Anti-nuclear protesters appear before judge: sharp departure from policy

[bananas]

From last week:

http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20111005/NEWS02/710059859/1003/NEWS02

Anti-nuclear protesters appear before judge
By Susan Smallheer
Staff Writer - Published: October 5, 2011

BRATTLEBORO — Anti-nuclear protesters were back in court Tuesday in a sharp departure from policy by the Windham County State’s Attorney’s office not to bring charges against protesters in court.

Four women, all members of the Shut It Down Affinity Group, pleaded innocent Tuesday to charges of unlawful trespass; two other members of the group were arraigned last month on similar charges.

The charges stem from a small demonstration at Vermont Yankee nuclear plant on Aug. 30, two days after Tropical Storm Irene struck the state, causing widespread damage, particularly in southern Vermont.

Windham County State’s Attorney Tracy Kelly Shriver declined to say what prompted the change in the informal policy, which was first put in motion by Shriver’s predecessor, Dan Davis.

<snip>

[FBaggins]

1. Maybe they realized that a lack of consequences... Has consequences?

"Arresting" a protestor and then letting him go is exactly what he wants.

[bananas]

2. Just like the protestors at Occupy Wall Street, Keystone XL, Mountop-Removal, Coal Plants, Egypt,...

and of course the anti-war protests we used to have here during the Bush administration.
Those protestors must be crushed for disobeying the law!
Teach them a lesson!

[FBaggins]

4. Just like any protestor

It has nothing to do with how righteous or misguided the cause... it's a pretty standard M.O.

You want to get "arrested"... hopefully on camera, and hopefully in a way that looks like excessive force (riot gear on the police is ideal). You don't want to actually spend more than a couple hours in jail.

Happened recently in D.C. and was posted here on DU. Out-of-town protestors joined a local group and didn't realize that the rules were different. If you're local and get arrested on a weekend, they generally let you go home. If you're from out of town they lock you up until Monday. So these folks expected to make their point and be home for tea... but spent the night squeezed into a tiny holding cell. Of course they tried to make the most of it (posting about the inhuman treatment), but you could tell that they weren't happy.

[bananas]

5. No, the main purpose of civil disobedience is to engage the people in the system directly

The system isn't composed of mindless heartless automatons, it consists of heartful mindful people who take pride in their work and have empathy and compassion and good minds and hearts. The purpose of civil disobedience is to engage those people to change the system so it works properly.

[FBaggins]

7. What in there disputes what I said?

The purpose isn't to "engage" the tiny minority that shows up at the protest... it's the engage The People. They do this by attracting media coverage to get the word out to the masses. Getting "arrested" serves that purpose.

A much smaller minority of that tiny minority is willing to actually get arrested for their actions.

Some will. Some are willing to go on a hunger strike... or break a law seriously enough to get a real prison sentence...etc. But that's not the norm.

[bananas]

8. You said "It has nothing to do with how righteous or misguided the cause" and that is wrong

You said "It has nothing to do with how righteous or misguided the cause" and that is wrong
Funny how you conflate "righteous" with "misguided"
it's obvious you are clueless to the difference
that's clearly a difficiency on your part,
you can try to cover that gaping wound with a band-aid,
or you can learn the hard way why band-aids only work on small cuts and scrapes.

[FBaggins]

10. Perhaps we can go over the meaning of "or"?

It's not conflated, it's an attempt to separate the conversation on tactics from the substance of the protest.

My point is that it doesn't matter whether or not the protesters have a valid concern. Protesters that HAVE a valid (IMO of course) reason to protest AND those who DON'T (same caveat) still use similar tactics.

[bananas]

13. I thought you were being snarky. nt

[PamW]

12. Not what the Founding Fathers..

Civil disobedience is NOT what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the 1st Amendment.

Lawful assembly for redress of grievances means that you can stand in the park or on the sidewalk and hold your sign.

The 1st Amendment was not written so that you can block traffic, or interfere with people going about their business.

The problem with the self-righteous protesters is that lawfully trumpeting their complaints isn't enough for them.

They want to "get in the face" of others, and MAKE them listen and do what the protesters want.

That's not what the Founding Fathers had in mind. Make the self-righteous idiots spend some time behind bars.

PamW

[bananas]

6. Part of the reason the anti-Iraq-war protests didn't stop the Iraq war (aka invasion)...

is because they mostly were in "free-speech-zones" instead of civil disobedience.

[bananas]

3. It depends

If you read the article, the reason the state attorney wasn't prosecuting was because it would just give the protestors a larger audience. And at the bottom of the article the judge was given such an earful he ran away. An arrest and trial gets more media attention than simply being ignored.

[FBaggins]

9. On reading it again... how "sharp" a departure was it...

...if two others were arraigned last month?

[PamW]

11. Don't do the crime...

Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time.

PamW