zlacker

Maybe this is how it is.

Most of us believe it's not how it should be.

And it's definitely not what the law says it is.

>>danari+(OP)
I agree. What worries me is that the law seems to be ignored by authorities. Thus, we need to think about whether the authorities should have authority in the first place. They like to wave the banner of the constitution, but only when it serves their purpose and narrative.

I'm in favour of direct digital democracy, rather than powerful politicians who refuse to act.

>>danari+(OP)
Be careful with asking people to do what the law says.

King (Martin, not Rodney) said[1] "[a]ll we say to America is to be true to what you said on paper".

Kennedy suggested[2] a world "where the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved".

If he were alive today, I'm sure JFK would have half a mind to ask "how could you elect such a schoolyahd president?"

[1] https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/ive...

[2] https://nationalcenter.org/KennedyInaugural.html (incidentally, Earl Warren has an interesting history; he once became Governor of California by winning both the D and R primaries)

>>463676+m
The "Bob Roberts" movie has aged well.

>>082349+2W1
I mean, yeah, obviously the law is not a perfect guide to what is moral or just.

My point was that in many cases, the police are not even making it up to that standard. They are breaking the law and their own rules in order to punish the protesters for daring to challenge their (the police's) perceived right to be above the law.