Terrorists take over Bay Bridge, falsely imprison commuters

[dismal]

And offering a diagnosis without having examined the patient indicates quack tendencies.

I have sat in traffic. Like most people, I feel harmed by it. Not complicated. Absurd denials make you look absurd.

 

[Derec]

As far as the ridiculous notion that there was "no harm".

There were many drivers that became upset with the Bay Bridge shutdown.

This former San Francisco Police Captain Al Casciato snapped a photo of an UCSF Children's Hospital ambulance stuck in the traffic.

"It would have been futile for them to have the lights on. There was no place to go," Casciato explained.

His newborn grandson was transported by ambulance last year. That struck a chord and it's why he posted the picture on Facebook. He said, "It scares you to think that they might not be able to get to the treatment in time."

For other people it wasn't an emergency, it was about money and personal loss. Some people missed flights, others missed out on hours of work.

Tony Wali, who was stuck in traffic said, "On the radio they said some protestors chained their cars. And right now, we passed them and they were just sitting there handcuffed, laughing. A lot of us have work to do and they don't think about it. How is that going to help their cause, if they're doing it for a cause? They're not thinking about other people that have to work and get somewhere you know."

Stanley Cooper who was also stuck in traffic said, "If there's one word I could pick, it's selfish. It's not fair. I'm trying to make it to work, feed my family. I work at a union hall, so they might pass my number. The bottom line is I just wish they could've done something a little different."

Commuter Hwee See said, "It's a little bit of perhaps a lack of consideration and responsibility. I think there are ways to protest that are maybe less disruptive to other people's lives."

According to Casciato, who was once in charge of the traffic division, said the owners of the vehicles that blocked the bridge could find themselves and their insurance companies liable for all the damages.

25 protesters arrested after shutting down Bay Bridge

 

[funinspace]

Neither. But then again, one group didn't have law enforcement walking up to them to arrest them within hours. If law enforcement did go into the refuge compound to arrest these idiots with lots of weapons, they would have needed to go in SWAT style simply to ensure their own safety. This alone makes it pretty clear which group of law breakers is the bigger problem. FWIW, I have no problem with the bridge protesters being arrested.

It doesn't harm people to shut down a bridge (or a government office)? Why did they build the bridge (or the government office)?

When I read your post, I was utilizing the more common understandings of the word "harm" (See below if you are confused). I see you and Derec are working on a word game duet here...a game I am not interested in. Again, I have not defended the bridge protesters actions as somehow legal. They broke the law, and they were ok with the consequences. So am I.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/harm
noun
1.
physical injury or mental damage; hurt:
to do him bodily harm.
2.
moral injury; evil; wrong.
verb (used with object)
3.
to do or cause harm to; injure; damage; hurt:
to harm one's reputation.

 

[dismal]

It doesn't harm people to shut down a bridge (or a government office)? Why did they build the bridge (or the government office)?

When I read your post, I was utilizing the more common understandings of the word "harm" (See below if you are confused). I see you and Derec are working on a word game duet here...a game I am not interested in. Again, I have not defended the bridge protesters actions as somehow legal. They broke the law, and they were ok with the consequences. So am I.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/harm
noun
1.
physical injury or mental damage; hurt:
to do him bodily harm.
2.
moral injury; evil; wrong.
verb (used with object)
3.
to do or cause harm to; injure; damage; hurt:
to harm one's reputation.

If you cause me to suffer an outcome worse than I would have otherwise would have obtained you have harmed me.

Only a true sociopath would claim otherwise.

 

[atrib]

Black Lives Matters Demonstrators Block Bay Bridge; Dozens Arrested

These idiots claim the legacy of Martin Luther King. I do not recall MLK Jr. ever blocking any interstate highways.

Oh and by the way, it is not OT in this thread to discuss similarities between #BLM idiots and Occupy Oregon idiots.

Another fake outrage thread started by Derec.

Police gun down 12 year old playing in the street: Both sides were to blame

People protesting human beings being killed by rogue police: OMG! The protesters are illegally blocking traffic. The horror! The outrage!

Tells us a lot about Derec's humanity and sense of priorities.

 

[Derec]

When I read your post, I was utilizing the more common understandings of the word "harm" (See below if you are confused). I see you and Derec are working on a word game duet here...a game I am not interested in.

I think harm as commonly understood includes concepts such as financial damage or loss of freedom as "harm". Thus the commuters stuck on that bridge were most certainly harmed.
Wikipedia offers a more detailed description of the concept of  harm.

Again, I have not defended the bridge protesters actions as somehow legal. They broke the law, and they were ok with the consequences. So am I.

The problem is that the consequences they are facing are nowhere serious enough to deter these people. After all, they were all released before the day was out. They did not even have to spend a night in jail.
And ok, you do not think what they did was legal. But do you think it was moral? Also, calling them "protesters" is misleading.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But the people protesting on the bridge were committing an act of Civil Disobedience, were arrested, the world went back to normal. They weren't heavily armed, saying they were "ready to die". This is a big notable difference between Oregon and San Francisco.

 

[Derec]

But the people protesting on the bridge were committing an act of Civil Disobedience, were arrested,

And promptly released.

 

[Sarpedon]

Another notable difference is that a political protest is a public use: They are putting public space to a public use, one that disrupts other's public use, to be sure, but a public use none-the less, and without actually damaging it.

The Oregon assholes are doing nothing less than to steal public property: They are ripping down fences (public property) and attempting to graze on public land, destroying bird nesting grounds (which are a public asset). They want this land to be open, not only for private grazing (an often destructive land use) but also mining (generally a destructive land use) and forestry (ditto). There is no comparison except in the most trivial sense.

If the Oregon people had done a non destructive sit in, I would support their right to do so. The fact that they are stealing public land and destroying public property means they have no claim to my support.

 

[dismal]

harm
Syllabification: harm
Pronunciation: /härm/

Definition of harm in English:
noun

1 Physical injury, especially that which is deliberately inflicted:
it’s fine as long as no one is inflicting harm on anyone else

1.1 Material damage:
it’s unlikely to do much harm to the engine

1.2 Actual or potential ill effect or danger:
I can’t see any harm in it

verb
1 Physically injure:
the villains didn’t harm him

1.1 Damage the health of:
smoking when pregnant can harm your baby

1.2 Have an adverse effect on:
this could harm his Olympic prospects

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/harm

That should end that little diversion.

 

[Sarpedon]

I have sat in traffic. Like most people, I feel harmed by it. Not complicated. Absurd denials make you look absurd.

Your childish and unmanly inability to endure adversity is your problem, not mine. The ability to withstand adversity with patience and fortitude has been an attribute of maturity since time immemorial. Raging at minor disappointments, pain and setbacks is a characteristic of children.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Another notable difference is that a political protest is a public use: They are putting public space to a public use, one that disrupts other's public use, to be sure, but a public use none-the less, and without actually damaging it.

Yes. The protest blocked the bridge, they didn't say they seized it and it was now the property of the people, but no one was allowed to use it. They also didn't print up new #BLM Letterhead with the Golden Gate Bridge on it.

There are so many differences here, with the main one being the heavily armed part and the seizing of property that splits a very obvious line between acting like terrorists and committing an act of Civil Disobedience.

 

[dismal]

I have sat in traffic. Like most people, I feel harmed by it. Not complicated. Absurd denials make you look absurd.

Your childish and unmanly inability to endure adversity is your problem, not mine. The ability to withstand adversity with patience and fortitude has been an attribute of maturity since time immemorial. Raging at minor disappointments, pain and setbacks is a characteristic of children.

I didn't say I couldn't deal with it. I said I am harmed by it. Now you're going from absurd to pathetic.

 

[Toni]

What makes you think that the marchers in Selma were 'inadvertently' inconveniencing anybody?

Are you saying they were blocking people deliberately like these bridge occupiers did? Or what is your point?

I'm saying that maybe you should look at the the photo again and decide whether you think that traffic might have inconvenienced some people. And whether you think that the people simply spontaneously appeared, simultaneously or whether a great deal of thought and planning went into the events in Selma.

Today, most people recognize the heroism of those who marched in Selma and other places, who worked hard for Civil Rights but at the time, civil rights workers didn't just face the prospect of being murdered or arrested. There was quite a lot of outrage and disapproval from people who felt inconvenienced or upset at having to consider--and reconsider the status quo.

 

[funinspace]

When I read your post, I was utilizing the more common understandings of the word "harm" (See below if you are confused). I see you and Derec are working on a word game duet here...a game I am not interested in. Again, I have not defended the bridge protesters actions as somehow legal. They broke the law, and they were ok with the consequences. So am I.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/harm
noun
1.
physical injury or mental damage; hurt:
to do him bodily harm.
2.
moral injury; evil; wrong.
verb (used with object)
3.
to do or cause harm to; injure; damage; hurt:
to harm one's reputation.

If you cause me to suffer an outcome worse than I would have otherwise would have obtained you have harmed me.

See bolded part that you seemed to have failed to grasp…about why I responded the way I did. Or if you did get it, you didn't seem to get the part that I'm not interested in word games...

Only a true sociopath would claim otherwise.

I already said what I thought. I’m sure the commuters had a mix of being annoyed, feelings of harassment or danger, angry, humored, et.al. I just didn’t get into this detail…

 

[Derec]

I already said what I thought. I’m sure the commuters had a mix of being annoyed, feelings of harassment or danger, angry, humored, et.al. I just didn’t get into this detail…

But there is more than mere annoyance. If you miss a flight, you are harmed. If you miss an appointment or come to work late, that's harm. If you are falsely imprisoned, that's harm. Under quite common understanding of the word.

 

[dismal]

If you cause me to suffer an outcome worse than I would have otherwise would have obtained you have harmed me.

See bolded part that you seemed to have failed to grasp…about why I responded the way I did. Or if you did get it, you didn't seem to get the part that I'm not interested in word games...

Then is seems odd you chose to pick on my rather conventional use of the word "harm" instead of simply recognizing people were harmed and dealing with it like a non-sociopath.

 

[Toni]

I already said what I thought. I’m sure the commuters had a mix of being annoyed, feelings of harassment or danger, angry, humored, et.al. I just didn’t get into this detail…

But there is more than mere annoyance. If you miss a flight, you are harmed. If you miss an appointment or come to work late, that's harm. If you are falsely imprisoned, that's harm. Under quite common understanding of the word.

What false imprisonment? How is this different than say, a bad traffic accident or vehicle break down that blocked traffic on the bridge? Or simply heavy traffic?

Too bad for you none of the people quoted in the linked article experienced actual harm.

 

[Sarpedon]

I have said time and again that I place no weight on semantic arguments. While yes, according to your dictionary definition, you could call being delayed 'harm.' However, my point is that the delay is so trivial, and so commonplace, that any mature person would disregard it. I don't argue semantics because only losers do. The idea that you are harmed by a delay is true in a trivial way, and that is enough for you, but not for me. Frankly, what's really being harmed is your ego. You think you are too important to be bothered by other people's problems. This is why the 'harm' is not objective. I am not troubled by delays caused by protests. You are. Thus, the problem lies within you. Or me, from a different perspective.

Let us make an analogy: If a delay caused by protesters 'harms' you, then so too must a similar delay caused by the efforts of a rescue crew to save people injured in an accident (and we have all been delayed by that). Do you rage at the rescue crew for 'harming' you? No you do not. You might say that the injuries suffered by the people involve in the accident might justify the delay to you, and you would be perfectly correct. Now. We have a problem in the United States in that one portion of the population is unfairly harmed by the other portion. If a rescue effort meant to alleviate actual harm to an injured person is enough to justify your largely imaginary 'harm' from delay, why should a protest against actual harm, with the aim of rectifying the problem, not similarly justify it?

 

[Derec]

What false imprisonment? How is this different than say, a bad traffic accident or vehicle break down that blocked traffic on the bridge? Or simply heavy traffic?

Deliberate criminal action.
Just like there is a big difference whether a wildfire starts due to an accident, from natural causes or due to arson.

Too bad for you none of the people quoted in the linked article experienced actual harm.

They all did.