Friday, December 09, 2005

Protestor's Protest Arrests

Yet another letter to the editor in the paper from a Petrolia resident. This one taking exception to the arrest of protestors during the last two anti- war demonstrations in Eureka. Boy, Petrolia must have more lefties per capita than Arcata. You don't see letters from Petrolia in the paper very often but, when you do, it seems they're always left leaning, to say the least.

That said, civil disobedience isn't exclusively the domain of the Left. The writer properly points out that there was a pro logging protest at the courthouse some time ago where logging trucks took up parking spaces they weren't supposed to park in and the police looked the other way. I wonder if perhaps arrangements had been made by the demonstration organizers to accomodate the parking of those trucks, though? She also has a point that some of the anti war demonstrators were given tickets for what I felt were questionable offenses. One that comes to my mind being a girl ticketed for riding a bike on the sidewalk during the demonstration at the military recruiting offices. Hmmm... I didn't know it was really against the law to ride a bike on a sidewalk.

Where the writer misses the mark is where she said civil disobedience is protected by law. Not quite, says I. civil disobedience, by its very nature, is breaking the law, isn't it? Standing on the sidewalk outside the courthouse with a sign protesting something isn't civil disobedience. When someone demonstrates and intentionally breaks the law, that doesn't mean they should be just ignored and let to continue that behaviour. As long as someone protests within the law, their speech is protected, as it should be. If they break the law, they get arrested. Free speech is one thing but to paraphrase an old saying, "You can't cry theater in a crowded fire house...". Ok, poor example, as that's not what these folks were arrested for but, if you don't want to get arrested, obey all the laws. If you deliberately break the law in order to get arrested and make a point, don't whine about it later.


At 10:33 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I find this more worrysome:

After Zimmerman's hearing, the four women and their supporters went upstairs to talk to DA Gallegos.

After a short wait, Gallegos ushered in as many people as would fit into a small room and heard their concerns.

So the DA had a meeting with people who's cases have not been cleared, for shits and giggles?

Some protesters threatened not to vote for Gallegos in his re-election bid next year.

One protester summed up the motivation to visit Gallegos: “Why isn't this just a slap on the wrist?”

Don't forget she is charged with felony battery of a police officer, evading a peace officer, resisting a peace officer, going too slowly on the highway and obstructing a street or sidewalk.

I hope they stuff her in the pokey for a very long time, you touch a police officer, you go to jail. I'm still upset that those girls got away with it in Arcata because they are black.

At 10:33 PM, Blogger the PLAZOID said...

fuck you anonymous.
The TImes-SLander article was wrong - probably intentionally. Witnesses to the injustice being perpetrated on K Zimmerman went to DA Gallegos to see WHY RANDY PRICE (CHP) WAS NOT BEING INVESTIGATED, inspite of all the eye-witness testimony and the fact that the injuries that he sustained support the eye-witness stories that report that Price (CHP) assualted Zimmerman, not the other way around. Price shoulder-checked K Zimmerman off of her bike, and in the process hurt his shoulder.
bad cop, no donut.


Post a Comment

<< Home