Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence • Hacker News Board

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#151

Post by asguy » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 7:30 PM UTC

gshulegaard wrote: post #136

asguy wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's also neat, but I'm responding to you not calling them riots. Stay on target.

You offered your proximal living location as a claim to credibility. I offered my own proximity as an equal claim to credibility. And I did stay on target, let me re-quote myself: > And what I said is that there is violence going on and PPD has been trying to walk the line of declaring unlawful gatherings while respecting freedom of assembly for the majority who are non-violent. Since it seems like it wasn't clear le…

> You offered your proximal living location as a claim to credibility.

No, I offered first-hand observation of what I would consider riotous behavior.

I’m not arguing any of your other points.

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#152

Post by e12e » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 7:34 PM UTC

koheripbal wrote: post #137

pmoriarty wrote: post #112

Why isn't Oregon law enforcement treating this as they do any other kidnappings: by finding and arresting the kidnappers, and freeing the victims? The people who ordered the kidnappings could also be rounded up on charges of conspiracy.

Because the uniforms clearly say "POLICE" on them.

Are they police, though? I was under the impression that federal agents are not police?

Should they not identify as whatever agency they are? I would even imagine (but I could be wildly wrong about this) that for example an FBI agent is not allowed to identify as a police officer?

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#153

Post by gshulegaard » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 7:44 PM UTC

asguy wrote: post #151

gshulegaard wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You offered your proximal living location as a claim to credibility. I offered my own proximity as an equal claim to credibility. And I did stay on target, let me re-quote myself: > And what I said is that there is violence going on and PPD has been trying to walk the line of declaring unlawful gatherings while respecting freedom of assembly for the majority who are non-violent. Since it seems like it wasn't clear le…

> You offered your proximal living location as a claim to credibility. No, I offered first-hand observation of what I would consider riotous behavior. I’m not arguing any of your other points.

Ah I think I see the disconnect. I was trying to make a nuanced observation that these aren't just riots. Re-reading my original comment, I find my phrasing lacking so mea culpa.

So it would seem re-reading the thread with that context, we actually agree. There is riotous behavior occurring, although not all participants are rioters. Regardless, Feds shouldn't be doing anything other than securing Federal property.

Feel free to add nuance to the summary, not trying to speak for you, just recapping as best I can.

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#154

Post by wtfishackernews » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 7:45 PM UTC

nickysielicki wrote: post #40

If you’re looking to hear the other (pro-police) side of the story, I’d recommend checking out this video by YouTuber “Donut Operator”. He’s a former LEO and he makes pretty fair videos doing breakdowns of officer involved shootings and whether they were justifiable or not. He did some commentary on videos coming out of Portland. https://youtu.be/5EgMijMhS_U

>pretty fair video

>title is "Fed bois are destroying Portland Antifa"

lol

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#155

Post by alexose » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 7:45 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #139

koheripbal wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the uniforms clearly say "POLICE" on them.

> Because the uniforms clearly say "POLICE" on them. You keep pointing that out as if it actually means something.

He's pointed it out six(!) times now.

Aside from the that it really isn't clear (a small yellow patch on the front of an otherwise military-styled uniform, not to mention the unmarked vehicles), the definition of "police" really matters here. They aren't police as any regular citizen would understand them. They are U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents, whose objectives have nothing to do with the city of Portland or its residents.

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#156

Post by throwaway_USD » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 7:45 PM UTC

beervirus wrote: post #140

throwaway_USD wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have seen federal agents acting as police and detaining and arresting individuals on the streets over objections from the Governor and Mayor. If you are going to support these acts: 1. Cite any legal precedent where Federal government has policed and made arrests over state/local government objections? 2. Identify the Federal Criminal Statute any of the suspects violated authorizing these "arrests"? (presumably ev…

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807 2. Attempting to burn down the federal courthouse would probably violate federal law, one would think. 3. You’re just speculating. There’s no reason to think the arrestees aren’t being mirandized and given access to counsel.

>1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807

Before invoking the powers under the Act, 10 U.S.C. § 254 requires the President to first publish a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse. So if this is your precedent and there is no Presidential proclamation, then you would agree Trump has engaged in illegal acts?

>2. Attempting to burn down the federal courthouse would probably violate federal law, one would think.

There have been multiple "arrests" on video, and in the video the individuals were not attempting to burn anything down, much less a federal courthouse, in fact they weren't even near a federal courthouse and had no materials in their hands to suggest they could burn anything down.

>3. You’re just speculating. There’s no reason to think the arrestees aren’t being mirandized and given access to counsel.

There is video of some of these "arrests" including the prior to the interactions, the initial interactions, the detention, the "arrest" and placement into unmarked vans...in these videos there was no Miranda given. Since when is verifiable video evidence speculation?

But yes, my point is even if a court ruled the Federal Government has this power, there would still be many other Constitutional protections that apply, and based on what we have seen there seems to be those kinds of violations based on verifiable video evidence. I have also yet to see anyone who was arrested be bonded out nor make a public statement through any attorney...where are these arrestees held? Have they been afforded the right to an attorney? Have they appeared before a Judge for bail?

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#157

Post by orwin » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 7:50 PM UTC

eanzenberg wrote: post #75

Antifa was declared a terrorist organization. They were seen as co-opting a movement, instigating with violence throughout the country, especially in poor neighborhoods, and attempting to start a race-war. However you may feel about the designation, the means to stop them are deemed serious enough to warrant these measures.

> Antifa was declared a terrorist organization.

Is this true? Was the identity right declared a terrorist organization as well?

Did "antifa" killed someone in the US? (Genuinely asking, i stopped following the new around may).

Because I will tell you that Antifa in europe is the leftist equivalent of the identity right (neonazis groups and white supremacists). So if antifa as a whole is deemed a terrorist organisation despite not having killed anyone while you have members of the identity right driving into a crowd or mass shooting people at a synagogue and the identity right as a whole is not at least declared a terrorist organization, this is a weird asymmetry.

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#158

Post by throwaway_USD » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 7:56 PM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #138

throwaway_USD wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The States should prevail, because under the Constitution the Federal Government does not have police powers and under the 10th Amendment police powers are reserved for the states. Now the limit on the Federal government police powers has eroded slowly (like all limitations on the federal governments power under the constitution), so you could point to the FBI, secret service, ICE/CBP...but if the Federal Government…

Taking a guess, the reason they're kidnapping many people just to release them without charges is because they're fishing for people with out of state IDs to strengthen the claim of federal jurisdiction. The lack of arrest paperwork fits with this - if they kept a paper trail of all their plainly unlawful attempts, it would risk upsetting whatever narrative they use to charge the unlucky ones.

It may also be partly about proactively anticipating civil lawsuits for false imprisonment and other violations of civil rights. If there is no record of these arrests it will frustrate future civil claims, where the Feds will just deny ever arresting claimants and for the most part unless on video there will be no evidence of the claim.

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#159

Post by alexose » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 7:57 PM UTC

aerovistae wrote: post #58

nickysielicki wrote: post #40

If you’re looking to hear the other (pro-police) side of the story, I’d recommend checking out this video by YouTuber “Donut Operator”. He’s a former LEO and he makes pretty fair videos doing breakdowns of officer involved shootings and whether they were justifiable or not. He did some commentary on videos coming out of Portland. https://youtu.be/5EgMijMhS_U

There is no "other side" for unidentified officers in unmarked cars with no accountability. There's no justifying that. This problem could be dealt with by forces who identify themselves and can be held responsible for violations. Do you have some videos explaining the "other side" for the SS too?

Well said. The attempt to divide this into a binary issue is (sadly) predictable. Nobody here should support the use of these gestapo-style tactics from the federal government, ever. For anything. Full stop.

Re: Oregon, Journalists Sue U.S. over Portland Arrests, Violence

#160

Post by jorblumesea » Sat, Jul 18, 2020, 8:01 PM UTC

itsoktocry wrote: post #115

jorblumesea wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you are infringing on their rights, you aren't an ally. Then they never cared about the values they hold dear. If you believe in "Freedoms" but those freedoms are entirely selective based on political ideology or convenience you believe in nothing. The constitution has no "rights whenever you feel like it" clause. > "where are the people with guns to defend us???" I'm actually not saying that at all. I'm not ask…

> The exact same behavior that the 2nd amendment proponents literally said that's why they own guns. This is about personal liberty . When the secret police come for them, they will defend themselves with their guns. That's why they (claim to) own guns. Nobody buys guns to defend their right to own guns; they buy them to defend their own person and property. The fact that someone else fights to take away their guns a…

> This is about personal liberty.

That is only one aspect or part of the 2nd amendment proponents debate. There were many, many people who literally made the argument that the 2nd amendment exists to keep government in check. This is a very common trope or line of reasoning.

The libertarian crowd emphasized the personal liberty part more but the "government tyranny" argument was a huge part of the debate and discussion. So yeah, I call bullshit on this.