When does protest cross the line into terrorism?

[RavenSky]

Todd Stave has the unenviable position of being the landlord of a building in Germantown, Maryland, which he leases to an abortion provider called Reproductive Health Services Clinic. So he knows a little something about dealing patiently with anti-abortion protesters. But when they started calling him at home at all hours and harassing his family, he got fed up and came up with a very clever solution: Do unto others as they have been doing unto you.

But protesters in Maryland figured out they could start targeting Stave for owning the clinic's property. He was largely unfazed by this campaign, until last fall when they took it too far. On his daughter's first day in middle school, a large group of people protested outside her school, and then they showed up again for back-to-school night. They were naturally carrying signs with his name and contact info and those nasty pictures of fetuses.

Stave was furious, and then it got even worse. Dozens of the protesters began calling him at home, around the clock.

Knowing that he was going to be out of town receiving the award, his personal band of haters chose that moment to canvass his neighborhood with fliers that had a photo of Stave in a Nazi uniform, photos of Holocaust victims, and bloody fetuses. [Pause for a brief rage-stroke intermission.] Of course, the fliers had Stave's contact information—and all of the phone numbers and addresses for other members of his family.

While he was in California, his neighborhood was canvassed with fliers depicting Stave in a Nazi uniform, with graphic photos of Holocaust victims and bloody fetuses. And it had all of his contact information as well as phone numbers and addresses for other family members.

“It wasn’t random,” he said. “They knew I’d be gone, and they wanted my daughter and neighbors to find them.”

On Monday, a protester showed up outside of his brother-in-law’s Rockville dental office to protest abortion where molars were being extracted.

“How was your trip to San Francisco?” the protester asked Stave, when he arrived at the dental office to confront him.

Seriously? Confronting a dentist’s patients with horrifying posters of ripped-up fetuses is a reasonable protest tactic?

And these folks don’t seem to care if children are around for the show. One year, the March for Life protesters leaving the Mall poured into the playground of my child’s preschool, putting stickers on the jackets and fliers into the hands of 4-year-olds. The police were called to get them out.

http://jezebel.com/5897699/brillian...rd-teaches-protesters-that-payback-is-a-bitch

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local...protesters/2012/03/29/gIQAThgwiS_story_1.html

Given the fact that abortion providers and people close to them have been murdered as a result of these tactics, how is this not considered domestic terrorism and prosecuted as such?

Or, at minimum, criminal harassement?

 

[Derec]

It crosses that line when you have violence either against persons or property.

 

[RavenSky]

It crosses that line when you have violence either against persons or property.

As noted, these groups have a long history of violence against both persons and property

 

[Derec]

It crosses that line when you have violence either against persons or property.

As noted, these groups have a long history of violence against both persons and property

But you can't penalize them just for protesting or just being there (buffer zone laws).

What is your opinion on protests becoming terrorism when it comes from the Left though (for example eco-terrrorism)? Should there be a 35' buffer zone around all their likely targets?

 

[laughing dog]

At the very least, it seems to me these people are stalking him and his family. Which may be a crime in his state.

 

[Jarhyn]

As noted, these groups have a long history of violence against both persons and property

But you can't penalize them just for protesting or just being there (buffer zone laws).

What is your opinion on protests becoming terrorism when it comes from the Left though (for example eco-terrrorism)? Should there be a 35' buffer zone around all their likely targets?

well, you CAN provided we change the laws. The laws here are pretty much just made up shit, we can make up new ones that are less shit. You seem to forget that such is an option. The problem is that the protestors are causing an actual disruption in the man's life. That's harassment, and the stress it causes does real damage. It is being done intentionally and knowingly, and unnecessarily, merely because the man is renter-neutral.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

As noted, these groups have a long history of violence against both persons and property

But you can't penalize them just for protesting or just being there (buffer zone laws).

What is your opinion on protests becoming terrorism when it comes from the Left though (for example eco-terrrorism)? Should there be a 35' buffer zone around all their likely targets?

Ecoterrorism is typically centered around loss of property, not life. Protests against abortion clinics is clinical harassment at best.

It seems we are always pressing the bounds of reasonable freedoms because of the fringes. You have all sorts of protests leading to little in the way of fear. But then you get these clinic protests which serve as severe harassment on something that is already rather hard to deal with. Imagine having pictures of dead elderly people being shoved into your face in front of the nursing home where you parent has been put in Hospice, instead of being dragged on in life to endure the suffering? People have the freedom of speech, but not a freedom to harass. In the end, I think it should come down to what the motive is.

 

[fromderinside]

Ecoterrorism is typically centered around loss of property, not life. Protests against abortion clinics is clinical harassment at best.

R U kidding me. Protests against abortion clinics only clinical harassment?

How about doctors who work at such clinics being killed, at least six. Then there's bombs that kill nurses and potential abortion candidates.

As for eco-terrorists, it seems luck rather than want that they haven't resulted in causing more deaths. Some claim eco=terrorists have killed (mostly from anti-green fringes).

It isn't much of a stretch to include  Unabomber the  Red Brigades and the  Red Army Faction and assorted other anti industrialization organizations among those who might be qualified as being eco-terrorists. Although these were more political, anti-capitalist, and anti-industrialist, than those trying to interfere with fishing animal use in science and building projects that we typically associate with eco-terrorism they reflect a natural view that capitalistic industry is bad.

The line is wide and very gray between eco-defense and eco-terrorism as it is with anti-abortion protest and anti-abortion terrorism. I suspect one might find murderous right wing links to anti-abortion that are just as anti-secular as are the anti-industrialist view of their analogs on the left fringe.

I really think that anytime protest includes violence and bullism it is terrorism. There needn't be deaths for terrorism to be declared.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Ecoterrorism is typically centered around loss of property, not life. Protests against abortion clinics is clinical harassment at best.

R U kidding me. Protests against abortion clinics only clinical harassment?

Clinical in the sense of professional grade, not "just".

Regardless, any form of violence which is meant to change political views is terrorism. The difference we see is that some defend abortion clinic protesters, but not ecoterrorists.

 

[fromderinside]

R U kidding me. Protests against abortion clinics only clinical harassment?

Clinical in the sense of professional grade, not "just".

Regardless, any form of violence which is meant to change political views is terrorism. The difference we see is that some defend abortion clinic protesters, but not ecoterrorists.

Any protest that includes bully tactics, pushing into another's path, grabbing, inappropriate amplification at a site, obstructing, or otherwise interfering with legal operations is terrorism in my book. Tramping yards of citizens not involved in what is being protested crosses the line (that goes for the news people too).

If a clinic owns the property upon which the protesters are stomping and the USSC rules that land is proper protester territory we have lost freedoms.

 

[Terrell]

Threatening or reasonable perception of threatening another person, their property, or their family. I'd say that putting a persons personal information out there, without their consent, for something as controversial as abortion, can reasonably be perceived as threatening him. Especially as described in the OP. Now if they were standing around a clinic with signs, placards, chants, etc. that's first Amendment rights. Though I do think there should be limits, as to how close you can get to another person, without their consent. At some point that should be harassment, and should be illegal under criminal statute.

I do think that they should not be allowed to block access to the clinic physically, nor should they be allowed to block any person attempting to enter the clinic. This includes putting themselves between the clinic door, and the person attempting to access said door, in any way shape or form. IOW, if someone is attempting entry, they must move aside to allow said entry, failing to do so should carry criminal sanction, to include prison time. Perhaps there is a way to prosecute such behavior as unlawful restraint, depending on the specific actions and the laws in the jurisdiction in question. IMO local prosecutors should look into whether it can be prosecuted as such, if so, then do so.

 

[RavenSky]

As noted, these groups have a long history of violence against both persons and property

But you can't penalize them just for protesting or just being there (buffer zone laws).

What is your opinion on protests becoming terrorism when it comes from the Left though (for example eco-terrrorism)? Should there be a 35' buffer zone around all their likely targets?

We are not discussing 35' buffer zones around medical care clinics. We are discussing that these people are showing up at elementary schools, private homes and dental offices to protest a medical care clinic. We are discussing that these people are harassing family members with thousands of crank calls and gruesome libelous fliers, etc.

 

[Derec]

Ecoterrorism is typically centered around loss of property, not life. Protests against abortion clinics is clinical harassment at best.

Attacks on property are not relevant? If an anti-abortion activist bombed a clinic when it was empty (so only attacked property) you would still call him a terrorist. Also eco-terrorists have threatened people and even attacked them.

It seems we are always pressing the bounds of reasonable freedoms because of the fringes. You have all sorts of protests leading to little in the way of fear. But then you get these clinic protests which serve as severe harassment on something that is already rather hard to deal with. Imagine having pictures of dead elderly people being shoved into your face in front of the nursing home where you parent has been put in Hospice, instead of being dragged on in life to endure the suffering? People have the freedom of speech, but not a freedom to harass. In the end, I think it should come down to what the motive is.

I have a problem with calling those that merely harass "terrorists" while those that say destroy pipeline digging equipment as "peaceful protesters".

Also I have a problem with singling out one issue (abortion) for strict buffer zone laws.

- - - Updated - - -

If a clinic owns the property upon which the protesters are stomping and the USSC rules that land is proper protester territory we have lost freedoms.

The problem is that buffer zones have extended to public rights of way, not private property of the clinic/their landlord.

 

[Angry Floof]

Knowing that he was going to be out of town receiving the award, his personal band of haters chose that moment to canvass his neighborhood with fliers that had a photo of Stave in a Nazi uniform, photos of Holocaust victims, and bloody fetuses. [Pause for a brief rage-stroke intermission.] Of course, the fliers had Stave's contact information—and all of the phone numbers and addresses for other members of his family.

Same tactics are used on critics and apostates by the cult of scientology.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Attacks on property are not relevant?

Did say that. Making a distinction in the severity of the act.

If an anti-abortion activist bombed a clinic when it was empty (so only attacked property) you would still call him a terrorist.

You do see the difference between bombing a building a knifing an SUV's tires, right?

Also eco-terrorists have threatened people and even attacked them.

Attacked? As in tried to kill?

It seems we are always pressing the bounds of reasonable freedoms because of the fringes. You have all sorts of protests leading to little in the way of fear. But then you get these clinic protests which serve as severe harassment on something that is already rather hard to deal with. Imagine having pictures of dead elderly people being shoved into your face in front of the nursing home where you parent has been put in Hospice, instead of being dragged on in life to endure the suffering? People have the freedom of speech, but not a freedom to harass. In the end, I think it should come down to what the motive is.

I have a problem with calling those that merely harass "terrorists" while those that say destroy pipeline digging equipment as "peaceful protesters".

But they aren't just harassing. They are taking it to the next level.

Also I have a problem with singling out one issue (abortion) for strict buffer zone laws.

Are there other steadfast protesters that need to be pushed away from a site that they never seem to leave? Granted, only six or so have been killed and a dozen or so acts of notable violence so far via the rage instilled by these protests. So maybe we are over-reacting. Maybe when the toll climbs we can start caring about the harassment.

*pondering going to a protest group near an abortion palace and handing them out doughnuts, telling them to keep up the good fight. Then start laughing them after they eat the doughnuts. They ask why I'm laughing, and I'd say, "do you have any idea how many grams of saturated fat you just ate, suckers!!!"*

If a clinic owns the property upon which the protesters are stomping and the USSC rules that land is proper protester territory we have lost freedoms.

The problem is that buffer zones have extended to public rights of way, not private property of the clinic/their landlord.

If I moved next to you Derec, and blasted my music to 120 db's, are you powerless to have the local authorities do nothing? After all, my stereo is on my property and the Porcupine Tree song I'm blasting is blasting from my computer, which is in my house.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Well let's compare apples to apples shall we?

Now let's look at how the govt has handled all the pro-choice demonstrations outside of maternity wards, all those pro-choice counselors talking to women in labor on a gurney being rolled into the delivery room...

No, wait...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well let's compare apples to apples shall we?

Now let's look at how the govt has handled all the pro-choice demonstrations outside of maternity wards, all those pro-choice counselors talking to women in labor on a gurney being rolled into the delivery room...

No, wait...

AthenaAwakened standing outside Hospital Emergency Room Door - Holding a sign that reads "IT'S NOT TOO LATE!!!" - She also has other signs that display very graphic images of poopy diapers, diaper rash, broken electronics that the toddler destroyed, scratched blu-ray disc and of course, a large sign saying "COLLEGE - $350,000 for four year college in 18 years!"

 

[RavenSky]

Attacks on property are not relevant? If an anti-abortion activist bombed a clinic when it was empty (so only attacked property) you would still call him a terrorist. Also eco-terrorists have threatened people and even attacked them.

It seems we are always pressing the bounds of reasonable freedoms because of the fringes. You have all sorts of protests leading to little in the way of fear. But then you get these clinic protests which serve as severe harassment on something that is already rather hard to deal with. Imagine having pictures of dead elderly people being shoved into your face in front of the nursing home where you parent has been put in Hospice, instead of being dragged on in life to endure the suffering? People have the freedom of speech, but not a freedom to harass. In the end, I think it should come down to what the motive is.

I have a problem with calling those that merely harass "terrorists" while those that say destroy pipeline digging equipment as "peaceful protesters".

Also I have a problem with singling out one issue (abortion) for strict buffer zone laws.

- - - Updated - - -

If a clinic owns the property upon which the protesters are stomping and the USSC rules that land is proper protester territory we have lost freedoms.

The problem is that buffer zones have extended to public rights of way, not private property of the clinic/their landlord.

Why do you derail EVERY thread wherein the topic pertains to women's issues?

Not one single solitary person here has said "Eco-terrorists" should be allowed to destroy property or people, or anything like that because THIS thread is NOT about "Eco-terrorists". Stop with your strawman and your attempts to derail EVERY conversation about women's issues. Stick to the actual topic or go the fuck away!

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Protests become terrorism when they're disagreeing with me.

Or when they're doing anything choose to what these terrorist freaks are doing. That's just wrong.

 

[RavenSky]

At the very least, it seems to me these people are stalking him and his family. Which may be a crime in his state.

The problem is that these people are repeatedly arrested but wear it like a badge of honor, even using the fact in campaign ads while the run for Polictical office, or sue municipalities for thousands. They are worse than Fred Phelps group in that regard.