The people setting those fires should absolutely be charged for their actions. But their actions don’t negate the Constitutional rights of everyone else who is protesting. And calling in the National guard before the local authorities have declared the situation to be out of their control, is a direct violation of Constitutional law.
But, when you say, “they”…you are painting the entire protest as violent, unless you make the distinction that it isn’t. And the vast majority of protestors are simply exercising their 1st amendment rights, in a perfectly legal manner.
I never said they were violent, I haven’t heard of anything violent (edit: from the protesters) yet personally. There’s a difference between peaceful, not peaceful, and violent.
If there’s enough bad actors doing things like setting cars on fire, then it warrants a larger police presence (but not the national guard at this level or ever the military)
Edit: Just to add clarity, it warrants a larger police presence, because they are in fact no longer peaceful. Sure most people are, but the protest itself isn’t.
Waymo’s are ultimately used for surveillance to intimidate protesters. Ideally they wouldn’t get burned, but at this point they have chosen to side with authoritarians (tho that is expected of corporations)
I’d love to see proof that Waymo is providing live footage to the police to help manage the protests if you have it. That’s pretty fucked up if true. (edit: Burning is still bad, but I’d be down for defacing (e.g throwing paint on it) if so.)
Granted, this is not about the protest, and it is too early for that footage to be used so far. Still we know the current admin is not happy about any protest and was elected on themes of revenge. It is worth taking steps to protect protesters from being targeted in the coming days and weeks.
I think it comes down to did waymo freely provide it (article doesn’t say up to where it wants me to sign up) or did the police have a warrant.
If they have a warrant, I think that’s legitimate. I don’t think Waymo should be responding to police requests without a warrant though, otherwise it will breed distrust, and rightfully so.
The police have been known to demand footage from Tesla’s in the area of crimes as well, again as long as its with a warrant, or the individual owner decides to provide it, I think that’s fine. I want to make the distinction that if an owner of a car that has cameras wants to provide it, i think that’s okay, but as a corporation, with a fleet of vehicles, that should never happen without a warrant.
I don’t condone deploying the military, its illegal, but burning waymo’s isn’t peaceful.
The people setting those fires should absolutely be charged for their actions. But their actions don’t negate the Constitutional rights of everyone else who is protesting. And calling in the National guard before the local authorities have declared the situation to be out of their control, is a direct violation of Constitutional law.
Agreed that the national guard shouldn’t have been deployed as well. I’m just saying they aren’t peaceful.
But, when you say, “they”…you are painting the entire protest as violent, unless you make the distinction that it isn’t. And the vast majority of protestors are simply exercising their 1st amendment rights, in a perfectly legal manner.
I never said they were violent, I haven’t heard of anything violent (edit: from the protesters) yet personally. There’s a difference between peaceful, not peaceful, and violent.
If there’s enough bad actors doing things like setting cars on fire, then it warrants a larger police presence (but not the national guard at this level or ever the military)
Edit: Just to add clarity, it warrants a larger police presence, because they are in fact no longer peaceful. Sure most people are, but the protest itself isn’t.
Impressive how the troll farms always manage to put one “yeah people were hurt but what about property?!” in every thread about our pigs.
Waymo’s are ultimately used for surveillance to intimidate protesters. Ideally they wouldn’t get burned, but at this point they have chosen to side with authoritarians (tho that is expected of corporations)
I’d love to see proof that Waymo is providing live footage to the police to help manage the protests if you have it. That’s pretty fucked up if true. (edit: Burning is still bad, but I’d be down for defacing (e.g throwing paint on it) if so.)
An example
Granted, this is not about the protest, and it is too early for that footage to be used so far. Still we know the current admin is not happy about any protest and was elected on themes of revenge. It is worth taking steps to protect protesters from being targeted in the coming days and weeks.
I think it comes down to did waymo freely provide it (article doesn’t say up to where it wants me to sign up) or did the police have a warrant.
If they have a warrant, I think that’s legitimate. I don’t think Waymo should be responding to police requests without a warrant though, otherwise it will breed distrust, and rightfully so.
The police have been known to demand footage from Tesla’s in the area of crimes as well, again as long as its with a warrant, or the individual owner decides to provide it, I think that’s fine. I want to make the distinction that if an owner of a car that has cameras wants to provide it, i think that’s okay, but as a corporation, with a fleet of vehicles, that should never happen without a warrant.