Posted on 08/18/2017 7:39:21 AM PDT by rktman
P.S. — There was no such thing as “law enforcement officers” when the Consitution was written. Back then, there would have been no protection for demonstrators other than the weapons they carried.
I did not say the Constitution required there be law enforcement to enforce it, of course it does not.
When we hire LE we tell them that is to be their job, it is in their oath. Doesn’t make sense to pay people to do something you hired them to do and are already paying them to do.
Right. But if I’m the mayor of a town and a Federal court tells me I have to give a group a demonstration permit in a situation where my police department is incapable of handling the crowd, I’d be understandably pissed off.
As part of the permit process that is discussed, if say a gathering is going to be very large held in a small town and there are not enough police, then a condition of getting a permit will likely be for the organizers to make arrangements for extra security. This is planned to supplement police that are available. Of course other issues are dealt with at the same time- restrooms, trash, ETC.
I have never heard of a fee or charge for the use of available on duty LE, that is already their job if they are on duty. Extra security hired (which is sometimes off duty LE) because they are needed for that event already have to be paid by organizers or no permit will be issued. That is how it is done in every case I know of.
I don’t know the details of the original permit granted in Charlottesville but that would have been the time for authorities to decide what needed to be done about security issues. If things change there is a process for that too by authorities and or the organizer. What has been reported is the permit was issued, then improperly withdrawn as shown by a judge saying the protest would be allowed to go on. The canceling of the protest just a few minutes before it was to begin, along with the way the crowd was funneled out to areas with violent protestors is the part of the process that has not yet been explained.
The issue that disturbs me is LE that was there and did nothing when violence broke out. They were on duty, assigned to work there, witnessed crimes and did nothing. This is happening over and over across the country.
DWS?
Breaking news: The Southern Poverty Law Center declares the ACLU a right-wing terrorist organization.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Disgraced DNC head and Awan’s last employer - even after he could no longer do any tech job legally)
I neither said, nor suggested that. I even said that the protesters would be charged in many cities.
The person to whom I was responding asked if there was some “constitutional sense” for the police to provide protection. And I stated, quite clearly and deliberately that YES there is a general sense that the police/city/State have a Constitutional duty to protect our basic rights.
Right -- understood.
I would usually agree with you, but in a case like Charlottesville the city's leadership had originally denied the permit for the demonstration -- and their legal argument was that the city didn't have the resources to protect the safety of the participants and the public in general. Their argument may have been total B.S., and I'm sure there were plenty of flaws in the law enforcement response ... but I'm also open to the possibility that their argument was a valid one.
This is why I think it's best for demonstrators to assume that there will be no law enforcement presence at all. Organize demonstrations as "flash mobs" instead of going through the process of getting a permit. I'll bet the police get their act together very quickly after a few situations like that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.