When is it justifiable for protestors and activists to break the law for the sake of

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oneraindog

are you serious? so the fact that they were flawed imperfect people negates every bit of their efforts??
are you really making the argument that the misdeeds of a person completely negates the worth of anything positive that they might do?
if that is true than every good deed ever done is totally without merit because EVERYONE is flawed and NO ONE is completely moral.

---

That's too broad of a statement, I question their motives. Jessie Jackson has taken up MLK's place & I don't care for him at all. It's not a question of being perfect, just morally upright, even the Boy Scouts swear to that! Double standards create suspicion in my mind. And I have no use for a wife abuser, my late sister-in-law was murdered by her soon-to-be ex-husband and now she is the "poster-child for "Take Back The Night." Remember the idiots who protested the war in Iraq by going over there & occupying buildings thinking that we wouldn't bomb them knowing that American non-combatants were there? In my book they were guilty of treason! Civil disobedience is always a tough road to go down as you'll oft-times gain more enemies than allies. Do it right, you know, "hearts & minds." :cool2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarge47

That's too broad of a statement, I question their motives. Jessie Jackson has taken up MLK's place & I don't care for him at all. It's not a question of being perfect, just morally upright, even the Boy Scouts swear to that! Double standards create suspicion in my mind. And I have no use for a wife abuser, my late sister-in-law was murdered by her soon-to-be ex-husband and now she is the "poster-child for "Take Back The Night."

---

im truly sorry to hear that.

but you are mixing an emotional argument with a rational one. saying "i dont like_________" does not make your argument logical or rational.

i want you to tell me that the work of ghandi and mlk are comepletely meaningless and worthless because of (admittedly large) flaws in their personal lives. are youre going to do that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oneraindog

im truly sorry to hear that.

but you are mixing an emotional argument with a rational one. saying "i dont like_________" does not make your argument logical or rational.

i want you to tell me that the work of ghandi and mlk are comepletely meaningless and worthless because of (admittedly large) flaws in their personal lives. are youre going to do that?

---

1st, remember that most people think "emotionally," "not logically."(Notice YOUR emotions at this point?) 2nd, "COMPLETELY meaningless & worthless?" NO! However MLK's work has sort of fallen by the wayside with J.J taking over. Also MLK's work, IMO, was a lot more meaningful than Ghandi's. Ghandi should have been horsewhipped! I guess maybe I do stand for civil disobedience, I'd of taken that wife abuser out myself! You see, there are some character flaws that stand out more than others. Did you know that he was a bigamist? Again, I question their motives in what they did, I look for the "why." My point to all of this is to show that while Civil Disobedience may be a means to an end, it's more than likely going to be messy...sort of like doing delicate heart surgery with a garden trowel. :cool2:

OK one more time with the best CURRENT US LAW BREAKING PROTEST I can find.
Federal law says that Marijuana is Illegal. Several states have thought"Well Uncle Sam is a stupid stick in the mud that just wants people to die. We will make it legal in our state so people can use it as Medicine." The fact is that the DEA can at any time,swoop in and shut it down. Wham, Bam, Thank you ma'am! The States themselves are protesting this law. They Break Federal law by legalizing it for ANY use. Sure it is legal in that(those) state(s) But in AMERICA which those states are part of, it is Illegal...period. You can argue that they are trying to do it legally by setting precedent..... Malarkey. It is in effect no different than If my town said that regardless of what the state says that you can sell just one blue dyed duckling. The town is still breaking STATE law!! Take it one step further. It is no different than if I said "I don't care what any LAW says Murder is legal on MY property." Breaking a law of an entity you are part of -Country,state,county,City, whatever, is STILL breaking the law.
In Essence these states are breaking FEDERAL LAW by Making their laws in direct conflict with state law OPPOSING federal law. You can call it an apple,an orange,or a banana it is still fruity. We aren't talking about apples,oranges,or bananas we are talking about the Fruit of protests breaking law(s). You can call it a "legal action" it is still protesting the federal law. period. This is not a "what if" it is an "it is". It is not hypothetical it is happening right now. Respectable organizations are throwing in with the states, unless you consider the American Medical Association a "frivolous" organization. This is a heavy hitter protest. No lightweights allowed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pocomoonskyeyes

OK one more time with the best CURRENT US LAW BREAKING PROTEST I can find.
Federal law says that Marijuana is Illegal. Several states have thought"Well Uncle Sam is a stupid stick in the mud that just wants people to die. We will make it legal in our state so people can use it as Medicine." The fact is that the DEA can at any time,swoop in and shut it down. Wham, Bam, Thank you ma'am! The States themselves are protesting this law. They Break Federal law by legalizing it for ANY use. Sure it is legal in that(those) state(s) But in AMERICA which those states are part of, it is Illegal...period. You can argue that they are trying to do it legally by setting precedent..... Malarkey. It is in effect no different than If my town said that regardless of what the state says that you can sell just one blue dyed duckling. The town is still breaking STATE law!! Take it one step further. It is no different than if I said "I don't care what any LAW says Murder is legal on MY property." Breaking a law of an entity you are part of -Country,state,county,City, whatever, is STILL breaking the law.
In Essence these states are breaking FEDERAL LAW by Making their laws in direct conflict with state law OPPOSING federal law. You can call it an apple,an orange,or a banana it is still fruity. We aren't talking about apples,oranges,or bananas we are talking about the Fruit of protests breaking law(s). You can call it a "legal action" it is still protesting the federal law. period. This is not a "what if" it is an "it is". It is not hypothetical it is happening right now. Respectable organizations are throwing in with the states, unless you consider the American Medical Association a "frivolous" organization. This is a heavy hitter protest. No lightweights allowed.

---

Hey, don't hold back, Poco, tell us how you really feel! :innocent: Anyway, I agree with you. It's a good thing all the dope smokers are too stoned to organize and create civil disobedience, huh? :sneaky2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarge47

My point to all of this is to show that while Civil Disobedience may be a means to an end, it's more than likely going to be messy...sort of like doing delicate heart surgery with a garden trowel. :cool2:

---

fair enough. and i agree with you. i just go one step further to say that sometimes it is called for. history shows this. we dont need to get too hung up on the moral character of mlk and ghandi i was just using them as historical examples of justified civil disobedience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarge47

Hey, don't hold back, Poco, tell us how you really feel! :innocent: Anyway, I agree with you. It's a good thing all the dope smokers are too stoned to organize and create civil disobedience, huh? :sneaky2:

---

Sarge this isn't about "recreational use" or "Medical use". This is about a current situation that is in perfect alignment with this topic. It ain't about whether it should or should not be legalized. It is about a protest that is Breaking the law of the land. Yeah I think it is being overlooked because it deals with something that is considered illegal. Or maybe that it is just "Dope Smokers". The fact remains that this law was originally passed to stop Mexicans from crossing the border. Didn't work did it? After being a Law for a few decades it now also considered immoral as well. I'll bet if we were talking about Dandelions being used to help Cancer or AIDS patients, You nor anyone else would bat an eyelid. Everyone would be saying pass the darn law!! Help those that are sick!!! You see I watched my Dad die of Cancer. If I thought that him smoking or eating this stuff, would have helped him stay alive or help him any little bit, I would have went out and bought the stuff from in front of the police station myself! No telling what they might find out next week in what helps with any illness. I just hope they find it soon so less people have to be miserable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oneraindog

if that is true than every good deed ever done is totally without merit because EVERYONE is flawed and NO ONE is completely moral.

---

There are degrees of flaw and immorality.
Criminal at one end, just annoying at the other and everything in between.
One ought to keep a sense of proportion when deciding whether a good deed
outweighs the bad.
Seeing the world in absolutes seldom leads to any real solutions or dialogue.
And it's just a lazy way out.

Quote:

---

It is about a protest that is Breaking the law of the land

---

right its called checks and balances. one of the most brilliant aspects of our system of government! it CALLS for a certain about of "law breaking" to ensure that nobody gains to much power over another.

amen poco!!

one thing's for sure. the federal govt. isn't protesting the tax revenue it gets from the "legal" sale of marijuana.

Personally, Poco, I don't see the conflict. The states have the right to pass any law they want whether it is in direct conflict with federal law or not. In this case, California has said, and subsequent state court rulings have upheld, that state law enforcement officials will not enforce the federal law on medical use marijuana. In others words, if a state or county police officer finds medical marijuana in your home they can not arrest you for possession (assuming it is packaged, etc. in accordance with state law). And they can not arrest a doctor prescribing the medical use of marijuana.

The DEA has said that marijuana is a Class I drug and they have the right to enforce federal law as it applies. Since doctors prescribed medications based on federal law the DEA has jurisdiction over doctors writing prescriptions. The Constitution establishes federal law as the supreme law. That's why DEA still has jurisdiction within the states.

It's really pretty simple. The term is preemption and you can see it in action in a variety of situations. Some municipalities have a law against the sale of alcohol even though the state says it's perfectly legal to sell it. The ownership and carrying of weapons is similar.

There are only several instances I can think for actually breaking the law.
1. If you hurt my family
2. Rape or Domestic Violence against a woman
3. Hurting a child in any way
4. Hurting an animal with the intent to only do harm or torture (not as a food source)
5. Hurting any Elderly Person
6. Being a deadly threat to the general public
7. To feed my family and provide for them (but then again I hunt so we wouldn't be hungry)
8. And if you keep telling me there is no Santa Claus (tired of that, he comes to my house every
Christmas so there ya wanker)

But that's just me
Beo,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beowulf65

There are only several instances I can think for actually breaking the law.
1. If you hurt my family
2. Rape or Domestic Violence against a woman
3. Hurting a child in any way
4. Hurting an animal with the intent to only do harm or torture (not as a food source)
5. Hurting any Elderly Person
6. Being a deadly threat to the general public
7. To feed my family and provide for them (but then again I hunt so we wouldn't be hungry)
8. And if you keep telling me there is no Santa Claus (tired of that, he comes to my house every
Christmas so there ya wanker)

But that's just me
Beo,

---

Nope, I am on board with ya on all of that. And will be back to back with ya if we ever catch the SOB that started that rumour about no Santa,, the rotten SOB

Wait! What's this about Santa? I hope nothing happened to him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick

Wait! What's this about Santa? I hope nothing happened to him.

---

Thanks, Rick. We better stop that rumor now!!!

It will be soon the way this administration is taking our rights away!
sharpen your pitchforks and light your torches..... they need a lesson in who works for whom!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SARKY

It will be soon the way this administration is taking our rights away!
sharpen your pitchforks and light your torches..... they need a lesson in who works for whom!

---

In 2008 people did it without pitchforks and those who care as much as they say they do, can accomplish the same in 2012.

Leave your pitchfork at home. You might put someone's eye out, for god's sake.

...is that civil disobedience will always seem justified in the eyes of those doing it, but not to those having it done to them! :cool2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benesse

Leave your pitchfork at home. You might put someone's eye out, for god's sake.

---

She's right, you know. Waving those things around is pretty dangerous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarge47

...is that civil disobedience will always seem justified in the eyes of those doing it, but not to those having it done to them! :cool2:

---

Sarge... shhhh! Civil Disobedience is the only time I get a chance to kick the crap out of some goofy retread hippie/yuppie jerk off spouting what needs to be done but doesn't vote to make the changes happen. Civil Disobedience is my friend, we call it anger management in the District. You get angry I manage it for you...:)