How are they inciting violence?
Willing to accept they are, but the way these cities have been run, seems like how you get regular americans to ask for a Mussolini like strong man to come in and fix things. Imagine youre a rural farmer and you can't even go into the city for your anniversary without seeing people having gun fights or shooting up publicly. Im not for that, but i can understand why normies would call for it.
Just by being there…
That to most dems is enuff to become violent as they see it as normal? Idk
I don’t go to the city because I think it’s to violent as it is… and have felt this wax for years now…
If masked government agents decide to kidnap dozens of kids from a building, it’s just a random Tuesday. Anybody else tries that, they’ll be in prison for decades. Governments are just entities that are allowed to get away with all of the horrendous things that would get anybody else locked up for life.
I don’t disagree with this statement
But also yeah, not a fan of cities either and I’m intending on moving farther away from them and eventually out of the country entirely. I still think their problems should be for them to solve rather than the feds, who I would almost guarantee are not actually solving anything with all this anyway. I think it’s just for optics. Trump literally said the other day that he’s planning on using American cities as training grounds for the military. Not like they actually have any principles or care about the population.
Imho city’s are the worst…
Yes states should be solving the problem on their own…
But when the state does nothing what do you think the government is gonna do?
Now we all know all governments are pathetic and can’t do anything right…
Much less solve any sort of problems…
And we all know the government only cares about our tax dollars…
Calling it kidnapping is disingenuous, 75-95% of the country would say they have the authority to deport people.
Also, are you implying you are an anarchist, yet for open borders? That makes no sense to me practically. If you ever think we will reduce the power of government, you have to embrace minarchism as a compromise other wise its just mental masterbation
Philosophically, yeah I do agree with completely open borders, maybe in a different timeline in the multiverse or in a post nation state future. Just like with everything else in politics, immigration is completely tainted by fiat and government control. If we didn’t have gigantic fiat fueled empires toppling foreign governments, leading to tidal waves of immigration, and funding welfare states which then give money and resources to those immigrants, then I don’t think we would even have enough immigration to be a problem. Now the UK is using immigration as their excuse to implement digital IDs. For all we know, they caused the immigration in the first place just to be able to put their authoritarian measures in place.
Right.... But considering the state currently does have authority to deport illegal immigrants, saying them doing what is in their power is inciting violence isnt really a valid argument, even if we think they're power is fake and ghey.
I am an anarchist as well, but i am basically willing to compromise on roads, a defensive military and border control simply for the fact that most are too retarded to envision a world without those things habdled by the govt, myself included. That is a pragmatic way to actually reduce the power of the state. But saying we should have open borders and no one is illegal when we have a welfare state is really dumb
These types of raids are a slippery slope to highway checkpoints, warrantless searches, searching your car or your house for illegal immigrants, demanding paperwork whether you’re a citizen or not, and just overall trampling of everyone’s rights in general. It’s only a matter of time before even the supporters of it see that. As far as I’m concerned, patrol the border and keep people out. Once they are in, they should be committing a crime in order to be detained. Otherwise, none of us have any rights.
If we know where an illegal is, they should be deported. Your argument is a slippery slope fallacy, i dont see how you can claim these actions are a slippery slope to violating the constitution
To clarify, by “once they are in” I don’t mean as soon as they run across the border lol. I just mean once they are in some city somewhere and nobody knows who they are. If the government does know who they are, then okay. But that’s not the same as blanket raiding buildings and just snatching people up.
I just think it’s the same as everything else in politics. If we aren’t ending the foreign wars, ending the drug war, and ending the fed, then what’s going to get fixed? The government is causing problems and then patching them over with bandaids, all the while increasing their control over everything.
Chicago but the same:
The action: https://x.com/DHSgov/status/1973796727615598738
(Just for the dramatic footage?)
The perception of the action: https://youtu.be/vFh5yBIxTpc
The reaction to the perception: protests
The next action: respond to protestors heavy handedly, radicalize the protestors, increase the size of the protests.
(Just for the dramatic footage?)
Broadcast footage, radicalize the population in favor of the state.
Repeat.
How is that inciting violence...
You have an internal sense of justice and fairness. Whenever someone treats you violently when you think you didn’t deserve it, it violates that sense of justice. And your human instinct is to be violent in retaliation.
You are a citizen, you live in an apartment, your three year old daughter lives with you, your wife lives with you. The state knocks on your door at 3 AM, your asleep, your not fast enough, they kick in your door, they put a gun in your face. Your family is cuffed, brought outside, interrogated. Your wife is cold, your daughter is crying and shivering. You didn’t do anything wrong to bring this on. Your family is separated children go in one car, you in the other. You are asked for ID, it’s not on you, they ask for name, DOB, and if you have warrants. You comply, You don’t have warrants. After a few hours the state lets you go after checking the system.
Are you not radicalized by the interaction? More prone to join a protest?
You join a protest to show your displeasure in being woken up at 3 AM and treated like a criminal for no reason. Others at the protest don’t have the same story as you, they were in the apartment too, they are your neighbors. You know them, they know you. Your kids play together on the playground behind the apartment. Their husband was taken that night, they haven’t been able to get any information since. You’re both outside the ICE office. The crowd has grown since when it started at 4:30pm it’s now 9:00pm. Some have left but others have taken there place. It’s rowdy. A police line comes from the ICE office in crowd control gear, dressed in black and shields. They line up against your protest line, they are walking toward you in unison. You still haven’t done anything illegal. Your heart picks up, someone on a loudspeaker declares this an illegal gathering. You’re blocked in on either side anyway, but you don’t want to leave just because they tell you to. You want accountability, they treated you wrong, you didn’t deserve the treatment. After declaring it illegal three times the police line makes contact pushing humans on top of each other with shields. You fall on someone else, another falls on you. You scramble up and back away and human nature takes over. The police line approaches again, you try to stand your ground, you push back. Adrenaline and anger and the feeling of injustice fills you. The police line comes again you are ready, this time you catch pepper spray.
Legally staying past the third call to disband and being told it was an illegal assembly puts you in the position of this force being applied to you. But you didn’t actually do anything, you’ve been standing in the same place all day. You haven’t done anything wrong. Maybe members of the crowd did maybe it’s a gray line. But you didn’t. This is the second time the state has used force on a group. Some in the group deserved it, perhaps they were violent, perhaps you told them to cut it out yourself. But again the force is being applied to you all the same. Your feeling of injustice is greater. You call your friends they come to the next protest, they are treated the same way as you. Your friend gets a lot of pepper spray in their eyes. They scream in pain and kick on the ground.
Are you more radicalized than you started, sleeping in your apartment before they kicked in your door?
Law enforcement action will generate false positives, crowd control will generate false positives. The heavier the hand the greater the measure of injustice felt and the more radicalized people become. Eventually a rock is thrown at a car it’s not you but someone does. Again and again. Until your tribalism fully kicks in it’s us vs them. We have shared water, and held together when the police lines came. They have used each excuse they could to shut us up, including violence. Eventually you do what comes naturally.
I’m not saying you would make all these same choices but I can see how state enforcement on a group will catch up people that did nothing to deserve it, and it grows from there. That’s why protests everywhere always grow as the enforcement gets harder. It brings people off the sidelines. And it’s the purpose of the protest in many cases to illicit a response to get the normies radicalized to join the cause.
Until something truly horrific happens or the state is able to change their tactics to reduce the interventions of this kind of heavy handed crowd control.
Trump wanted in Chicago weeks ago, we just happen to find ourselves on the brink of the insurrection act being used and national guard being pulled in? I’m not at all surprised. They were trolled and baited.
Yep. If it was anybody besides the state kicking in doors and snatching up kids, it would be kidnapping punished by decades in prison.
anything less than crush and shatter is counter-productive...
either way, you aint seen NOTHING yet.
Do you have any proof of this hypothetical 3am false positive actually happening, cuz I've not heard or seen those reports.
Also, all of the videos i have seen are daytime where the "protesters" are throwing shit at the feds vehicles which doesnt fit into your narrative. Of a peaceful protest incited to violence by police action to disperse the crowd. If what im seeing actually fit your narrative, i would be more sympathetic, as ive been apart of those types of protests, but thats not what I'm seeing here.
The right to peacefully assemble is valid until it becomes not peaceful, so when there are people in the group committing violent acts, then the assembly itself is not peaceful, and it loses its protection. A sane person would then leave and reconvene later and convince those in the subsequent assembly to be peaceful and if necessary detain and turn orlver those trying to belreak peace, not simply stick around in a riot.
Did you see this?
Ok, so the Chicago lady said she went out into the hallway. Iirc cops need a warrant to enter your home so thats issue 1, she should have stayed inside. It also sounds like they asked for her id and she didnt have it so they took her to the station and then released her once they figured out who she was, isn't that standard protocol? If not seems like she has grounds to sue.
As for the portland guy, he admits that there has been graffiti and breaking windows and violating the local law for encampments. So what do you want the pokice to do? Not enforce the law? Even though i think those laws are bogus, even a private security would come fuck you up if you broke windows at a business, just so happens the state happens to be running that shit atm.
Its hard because you can side by side these videis with videos of peopke throwing shit at govt vehicles trying to break the windows, which is actual violence.
But also, lets be honest, these protests are not against the false positives that may occur (but we do inherently have to accept some number and then deal with those, a discussion about that is separate and valid). These "protests" are against them even taking actual illegal immigrants and deporting them, so i feel like its disingenuous to pretend like they are about the people who lose 6 hours of their life going and getting ID'd at an ice facility. If it was, a lot more people woukd be out there.
I think you should search out more videos that actually go into asking the actual protestors why they are actually protesting. I have showed you what I have seen.
Yes there are people protesting because their dad was taken.
Yes there are people protesting because the states enforcement of helicopters and drones and search lights woke them up and they think it’s overkill in their neighborhood.
Yes some people are protesting because they don’t want to see military exercises in their city.
Yes someone is protesting because they were a false positive and felt the state violence.
Yes there are protestors because they think this is a slippery slope to authoritarianism and they think they are standing against it.
Yes there are protestors because they are anti Trump.
Yes there are protestors because someone died in ICE custody.
Yes there are people protesting because someone was taken by ICE and they haven’t heard from them.
Yes some people are protesting because they just don’t think they should be enforcing with violence against a non violent crime or offender. Yes someone is protesting because they want to punch a cop. It’s all down there.
My main point is that the state has choices, they can enforce the laws in ways that grow discontent of the population they are policing and they can enforce the laws in ways that encourage trust with the population they are policing. Federal agents and border patrol are not the police, they aren’t trained to be police. They don’t know how to interact with the public in inoffensive ways. As a government You should not release the federal agents and ICE and border patrol onto the population it will agitate and radicalize, it’s predictable. They don’t have the correct training. Bad crowd control stimulates violent protests.
But also, hell no it’s not standard practice to arrest someone for coming out of their apartment. How is that probable cause.
If you come out of your apartment without ID and they suspect you of being an illegal immigrant? Sounds to me like probable cause.
To your point about ice not being trained to not be inoffensive, how do you propose they deport illegal immigrants? That is what his base wants, do you have an alternative methodology, bc you can't just say "dont".
Ill try to lookup nore videos about the "protests", but every time i see violence or property damage, that overrides like 20 individuals being peaceful, especially if the others around aren't condemning that person.
You wanted to know how the state incites violence. And how they are inciting violence particularly in this case. I’ve described it. Mass arrests of non violent offenders in a heavy visual presence, disturbing the life in residential areas, by people not trained to police while respecting constitutional rights, predictably create the protests. Heavy handed crowd control predictably radicalizes the protesters. Videos of the protestors being violent is the outcome the state wants so that it can justify bringing in the national guard and polarize the population.
What is the possible probable cause of arresting a natural born citizen because you didn’t have an ID on you while being outside your apartment. Since they turn out to be a citizen it can’t be that they have paperwork with your name on it back at the office. They are arresting because they don’t know who you are, not because they know who you are and they have some prior evidence you committed a crime. Arresting someone because you’re not sure if they didn’t commit a crime is all kinds of constitutional violations. The ask is not to me on how they can satisfy the base without inciting violence. The ask is for them on how can they enforce the law without violating the rights of people.
The fact that the state is presently pursing the enforcement while appearing to not care about the rights of people is the point of the protests in many cases.
I dont agree that what you described is inciting violence. Its annoying and frustrating, but i dknt agree the only answer to these things is to stoop to your most base instinct and commit violence.
Like i said before, on the lady outside her apartment, were not legal scholars, but my understanding is that the police can detain you if you dont have your id and they suspect you of criminal activity (illegal immigration). They didnt arrest her right? If her righta were violated she should sue, but seems to me like this was just 5 inconvenient hours. We dont have the full story, because its unclear if they took her to the ice facility or she was just cuffed in the building. Again, we're not legal scholars and dont have the full story.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1357
To me it seems like they were following statute
I agree we don’t know all the facts, and I’m not an attorney but For your own benefit in the future let me assure you the statute that says they can : “(1) to interrogate any alien or *person believed to be an alien* as to his right to be or to remain in the United States;” Needs to be a reasonable belief based on something. It not an excuse to detain for any reason. Based on what we know I hope she does sue, on appearance I don’t see what reasonable belief they would have had to arrest her for being outside her apartment. Proximity to your apartment doesn’t make you more or less likely to be in the country illegally. The best I can do would be to say they had evidence that there were a lot of illegal immigrants living in the apartment. But I don’t think that would hold up as it’s not specific enough to her. It’s casting too wide a net to say “because I know a lot live in this apartment I can detain anyone without a warrant for this enforcement” That’s my problem generally, on appearance these are warranties arrests without probable cause. And it’s not just an inconvenience it’s a violation of the 4th amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. Violence isn’t going to be seen as legitimate against the state until if the magic undefined tipping point where the state looses its monopoly power on violence because they are clearly violating constitutional rights is reached. Some segment of the population is protesting because they believe there are constitutional violations happening in mass. It’s interesting to watch.
Bc we dont have the whole story it's easy to make shit up.
For example, what if the landlord has told them he allows people to live there without paper work? Or the person in that unit before was an illegal? Or her boy friend is an immigrant? Its easy to speculate a probable cause, so the cops will probably have one of these excuses.
I dont see how they are violsting the fourth amendment, she didnt say they searched her apartment they just identified her.
Thats my point i dont think ive seen genuine intentional violations of peoples rights, but if that is happening it should be taken seriously. Using this ladies story as proof is not going to gelp because the reporter didn't do her job.
Good chat
This is Portland, not Chicago where the apartments were.
https://www.youtube.com/live/bcF7In9xW2I
But the escalation is the example is what happens a lot. The full story is never the 3 minute clip. You would need to watch atleast the hour in advance of the 3 minute clip to understand why what is happening is happening. And I grant you I don’t have time for all of that. I’m not saying the protestors are always in the right. Or that I would make the same choices as they are. But I do have enough time to specifically search for the protestors perspective and not just accept the narrative I’m being fed by those attempting to get me outraged.
Regardless of how any of us feel about it though, why all the support for the Feds? None of us actually agreed to any of the taxes or money printing that pays for any of this.
