Police State

In my criminal justice classes we learned that as police officers we cannot, except under the most extreme cases, stop a protest.   If someone is protesting on a sidewalk they cannot be interfered with as long as they don't block the sidewalk.   And if hecklers threaten the speaker we remove the hecklers unless the hecklers overwelm all available police power and threaten the speaker's life.

That is why pure and utter assholery like this  ,thanks to Ravenwood, makes my blood boil.   The police can set up much better protesting zones than this without any security threats and the democrats can be more lenient to peoples' freedom.  (Or not?  this is the dems.)

I write all this up to the following:

1 Police Lazyness

Crowd control isn't real hard, you just need an overwhelming force of officers, you can have them on hand but you don't need the whole public to see them, bad publicity and it gives off too much of a police state feel.

2.  Give an inch lose a mile.

When one security precation is taken and given the authorities want to go to the next level.  Why?  They get more power, more forces to command,more money, and more authority over the general populace.

3. Bad publicity gives good cover.

The democrats won't have to see the protesters while going to the convention and with all the law enforcement, the protestors message will be lost in the fine print, so a bit of bad publicity hides the true meaning of the protesting and the cause the people that are protesting are supporting.

4. Lack of interest.

If people would truly backlash, write congressmen, investigate officers and their commanders,(trust me, not all those Law Enforcement Officers are angels,) and lash back against the party that approved those conditions than such a thing will dematerialize.   But if there is no interest in fighting the good fight, the bad guys will keep on doing it. As the old quote goes:

For evil to succeed, all that is needed is for good men to do nothing.

Or something like that.....