zlacker

>>Kapura+(OP)
Police who refuse to identify themselves and carry no markings used against an administration's political opponents sure sounds like something everyone should be opposed to, no matter their political camp.

If someone thinks that's a healthy part of a democracy, I'd be real curious about your reasoning.

>>Pfhrea+7u
I'd rather they be counterbalanced with a well-armed citizenry, such as the "cosplaying" the article insultingly describes.

>>madeng+xw
Do you genuinely believe that if the protestors had been armed that we wouldn't have had multiple deaths when the Park Police took the park by force? Or are you arguing that the police wouldn't have moved on the protestors at all?

Knowing what happened, I think it's clearly better for all of us that the park was held by hippies with spray cans.

>>newacc+6y
He genuinely believes that "armed protests" are peaceful because his side has been involved in hundreds and they were all peaceful.

So he obviously thinks the guns were the differentiator and not the privilege enjoyed by being a bunch of old white men with the support of the authorities.

A number of cops were shot at during these recent protest. Our mayor was discussing this very fact this morning. Turn out, all that body armor is highly effective at stopping small arms fire. (There was no elaboration on who did the shooting though, so I guess it could have been friendly fire)

>>mywitt+nH
The black panthers had several armed marches.. and one reason why they took up arms was because they kept getting (illegally) arrested for marching unarmed. They actually sat at the California courthouse while armed.. and everything that day was peaceful. That did inspire Reagan to pass significant gun control laws though, both as Governor and President.

Image: https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fi...