Replies

This is so much a fallacy, it’s laughable.

The police knew there was going to be a rally from a group that has demonstrated violence before with a required permit, why didn’t they cover it better.

If anyone thinks the mask is the problem, they are not in tune with reality. Guns don’t kill people either.

If there is a permit, that requires the signers to see that it doesn’t get violent, then arrest them automatically and charge them with the maximum of the crimes.

If the rally doesn’t have a permit or threatens violence, Oregon has a law for that:

2017 ORS 131.675¹

Dispersal of unlawful or riotous assemblages
When any five or more persons, whether armed or not, are unlawfully or riotously assembled in any county, city, town or village, the sheriff of the county and the deputies of the sheriff, the mayor of the city, town or village, or chief executive officer or officers thereof, and the justice of the peace of the district where the assemblage takes place, or such of them as can forthwith be collected, shall go among the persons assembled, or as near to them as they can with safety, and command them in the name of the State of Oregon to disperse. If, so commanded, they do not immediately disperse, the officer must arrest them or cause them to be arrested; and they may be punished according to law. [Formerly 145.020; 1987 c.526 §1]

So it all gets back to coverage and who controls the violent people. The cops and the mayor, who would have known it was possible and has been displayed in the past, got caught showing the politics. It has nothing to do with a mask. Besides, they could all have been wearing burkas and the Mayor doesn’t have the guts to unmask them. None of the 15 states that have anti-mask laws do. Liberal Portland do something like that to hinder a liberal group.....Not on your life.

rwood