They are honestly one of the biggest threats that whiny b**** states like California face these days. Of course you'd never see this in Texas, competent government would squash that nonsense in a hurry.
Something seriously needs to be done about legal protests. First, no weapons. Defensive clothing, helmets, and shields are okay. Even though shields can be used as force, there are way too many projectiles being thrown. Secondly, no masks. Anyone protesting should be identifiable. Any other suggestions to improve legal, safe protests?
SF said no helmets and that is THE main reason the right wingers cancelled their little rally here: no helmet, no go-pro, no edited YouTube propaganda to defame liberals. Pretty crafty rule on the city's part.
So San Francisco/Berkley is cool with lawless vigilantism and mob rule? The city wants to suppress information? That's absolutely insane.
these arent legal protests. people are being beaten in the streets. that's not legal. It's very simple. police just need to arrest all these violent assholes. that's what needs to be done. As soon people start charging a police barricade, light them up with tear gas and bust out the beating sticks and arrest them.
Given the history of AntiFa violence, it makes sense why people would want to wear defensive gear to protect against the rocks and bottles that will be thrown and the clubs that will be used against them. Given that the mayor of Berkley belongs to AntiFa himself, it's safe to say that he'd have the police stand down and allow the violence that his buddies have planned....banning defensive gear was a move to ensure AntiFa hurt as many people as possible.
Uhhhhh, what? Are you replying to a post in some other dimension that I can't see? Sorry I dropped into this weird ass thread again. SF avoided a horrible and ugly day of violence with one simple, subtle, and astute rule. The wingers made up bullshit about safety, but it was all b/c of one thing: they can't hold clubs and cell phones at the same time. The helmets allowed them to hold clubs and shields while still filming everything. The **** does a protestor need with a helmet if they're peaceful? (rhetorical question, leaving thread)
.....it helps protect you from being attacked by AntiFa, which is something that happened anyway. Seriously how is this hard to understand?
You do realize that Nazis also initiated violence. They weren't just defending themselves from Antifa, right? We have actual video of a Nazi not being attacked and pulling out a pistol and shooting at counter-protestors. I'm not sure why you are so gung-ho on trying to make it look like Antifa instigated all the violence. We all know that Antifa is willing to use violence. We don't need to pretend that the poor Nazis were so worried about their safety and that all violence was initiated by Antifa. It only makes anything you say about Antifa less credible.
A few quick things, 1. So you are saying that there was violence on both sides? I'm pretty sure if you were someone else people would freak out to hear you say that. 2. It's not that AntiFa is "willing" to use violence, it's all they do. They are a violent extremist group. 3. When you say "Nazis", are you using the AntiFa definition of "Anyone that isn't a radical communist is a Nazi" or what definition are you using? They attacked some people simply for wearing a Polo shirt.....which to them is a clear sign that someone is a Nazi. Here's a chart to see how AntiFa view different groups When it comes to AntiFa, especially AntiFa groups in places like Berkley or Portland, they are almost always those who initiate violence....even when there is no actual opposition present.
so brazen, committing crimes, videotaping it, bragging about it online, with no expectation of any consequence
The need for helmets/shields are mostly defensive countermeasures against AntiFa protesters who love to throw projectiles, particularly cans and plastic/glass bottles or whack people in the head with bike locks. Helmets have a legitimate practical use for safety. Whether they're utilized for video recording is a moot point. It's freedom for the press. AntiFa riots frequently love to suppress video journalists because those videos have helped to dox and identify violent offenders. Why is it a problem for the right wing protesters to broadcast the violent tendencies of AntiFa? Left wing protesters are free to video tape any violent offenders on the right to keep both sides in check. SF and Berkley not allowing helmets to be worn as a deterrent for the right wing protesters looks like they are targeting the right wing protester tactics and are complicit in allowing AntiFa to attack American citizens, especially when the mayor has given stand down orders to the police, resulting in a lawless city. If cities ban weapons, then neither side will have clubs. But there will still be projectiles thrown.
The Nazis I'm talking about were those that were wearing Nazi emblems, chanting Nazi slogans and their other white nationalist allies. You can try and pretend like a bunch of folks are being unfairly called Nazis all you want. It goes right along with you trying to make up crap about Antifa initiating the violence. Of course, you bring up other incidents where they did, but this thread isn't about those incidents it's about what happened in VA. Your agenda is clear, just stop pretending like you are only dealing in facts, and not pushing your agenda.
Are you talking about in Charlottesville or in Berkley? I'm talking about the most recent AntiFa violence where they were just randomly attacking people at an anti-Marxism event. You know, the type of mindless violence that is ALWAYS associated with AntiFa no matter where they show up.
Oh, well yeah, on that occasion, the people AntiFa attacked were Nazis and white supremacists for the most part.....but really AntiFa is fine attacking anyone that isn't a radical communist which is what they were doing this weekend in Berkley attacking random people in the streets. You have to realize that Charlottesville was just one of many times AntiFa showed up to cause violence, they do it everywhere they go.
It is like he-who-should-not-be-named gets good wood whenever AntiFa gets mentioned. People are saying ...
