Wall Street Protests

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by SamIam

What's your problem with American citizens exercising their rights to freedom of assembly.....

Does not equal freedom to occupy....

You just don't want people walking around and freely expressing a point of view that does not agree with your own. Well, you can always move somewhere that does not allow freedom of speech - many places you could choose from.

That would be an assumption on your part. I have no problem with people expressing a point of view that differs from mine, and you should have no problem with me doing the same. I won't be going anywhere. My service to my country is well documented.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by SamIam

What's your problem with American citizens exercising their rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of speech?

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Does not equal freedom to occupy....

Freedom to assemble, unless it's in a place.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Freedom to assemble, unless it's in a place.

Not the same as occupy. Nice try.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Not the same as occupy. Nice try.

as·sem·ble
   [uh-sem-buhl] Show IPA verb, -bled, -bling.
verb (used with object)
1.
to bring together or gather into one place, company, body, or whole.


oc·cu·py
   [ok-yuh-pahy] Show IPA verb, -pied, -py·ing.
verb (used with object)

4.
to take possession and control of (a place), as by military invasion.

So your argument is that if they called themselves the peaceable assembly movement it would be okay to hold a multi-day protest? I understand that arguing is often the point of your arguments, but you didn't pay for an argument. Maybe you want abuse, its just down the hall.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Griff

as·sem·ble
   [uh-sem-buhl] Show IPA verb, -bled, -bling.
verb (used with object)
1.
to bring together or gather into one place, company, body, or whole.


oc·cu·py
   [ok-yuh-pahy] Show IPA verb, -pied, -py·ing.
verb (used with object)

4.
to take possession and control of (a place), as by military invasion.

So your argument is that if they called themselves the peaceable assembly movement it would be okay to hold a multi-day protest? I understand that arguing is often the point of your arguments, but you didn't pay for an argument. Maybe you want abuse, its just down the hall.

No, I would argue that prolonged occupation is not the same as a simple "Right to assemble". At some point, against the letter of the law, the initial assembly becomes a form of protest and is no longer an exercise of the Right to assemble but an act of civil disobedience.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

No, I would argue that prolonged occupation is not the same as a simple "Right to assemble". At some point, against the letter of the law, the initial assembly becomes a form of protest and is no longer an exercise of the Right to assemble but an act of civil disobedience.

It was always a form of protest AND an assembly. What's the point of assembling for redress of grievances if it is not in protest of those grievances?