Procrustes Stretched
Dante's Manifesto
- Dec 1, 2008
- 65,483
- 10,206
Videotaping Law Enforcement & Videotaping the Homeless in Hawaii
The state representative who made a name for himself as a fighter against the homeless, by public stunts such as destroying the shopping carts of the homeless with a sledgehammer, was put in the hospital with serious head injuries after a run in with homeless people. His crime? Videotaping the homeless.
People here at USMB as well as people all over the web (wisdom of the majority?) have celebrated the beating of the state representative as justice exacted. But what kind of justice? The state representative was not smashing shopping carts as a political stunt when he was viciously attacked. He was merely videotaping homeless people living on the street. The homeless people themselves have apologized and admitted what they had done was wrong. In their own defense, they use an analogy of some stranger coming into a home and videotaping the people living there without their permission.
Now the people celebrating the attack the homeless themselves have admitted was morally wrong? These people insist the former actions of the state representative justify the vicious attack. By now some of you must see where this is going...
When law enforcement is being videotaped without their permission and they overreact or react to prevent people from interfering with law enforcement performing their duties, would people who insist the state representative's previous history justified an attack, agree law enforcement should be able to attack people videotaping them, if it can be shown the people videotaping them have past criminal behaviors?
The state representative who made a name for himself as a fighter against the homeless, by public stunts such as destroying the shopping carts of the homeless with a sledgehammer, was put in the hospital with serious head injuries after a run in with homeless people. His crime? Videotaping the homeless.
People here at USMB as well as people all over the web (wisdom of the majority?) have celebrated the beating of the state representative as justice exacted. But what kind of justice? The state representative was not smashing shopping carts as a political stunt when he was viciously attacked. He was merely videotaping homeless people living on the street. The homeless people themselves have apologized and admitted what they had done was wrong. In their own defense, they use an analogy of some stranger coming into a home and videotaping the people living there without their permission.
Now the people celebrating the attack the homeless themselves have admitted was morally wrong? These people insist the former actions of the state representative justify the vicious attack. By now some of you must see where this is going...
When law enforcement is being videotaped without their permission and they overreact or react to prevent people from interfering with law enforcement performing their duties, would people who insist the state representative's previous history justified an attack, agree law enforcement should be able to attack people videotaping them, if it can be shown the people videotaping them have past criminal behaviors?