RE: North CA cops skip preliminaries, get straight to torture

Tim May ('>') 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 protesters 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.

I think you're overreacting here (or I am misreading the above '>>').
If the sentence is life, with a chance for parole after 15 years, or if
the sentence is death, that is what all those who practice civil
disobedience should face -- what the actual sentence is.  Applying
pepper spray directly to eyes of _non-violent_ demonstrators is "cruel
and unusual punishment", not just normal arrest procedures.  (Violent
demonstrators must deal with the consequences of their actions,
including death.)

[as usual -- just my own views...]
==========================================================
Mark Leighton Fisher          Thomson Consumer Electronics
fisherm@indy.tce.com          Indianapolis, IN
"Their walls are built of cannon balls, their motto is
'Don't Tread on Me'"

At 10:45 AM -0700 10/31/97, Fisher Mark wrote:

>I think you're overreacting here (or I am misreading the above '>>').
>If the sentence is life, with a chance for parole after 15 years, or if
>the sentence is death, that is what all those who practice civil
>disobedience should face -- what the actual sentence is.  Applying
>pepper spray directly to eyes of _non-violent_ demonstrators is "cruel
>and unusual punishment", not just normal arrest procedures.  (Violent
>demonstrators must deal with the consequences of their actions,
>including death.)

This whole "non-violent demonstrators" stuff is the conceptual flaw.

If I return to my home or place of business and find that "demonstrators"
have placed a 700-pound tree trunk in the center of my living room or
office and have chained themselves to it, or surrounded it with a human
chain, as a form of "protest," my response will be simple:

"I'm going to go get my assault pistol and a couple of other guns. If
you're gone by the time I get back, we'll settle in civil court for the
damage you just did to my front door, my carpet, and my peace of mind. If
you're not gone, I'll consider you intruders in my home or business, and
probable threats. Take your choice."

Sounds fair to me.

"Non-violent demonstrators" are still trespassers, and possible security
threats.

This is what guns are for.

--Tim May

The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
ComSec 3DES:   408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^2,976,221   | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Tim May wrote:
> If I return to my home or place of business and find that "demonstrators"
> have placed a 700-pound tree trunk in the center of my living room or
> office and have chained themselves to it, or surrounded it with a human
> chain, as a form of "protest," my response will be simple:

> "I'm going to go get my assault pistol and a couple of other guns. If
> you're gone by the time I get back, we'll settle in civil court for the
> damage you just did to my front door, my carpet, and my peace of mind. If
> you're not gone, I'll consider you intruders in my home or business, and
> probable threats. Take your choice."

> Sounds fair to me.

And what if they closed a public driveway?

Do you think that a private (ie, non-leo) person can shoot them?

	- Igor.