post excerpts from these news story, and links to the stories, while these are still current and while they are still available on-line, since links to news stories sometimes expire. This is something I plan to use as an example in another thread later this year, and I'd rather people have a chance to read the original now rather than simply my re-typing or cut-and-paste of the story later.
One thing people may be interested in discussing in this thread is this particular incident, in which stun guns were used on non-violent (and non-resisting) protesters in order to obtain compliance with a police order (for the protesters to unchain themselves from a barrel). I believe this was an improper action on the part of police. Protesters who chain themselves to heavy objects in order to prevent their removal from a site -- be it a construction site, as in this case, or abortion clinics, as was frequently done in the late 1980s and early 1990s by abortion protesters -- are committing civil disobedience and should be subject to arrest.
But the use of violence by police -- be it beating with clubs, stunning with tasers, or physically striking or kicking people -- should be limited to preventing people from engaging in actions, not to compelling people to engage in actions. If the protesters had been advancing threateningly toward the police, for instance, the use of violence could be appropriate. If the protesters were refusing to move, on the other hand, the use of violence to compel them to move would be inappropriate. And I believe this principle should be applied independent of the cause the protesters represent. I want to see anti-abortion protesters treated with the same respect and according to the same rules as anti-war protesters are treated. I want to see school prayer activists treated with the same respect and according to the same rules as gay rights activists.
And that's not what I see happening, which is the other thing people may be interested in discussing in this thread. Are protesters for different causes treated equally? Or are protesters for some causes treated better (or worse) than protesters for other causes?
In a thread in Religion and Philosophy about Thomas Jefferson, a tangent has developed about a case in which an unauthorized demonstration was held at an Illinois school by school prayer activists -- adults who had no permission to be on school property, as well as by students who did. The police were called to break up the demonstration, and two of the students who refused to comply with the police order to disperse were handcuffed, taken to a police car, and detained for 15 minutes before being released without any charges being filed.
To some Christian activists, this case is evidence that Christians are being singled out for persecution. To me, the rarity of such incidents in relation to school prayer demonstrations, and the relative mildness of the alleged mistreatment, indicates just the opposite. But I would be interested in collecting more examples of mistreatment of protesters in a thread such as this in an effort to see whether incidents of mistreatment are more or less common and more or less severe, depending on the cause involved, or whether incidents of mistreatment are equally likely to occur regardless of the cause involved.
Both these news stories appeared in the Brattleboro Reformer (and both were written by Patrick J Crowley of the Reformer staff). I have excerpted out the key points relative to what I am interested in discussing, but I encourage people to click on the links for more details about these cases.
