OCCUPY WALL STREET

[greeneyedgrrl]

ok... so obviously OWS is a hot topic. i posted a link on another page about the davis pepper spray incident. and my cousin who is a cop responded, along with her mom, they fully back wall street and the cops, not a surprise, but she gave me a penal code to justify the police action: PC 407

CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE

· 407 PC Unlawful assembly defined.
Whenever two or more persons assemble
together to do an unlawful act, or do a lawful
act in a violent, boisterous or tumultuous
manner, such assembly is an unlawful assembly.


the link below explains the criteria for conviction of this offense:

http://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/...2600/2686.html

after reading it... my thinking is that it still wasn't justified from what i saw because it didn't appear to be a riot, and there didn't appear to be malicious intent or intent to break the law. because my cousin is so adamantly defending the action, (i really don't know the motivation, because she refused to answer any of my questions, so i can only speculate) i'm wondering if the cops are perceiving the demonstrations as riots, illegal activity, or if it's her more conservative (and privileged) viewpoint that she's perceiving it this way, or an attempt to stick together? it sounds like other people on this thread have had similar experiences... thoughts?

[atomiczombie]

Originally Posted by greeneyedgrrl

ok... so obviously OWS is a hot topic. i posted a link on another page about the davis pepper spray incident. and my cousin who is a cop responded, along with her mom, they fully back wall street and the cops, not a surprise, but she gave me a penal code to justify the police action: PC 407

CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE

· 407 PC Unlawful assembly defined.
Whenever two or more persons assemble
together to do an unlawful act, or do a lawful
act in a violent, boisterous or tumultuous
manner, such assembly is an unlawful assembly.


the link below explains the criteria for conviction of this offense:

http://www.justia.com/criminal/docs/...2600/2686.html

after reading it... my thinking is that it still wasn't justified from what i saw because it didn't appear to be a riot, and there didn't appear to be malicious intent or intent to break the law. because my cousin is so adamantly defending the action, (i really don't know the motivation, because she refused to answer any of my questions, so i can only speculate) i'm wondering if the cops are perceiving the demonstrations as riots, illegal activity, or if it's her more conservative (and privileged) viewpoint that she's perceiving it this way, or an attempt to stick together? it sounds like other people on this thread have had similar experiences... thoughts?

I think the cops clearly mistake peaceful protestors with rioters. How they make that connection in their minds is just baffling to me. Someone staging a sit in, someone standing on a side walk or in a park with a sign, someone banging a drum and chanting is not a threat to anyone. Pepper spray is one of many non-lethal weapons that are supposed to be an alternative to using lethal force (guns for instance). But instead of using pepper spray as an alternative to using lethal force, the cops use it as a way to use force in situations that don't call for any type of force - which is totally inappropriate imho.

[greeneyedgrrl]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

I think the cops clearly mistake peaceful protestors with rioters. How they make that connection in their minds is just baffling to me. Someone staging a sit in, someone standing on a side walk or in a park with a sign, someone banging a drum and chanting is not a threat to anyone. Pepper spray is one of many non-lethal weapons that are supposed to be an alternative to using lethal force (guns for instance). But instead of using pepper spray as an alternative to using lethal force, the cops use it as a way to use force in situations that don't call for any type of force - which is totally inappropriate imho.

thank you az. it is so hard for me... to hear my cousin spouting such hatred for people she has never met. it just baffles me how easily we (humans) can be duped into seeing each other as the enemy.

[atomiczombie]

Originally Posted by greeneyedgrrl

thank you az. it is so hard for me... to hear my cousin spouting such hatred for people she has never met. it just baffles me how easily we (humans) can be duped into seeing each other as the enemy.

You can call me Drew

[greeneyedgrrl]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

You can call me Drew

thank you Drew!

[Ebon]

I wish they could have finished. He was listening then some idiot started chanting. Then it just got garbled up. Not that I'm a fan of Obama, but had this had been Bush, they would have been escorted out or arrested. Sorry if this is already posted. The Obama chanting was a bit unsettling for me though.

[Diavolo]

Originally Posted by greeneyedgrrl

thank you az. it is so hard for me... to hear my cousin spouting such hatred for people she has never met. it just baffles me how easily we (humans) can be duped into seeing each other as the enemy.

I am amazed by it myself. With a few exceptions here in Oakland, in particular, the OWS folks have been completely peaceful and all of the violence has been committed by the State.

Ask your cousin how many of her friends have lost their houses to the banks while they were working on a modification? My experience as an REO real estate broker is that while the bank is working on your modification they are "double tracking" the foreclosure. Meaning they are stringing you out and then "Bam!" they take your house. I didn't dream up derivatives. Did you? I didn't even dream up options, and while I understand the investment product, options are no more than legalized gambling. I said that in 2000 when I got my Series 7 license. This shit is legalized gambling. So when the OWS folks say the banks have been gambling with our money on our future, they are exactly right. Bank of America is so bloated that they could fail and it would take months for the rank and file to find out about it. Yet their executives still receive huge pay packages while the middle class shrinks away.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a capitalist for sure, but I believe in conducting business with a soul. Am I working towards the top 1%? You bet your ass. But I think you don't have to make every penny on every deal. You have to give back. A lot. Its the right thing to do. You help people who need help. And you operate with a conscience, not from a place of greed. Greed is still is one of the seven deadly sins. If every business person handled themselves in this manner this country would be out of this mess in a month.

[SoNotHer]

"Double tracking," eh? The games never end do they?

Originally Posted by Diavolo

I am amazed by it myself. With a few exceptions here in Oakland, in particular, the OWS folks have been completely peaceful and all of the violence has been committed by the State.

Ask your cousin how many of her friends have lost their houses to the banks while they were working on a modification? My experience as an REO real estate broker is that while the bank is working on your modification they are "double tracking" the foreclosure. Meaning they are stringing you out and then "Bam!" they take your house. I didn't dream up derivatives. Did you? I didn't even dream up options, and while I understand the investment product, options are no more than legalized gambling. I said that in 2000 when I got my Series 7 license. This shit is legalized gambling. So when the OWS folks say the banks have been gambling with our money on our future, they are exactly right. Bank of America is so bloated that they could fail and it would take months for the rank and file to find out about it. Yet their executives still receive huge pay packages while the middle class shrinks away.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a capitalist for sure, but I believe in conducting business with a soul. Am I working towards the top 1%? You bet your ass. But I think you don't have to make every penny on every deal. You have to give back. A lot. Its the right thing to do. You help people who need help. And you operate with a conscience, not from a place of greed. Greed is still is one of the seven deadly sins. If every business person handled themselves in this manner this country would be out of this mess in a month.

[Bard]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

I think the cops clearly mistake peaceful protestors with rioters. How they make that connection in their minds is just baffling to me. Someone staging a sit in, someone standing on a side walk or in a park with a sign, someone banging a drum and chanting is not a threat to anyone. Pepper spray is one of many non-lethal weapons that are supposed to be an alternative to using lethal force (guns for instance). But instead of using pepper spray as an alternative to using lethal force, the cops use it as a way to use force in situations that don't call for any type of force - which is totally inappropriate imho.

I very much respect all the posters and viewpoints that have been stated here and I am just wanting to say that yes I don't think that the way it has been done is the right way and while the cops on the street are following orders from higher up it is not a excuse to use methods that are not called for. I am recalling my training in moving a passive resistor and we were taught not to use pepper spray but there are other pressure points that we would use yes it is called pain compliance but it is not a maneuver that will injure you. As a campus police officer I have had to break up some protest because they could not be in the spot that they were as I was told to by my higher command it was a small scale and I was able to just to talk it out. but was I a little scared heck yeah yes I have a gun but the very last thing I want to to have to use it I am here to protect these students but you never know about the beer bottle that gets throws or worse I worry about Officer safety all the time.. again I am not excusing the acts at all they make me ashamed

[greeneyedgrrl]

Originally Posted by Bard

I very much respect all the posters and viewpoints that have been stated here and I am just wanting to say that yes I don't think that the way it has been done is the right way and while the cops on the street are following orders from higher up it is not a excuse to use methods that are not called for. I am recalling my training in moving a passive resistor and we were taught not to use pepper spray but there are other pressure points that we would use yes it is called pain compliance but it is not a maneuver that will injure you. As a campus police officer I have had to break up some protest because they could not be in the spot that they were as I was told to by my higher command it was a small scale and I was able to just to talk it out. but was I a little scared heck yeah yes I have a gun but the very last thing I want to to have to use it I am here to protect these students but you never know about the beer bottle that gets throws or worse I worry about Officer safety all the time.. again I am not excusing the acts at all they make me ashamed

thank you for your input. i'm wondering how long ago your training was? and if you think location of training would make a difference? my cousin is a cop in la county and all her buddies chimed in with the same kind of response: saying that the people sprayed deserved it and the cops were showing restraint.

[SoNotHer]

From - http://movetoamend.org/amendment

Amendment

Section 1 [Corporations are not people and can be regulated]

The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only.

Artificial entities, such as corporations, limited liability companies, and other entities, established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or local law.

The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the People, through Federal, State, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.

Section 2 [Money is not speech and can be regulated]

Federal, State and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own contributions and expenditures, for the purpose of influencing in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure.

Federal, State and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed.

The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be speech under the First Amendment.

Section 3

Nothing contained in this amendment shall be construed to abridge the freedom of the press.

Help Us Name The Amendment!

What do you think the amendment should be called? We want to hear from you!

Here are some ideas already proposed:

Amendment to End Corporate Rule
Clean Elections Amendment
Abolish Corporate Personhood Amendment
Amendment to Remove Corporations from the Constitution
End Corporate Personhood Amendment
Making Democracy Real Amendment
The Democracy Renewal Amendment
Government of the People Amendment
The 99% Amendment
The Amendment to Liberate Democracy (or Our Republic)
We the People Amendment
The Peoples Personhood Amendment
Corporations are Not People, Money is Not Speech Amendment
The Common Sense Amendment