• Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Apparently the charge was related to blocking access to the hotel, which, climate issues aside, I don’t think I can say is entirely unreasonable.

    It’s reasonable to arrest someone blocking access to a hotel. OK. But you didn’t mean “it’s reasonable to arrest someone inconveniencing anyone”. I think you need to explain the functional difference in the specific vs vague interpretation.

    • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s the difference between me standing outside your house screaming at you and me physically blocking your door. The first is an inconvenience, the second takes away your ability to use your own property at all. I think there’s a pretty clear functional difference.

      The oil people have the legal right to hold a conference. Protesters have the right to stand outside in public land, make their message heard, and generally create an unpleasant environment. They do not have the right to directly stop the conference, and the oil people do not have the right to remove the protesters.

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ok, sure. You are on the side of law and order. But if protests can only exist when they don’t impede the work of those they are protesting, protests will be ignored.