Parents stuck on I-40 during protest call paramedics to help young son
Source: Fox 13 -
An ambulance had to be dispatched to pick up a child on the I-40 Bridge during the Black Lives Matter protest Sunday night.
Protesters began their march downtown and eventually made their onto the bridge, which caused it to be shut down for several hours. As a result, the child’s parents were stuck on the bridge, and they could not drive the child to Le Bonheur Children’s Hospital.
His parents were worried about his condition and considered it an emergency, so they called an ambulance. Bobby Harrell was the paramedic on that call.
"We were escorted by the Crittenden County Sheriff's Office up the wrong way on the interstate to pick up the child out of the traffic," Harrell told FOX13.
Read more: http://www.fox13memphis.com/news/parents-stuck-on-i-40-during-protest-call-paramedics-to-help-young-son/396934340
It's ok though... He didn't die...
When did a few minutes every make a difference in a medical situation...?
Right?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Blue_Adept
(6,393 posts)But there's a lot of unintended consequences as well. Life threatening ones at that. We all get in an uproar over bridge closures from Christie. There's plenty of reason to be frustrated by this as well.
It's not all "Oh, poor babies couldn't get to their dinner on time" thing. For some, their livelihoods are on the line as well.
Igel
(35,270 posts)But those we don't like only have intended consequences.
Old-style civil disobedience was either known about ahead of time (if it affected a lot of innocents) or targeted the guilty. For a lot of folk these days, the only innocent people are themselves and everybody else is guilty. As we close the educational achievement gap we seem to be widening the ethical achievement gap.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)What we don't do also has intended consequences.
BLM was almost responsible for hurting this child. Is that what you are postulating as the purpose of this OP? We, as a race, have no right to have anger over outright murder. I sense you just want BLM to cease and desist, right? Don't get in the way of other people not really concerned about the genocide going on in this democracy?
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)do you care that PoC are being murdered in the streets by criminals in blue?
DustyJoe
(849 posts)You know, like
two wrongs don't make a right
eye for an eye
et al
heaven05
(18,124 posts)has been my favorite.....I always said I haven't got that far yet, god is still working on me.
Igel
(35,270 posts)Anger doesn't justify.
There's a very big difference between the two, and it's not just grammatical voice.
In a very real way, the protest was almost responsible for hurting this child. That doesn't entail not having a right to be angry. The right to be angry doesn't make it okay to almost hurt the child, or as seems to be the case, make the possibility just vanish and absolve all responsibility.
They can find a way to either not hurt the innocent or do as was done in the "good old days" past, give people a choice to avoid being hurt. Surely that's within their capacity and they're not just made foolish or uncaring or even vindictive by rage.
You present a false dilemma. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
You stand corrected.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)is rejected based on the fact that anger for any given reason or situation is either justified or not based on the facts. The anger represented in and by these protests ARE justified. Your attempt at intellectualism is a total fail. Have a good one....
bye......
TipTok
(2,474 posts)As long as I'm angry about something, I can do whatever I want.
Amazing...
christx30
(6,241 posts)the police, the government, and the courts. You know, the people that can actually do something about it. Not everyday people like dental hygienists or architects or people trying to get their kids to the hospital.
If I'm sitting in traffic because of this dangerous form of protest, I'm not going to blame the cops or politics. I'm going to blame the idiots that walked out in front of cars going 60 on the highway.
Who's to blame when someone happens to glance down at their speedometer at the wrong moment and hits someone, because he doesn't see the idiot standing there waving his arms? Pedestrians have the right of way in most cases, true, but the laws of physics don't care. A 2500 lb vehicle going 65 miles per hour doesn't give a rip who has the right of way.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)the police, the government, both state and local and the courts have time and again ignored the facts of murderers in blue, so the murders continue. They are not idiots. Purely a false flag word used by you to stir up animosity to distract from the facts of murderes in blue. SHUTITDOWN!!!!!!
TipTok
(2,474 posts)More interested in their own emotional immediate gratification that advancing the cause they supposedly care so much about.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)won't, don't or will ever get it. Stay in your bubble, it is safer.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Hell.. 1st order effects in this case...
Ok... I'm good here.
liberal N proud
(60,332 posts)How does causing harm to others or even death further the cause of BLM?
Protest, and protest strongly, but make sure it does not adversely harm the lives of those who you want to support your cause. Win people over not with violence but with peace.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)they never will be. The fact of generations long violence and death perpetrated against PoC, by the state, doesn't concern people enough to have it stopped by now. So I tell them, get angry, start hating the people marching, a person more than likely harbored those feelings all along.
liberal N proud
(60,332 posts)christx30
(6,241 posts)Like I said, have you seen the film of the group taking over that highway?
http://i.imgur.com/TTWIrSs.mp4
Short gif of it happening.
If I'm in one of those cars, I'm not thinking about why it happening. All I care about is that it is happening. I'm not saying "Gosh, I wish police would stop shooting people." I'm thinking "Gosh, I wish the cops would come bash some heads in to get these people the hell out of my way." You risk turning ambivalence to your cause into outright hostility. Protests in Dallas were peaceful (before the shootings), with assistance and support from the police. Protests in Baton Rouge and other places were violent, with cops cracking down on people. 102 arrests.
So protest in front of the police station. Do sit-ins at the legislature and governor's mansion.
Personally, I hate cops. They get away with so much crap it's not funny. Anyone in their ranks that tries to stop injustices gets fired or has their career severely hampered. But I know I can't do crap about it. I'm just a tech support agent in Austin, Texas, trying to take care of his family. No one in government gives a crap what I think. They aren't going to prosecute a bad cop just because Christx30 thinks it needs to be done. Keeping me stuck in traffic for 3 hours isn't going to do you any good.
A tired driver that's kind of in autopilot is going to hit one of these idiots one day.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)your GIF. Nothing you are concerned about is my concern. My concern is to not see some deranged by hate person in blue under the authority of badge and state, murder any more unarmed PoC. You can rage, whine and rant about the protestors, I could care less about that. Bye
TipTok
(2,474 posts)You have no concern for anyone else and it's all about you and your issues.
Nicely summarized... Bravo
heaven05
(18,124 posts)I'm touched.
My concern is the actual murders of unarmed people. You will never be able to relate to that because you are only concerned with your issue. YOU are not right on any count. I stand by what is here as penned by me. bye
TipTok
(2,474 posts)... you might try doing something effective instead of hobbling yourself.
That would be hard though... Might as well stick with what you got. Feels good for you at least...
christx30
(6,241 posts)are going to lose in the court of public opinion, and cops get to keep the status quo. BLM looks like disruptive children throwing a tantrum, when the issue is way more important to let that happen. The public isn't going to be asking about the police. They are going to be asking what can be done about BLM. And cops that employ tear gas and bean bag rounds to clear the disruptions are going to be met with cheers from the local population, and not boos.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)the court of public opinion since I started fighting to be respected as an equal human being in america. The court of public opinion(white) has ALWAYS stifled PoC and our aspirations toward an equal society because we don't see change as you perpetuate slow change. Nothing you can say will take away from the fact that racism will never end because a majority of white people in america have a vested interest in keeping their privilege(s) and one of those privileges is the right to be a racist. There's a piece in this forum on some trashy POS telling a black person, that there "ancestors owned your ass", or something like that. She used the n-word and still see black people as monkeys. Take your court of public opinion to someone who gives a damn.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)We are suggesting that you go about it in an intelligent and effective way that might get you closer to your goal instead of further from it.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)and that is an familiar refrain from you. As an individual that has heard these words before, can I be insulted or offended? No. Why, if I had, in the past approached the american race problem as you say you do and advise me to pursue, is my pursuit still never ending, based on some racial/cultural status quo skewed in your favor by automatic privilege based on ones skin color, class and social status. As far as I'm concerned this experimental democracy is a failing model.
Any country that can have a status quo that has allowed the american underbelly, in light of the trump campaign, to show such a blatently, violently race based hostility, still after all these generations of said 'experiment is inexcusable. As I hear in the streets, a lot just prefer isolationist tribal solutions with nothing but blood andd grief the outcome
You are can try to judge me about my personal feelings and approach to the ongoing and seemingly escalating race division in this country as given impetus by the trump campaign....... if change is not something you think you can support, bully for you. Agitate agitate agitate and if some get offended, they truly had those reactions hidden all the time. I don't need your solution.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Such little content...
In any case, I'm all for change. As stated before there are serious issues with race right now and that makes it all the more important to try and implement that change in an effective way instead of the general clusterfuck that we've seen so far.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)and still nothing of merit said............
karynnj
(59,495 posts)nor will it win you many new supporters. What it does is provide an emotional outlet for people angered by what happened and it shows that many people think what happened wrong - and cared enough to get out there.
One question is whether organizers could find a means to do something that provides that emotional outlet and provides a positive way for people to show their concern that spreads the message that change is needed and actually gets people not yet concerned to join with those already engaged.
Could a concert or a rally in a public park be an alternative?
Judi Lynn
(160,415 posts)and their friends are protesting the murders, as well as centuries of monstrous abuse of African descendants.
There is absolutely NOTHING else involved, and every one of us can see that. There is no tree to hide behind, they are standing in full view, with no one human cheering them on.
For every rancorous voice trying to cut you down, remember there are so many of us who agree in every possible way, now, and forever.
Something's going to change in this country, and it's NOT going to be that the racists are going to get back total control.
As soon as you can read the headlines on articles like this you know the motivation and who's going to support it. Never a surprise, not by now.
R.A. Ganoush
(97 posts)Strategic objectives be damned. No wonder people look at groups like BLM negatively.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)look the reason BLM is needed because a majority of white people don't want things to change. History is my witness. You can talk all you want, I live it. there is nothing you can say that will change the truth about racism in america. "Bitchfest"? Nah. Just truth. A majority of White people do not care about racism against PoC. It's a tribal instinct that prohibits change especially with the privilege inherent in bring able to perpetuate that racism, both unconsciously and most definitely consciously.
R.A. Ganoush
(97 posts)What are they hoping to accomplish by protesting? Action without an attainable goal just turns into a one step forward two steps back situation; hence my comment about it being a bitchfest.
You already seem to think most whites are biased, you don't care what they think of the movement or if you sway them to your side, but you expect the action to spur further actions...by whom and what would they look like?
heaven05
(18,124 posts)you probably looked at BLM negatively all the time, which would not surprise me in the least.
Judi Lynn
(160,415 posts)Response to liberal N proud (Reply #13)
mahatmakanejeeves This message was self-deleted by its author.
OhioChick
(23,218 posts)yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Bridges? I think that's a reasonable request.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Lance Bass esquire
(671 posts)In Hospital. She was dying. Don't remember who the protesters were but it was off the 805 south in San Diego about 8 years ago.He got out of his car and tried talking to them. They were adamantly not going to move.
After a couple minutes he literally picked up one if the protester's and body slammed him on the pavement, jumped back in his car and told the protesters to move the guy out of his,way or he would run him over.
They complied.
He made his flight. Under the circumstances I can't blame him.
If I was,a protester I would expect stuff like this to be in the realm of possibilities.
romanic
(2,841 posts)I would have done the same thing. 
TipTok
(2,474 posts)As long as it is someone else doing the paying.
He probably showed more restraint than I would have.
I wonder when it crosses the line to illegal detention.
peace13
(11,076 posts)Assuming that protesters are not putting anything on the line by being there is a huge mistake! Assuming that protesters are losers.....big mistake!
peace13
(11,076 posts)...and injuring anyone. But hey, it worked for him. Sorry about your friend and his situation. I have been on both sides of the issue. When I am on the street I Am out there because all else has failed. More than likely people have already or or are about to die to get me out there. The moment is urgent for all parties.
How to avoid demonstrations......actively support the process so people are not backed into having to Protest!
Judi Lynn
(160,415 posts)christx30
(6,241 posts)it without violence.
Pull up to them, they don't move. Honk your horn, they don't move.
Yell out your window, they don't move.
Get out of your car and yell, they don't move.
Body hits pavement, they move. He gets to the airport.
If they don't want to be hurt, if they don't want to go to jail or end up in court, they'll move.
peace13
(11,076 posts)...and no one died at the hospital. Drive safely. Check down thread for the info.
christx30
(6,241 posts)with the person getting to the airport with the protestors in the way. The person picked up a protestor and dropped him on the ground. The crowd parted and allowed the car to pass.
They have the right to protest. They don't have the right to inconvience anyone.
You have the right to speak. You DON'T have the right to be heard.
peace13
(11,076 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)
hamsterjill
(15,220 posts)There are times when reasoning with someone simply doesn't work.
I don't believe that the masses of Americans are going to be sympathetic to protests that cause major disruptions and prevent others from getting medical care, getting to and from emergency situations, etc. I feel like this type of disruption will only create more animosity against the protesters.
People should be allowed to protest. But their right to protest should not supersede anyone else's right to go about his/her normal and ordinary business when that business is separate and apart from anything being protested.
peace13
(11,076 posts)Why do we always have to go to such extreme measures in order to make a point? People in the U.S do not pay attention unless drastic measures are taken. Yes there will be fallout, a blocked road, trouble getting to the hospital, missed meetings, angry and delayed people. But folks, wake the $ell up! So sorry for the trouble when people continue to put their heads in the sand. Yes this child could have possibly been in trouble but we are talking about other people who have and will continue to be in trouble unless something is done. Glad the child is OK. The parents should feel lucky on many levels.
jalan48
(13,837 posts)then there will be no protests unless the they are carefully contained to official protest areas.
Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)But I don't think the shutting down of major highways is the way to do it. What if someone is in need of immediate medical care, e.g. heart attack, accidents, etc. In those cases there isn't the time to plan an alternate route to avoid the protest. There are unintended consequences, and if someone dies as a result of a highway being shut down, then all those that were involved should be criminally and civilly liable. Freedom of speech and freedom to protest does not mean such people are free from consequences of their actions.
katsy
(4,246 posts)Protests are inconvenient? Is that your concern?
Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)When done in a city, there are multiple ways around a protest area that do not impact someone trying to get around the area. Going a few blocks up then a few blocks only minimally impacts transit time. When it is done on a highway, there are miles between exits, and taking those exits could add miles and precious time that means life and death in certain circumstances.
That is the difference.
katsy
(4,246 posts)The shoreline in the NE is trecherous and always backef up and it is almost impossible to navigate in summer. But it gets done because emergency planning works. Ambulances are accomodated.
Here is what doesn't work: a democracy based on your convenience.
You can't curtail the right to protest. Full. Stop.
Prepare for emergencies and all parties must be on biard with that. But you don't ever fuck with the right to protest. Ever.
Unless your emercency services are manned by fukwits, deal with it.
Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)... So I know the traffic patterns of the shore area. So, what happens when a person has a heart attack and is in between exits with miles between the closest entrance and exit and was not from the area and had no idea there was going to be a protest? That person should die because they should have known better than to have a heart attack? If you want to shut down LOCAL streets, where there are many options for detours, I'm all for it.
Everyone has the right to peacefully protest, but that does not mean you have the right to put other lives in danger.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)I suspect if one of them fell down with a heart attack in the middle of the highway, they'd be up in arms about the terrible response times.
katsy
(4,246 posts)in inconvenient areas because someone might die somewhere?
You know how that sounds? It's like the anti-vaxxers. One child somewhere in this fucking world WILL die because of an adverse reaction to a substance in a vaccine so we need the right to not vaccinate.
Are you fucking kidding me?
You want to impose limits on the constitutional right of protesting because it MAY prevent the loss of one life? Seriously? You think emergency services are too fucking inept to function under duress?
Every fucking time you get in your car to run an errand you put someone elses life at risk!!! Should you stop driving?
This sham of an op isnt about a child's safety. If it were... It would be accompanied by a request that everyone stay in their own fucking bubble so as to not put others at risk.
This is about people trying to discourage BLM protests. If they don't look like you or have your concerns then they aren't really citizens worthy of any constitutional rights.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)It doesn't give you carte blanche to go anywhere you want.
Maybe they want to protest nuclear power by shouting slogans in the safety control room of the station?
Anti war folks want to protest in a mine field?
Anti govt folks can just march into the oval office?
Anti abortion folks block the road and protest in the office of providers?
Religious wingnuts who believe in the power of prayer can shut down an ER?
The list goes on and on...
katsy
(4,246 posts)Accomodation for emergency services for protests conducted on roadways should be agreed to by all parties.
And it's time to address the root cause. LE must stop indiscriminantly killing citizens. Period.
I don't think that has every happened before...
katsy
(4,246 posts)We have encountered the same situation here in our homestate every single summer. For some reason people feel compelled to go to the shore on these 2 lane roads and the traffic is backed up into the neighboring state and every single time we go ambulances have to be accomodated and are accomodated. Somehow... They get their job done, right?
So why dont people think before going to the beach? Amirite? Do we stop beach goers just in case theres a life-threatening emergency? Do we shut our kids up in the house so they dont get hit by a car?
Of course not.
I hope the child is safe.
The article is shit. The concern trolls should just come out and say they dont believe BLM should have the right to peaceful protests. Anywhere. A medical emergency can happen on a street also. They would be assholes for believing that but at least they'd be honest assholes.
Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)That your average traffic due to congestion is not intentional and no one is at fault -- when someone intentionally shuts down a roadway, they are at fault.
katsy
(4,246 posts)trumps unintentional traffic congestion okay? Clear enough?
If you don't like to be inconvenienced in any manner going about your business... Tough shit. Democracy matters. The right to protest matters.
Just come out and say you want a constitutional amendment that allows protests only in certain safe spaces that wont affect your particular life. How will that work out?
Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)I never said I was against protests, I just don't think it should be done in manner that put lives at risks. I am not talking about people being stuck in traffic -- I am saying major road ways should not be blocked in protest.
apnu
(8,749 posts)They keep citing traffic jams as an example and its clearly a false comparison. Bad traffic, be it LA or Chicago or Boston or NYC, causes problems but emergency crews and dispatchers know the roads are clogged and there's the break down lane which is usually clear (well not in Boston because they're crazy driving there, but everywhere else its true). BLM shut down the whole highway, emergency lanes and all. There is no comparison to that and horrible traffic in major population centers.
If people are injured who had nothing to do with the protest, such as a child needing to get medical attention, its the responsibility of the protesters and they own all the heat that comes with it.
Now if they let emergency needs through, nobody here would be complaining. In fact it may be even more effective to shut down part of the highway and not all of it. That way the cars have to trickle by the protesters and everybody gets a good look at it. 10 cars back in the jam and nobody knows what's going on. Its just confusing and annoying. It doesn't win anybody's attention or spark any reaction or awareness.
katsy
(4,246 posts)an acceptable place for protest. And the problem BLM is trying to address has reached critical mass.
The indiscriminate murder of POC must be addressed immediately.
Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)I just don't believe this particular form of protest is the correct one as it is putting the lives and safety people at risk.
JustAnotherGen
(31,777 posts) I would think the Order! Order! folks at DU would want to get right on getting that defined in the Constitution. I.E. An acceptable list of places and times to protest. I.E. On a go forward basis you may not ever march or stop traffic on the Edmund Pettus Bridge because it might inconvenience people. A good start? Who know? That's on them though - not my monkey and not my circus to be concerned with. Not yours either. 
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,283 posts)This reference is to a march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in March 1965.
The problem is that there were three marches across the Pettus Bridge that month. The photographs at Google Images are either not dated or, in many cases, incorrectly dated.
If I am not mistaken, on the first march, on Sunday, March 7, 1965, the marchers kept to the sidewalk. They made it across the bridge to the other side, where they were attacked.
Here is a photograph taken, I believe, on March 7, 1965. The marchers are all on one sidewalk.
It appears in this thread: "At age 19 he had helped organize the first lunch counter sit-in"
The article in which it appears says it was taken on Tuesday, March 9, but I think that label is incorrect.
John Lewis on Pettus Bridge, 45 Years Ago Today
The 7th was overcast, and everyone was wearing an overcoat. March 9 was warmer. The sun was out (you can see distinct shadows), and troopers were wearing short sleeves.
Two days later, on "Turnaround Tuesday," they marched again. This time the marchers turned around and went back across the bridge.
This is from March 9:
Finally, on March 21, the marchers made it across the bridge and kept going to Montgomery.
Here is a photograph taken on March 21, 1965:
In this March 21, 1965, photo, civil rights marchers cross the Alabama River on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala., toward the state capital of Montgomery.
AP
This is from March 21:
That march is going on because of a court order.
So when you talk about the Pettus Bridge, you have to specify which of three events you are talking about.
JustAnotherGen
(31,777 posts)My remarks were for katsy.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,283 posts)If you meant for your remarks to be private, it's a little late for that.
JustAnotherGen
(31,777 posts)If you have an issue with any of my posts or feel the need to chastise me or 'write down to me' - take it to Admin. I would take 'ORDERS' say from EarlG or Skinner. You though? You have no authority here.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,283 posts)
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people [font color=red]peaceably[/font] to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
When Donald Trump and his supporters [font color=red]peaceably[/font] assemble for a rally, they are exercising a right that is guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution.
When protesters react by setting things on fire and overturning cars, they are not exercising their rights. [font color=red]There is no Constitutional right to set things on fire and overturn cars.[/font]
When neo-Nazis [font color=red]peaceably[/font] assemble on the grounds of the California Capitol to wave their flags, they are exercising a right that is guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution.
When protesters attack the neo-Nazis by striking them with sticks and hitting them with rocks, they are being a violent mob.
It doesn't matter that the leader of the mob has two degrees, as clearly neither one of them required a course that involved logic or critical thinking as a prerequisite. When she says that the neo-Nazis have no free speech rights, she is letting all the world know that she is a complete idiot.
That ignorant fool hasn't the slightest grasp of what the Constitution stands for. All those hours she spent sitting in a classroom were completely wasted. She's as dumb as a post and happy to remain that way.
The Constitution says that protesters can assemble all they want, but they have to do so peaceably.
You can't protest in front of someone's house at 3 a.m. Noise ordinances easily meet Constitutional muster.
Similarly, you can't block access by emergency vehicles. That's not a peaceable assembly.
The building is the Newseum.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,777 posts)This farce of a trial in September in NJ? It's a farce. Mark my words - it's going to be AOK to block emergency vehicles and preventing children to get where they need to go.
If we are lucky we can move over to accommodate others, put our privilege in our back pocket and get over it. Once again those who do not understand will only notice that the right to peaceful protest has disappeared just when they need to use it. Thanks for posting the view from your world. Perfect example.
ripcord
(5,252 posts)BLM is trying to inconvenience as many people as possible but they also think for some reason these same people are going to support them? Talk about a disconnect.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Thank goodness traffic never backs up anyone, anywhere, for any reason other than from protests... else our concern would necessarily be applied consistently rather than only those times it fits our narrative.
And oh, the plethora of posts concerned about medical emergencies during L.A. rush hour traffic is deafening in its multitudes.
Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)That traffic is unavoidable, intentionally shutting down a highway is negligent at best.
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)It is the same as asking, "everyone is going to die anyway, so why do we care about murder?"
dembotoz
(16,784 posts)romanic
(2,841 posts)And it's not going to do jackshit now. People that continue to romanticize this tactic just can't see it.
Lance Bass esquire
(671 posts)For involuntary manslaughter if they impede a ambulance or a person from getting to a hospital in time then fair enuff.
If something like that happens they can't hide behind their right to protest.
Families should be able to sue in civil court also in wrong full deaths.
If you want to wear the big boy pants, you have to pay the tailor.
Can't have it both ways.
JMHO
heresAthingdotcom
(160 posts)was the issue life threatening?
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Le Bonheur Children's Hospital, and Memphis Police Department all said nobody died as a result of the protest.
Another picture that has been getting attention online involves a baby being passed over a divider on a bridge. That picture's exact location and date have not been confirmed. Therefore, we're not sure if it happened during the "Black Lives Matter" protest in Memphis.
St. Jude said it did not admit any babies nor did it have any heart transplant patients Sunday night or Monday morning.
http://www.wbtv.com/story/32418588/post-claiming-child-died-during-i-40-bridge-protest-debunked
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Should anyone, child or not, terminally ill or not, have their medical care blocked or delayed for the benefit of the folks who want to stand in the road?
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,283 posts)into a tale about a child who died as a result of the traffic blockage.
I for one am shocked to hear that not everything I read on the internet is true.
Where will this end?
Best wishes.
Good thread.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)... labeled as false by snopes.
Nothing I am aware of contradicts the story in the OP.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,283 posts)I can't keep track of them all. Then I get to go home and have them repeated to me all over again on TV.
I'd love to stay, but I HAVE TO WARRN EVEERYONE I NO ABOUT THE FEEMA CAMPS!!!1!1!!!111
Thanks.
mainer
(12,017 posts)because of a protest blocking an ambulance, that changes everything. Everything.
Every parent in the country, of every race, shudders at the possibility. And BLM loses the war of public opinion, just like that.
katsy
(4,246 posts)Emergency vehicles must be accommodated.
No hand wringing required. No death knell/drama necessary.
There is no either/or here. The city must make accomodations for all parties.
christx30
(6,241 posts)that don't want to sit in protest related traffic for 2 hours. To hell with JUST emergency vehicles. Your right to protest ends at the front of my car.
katsy
(4,246 posts)And shame on you for reducing this issue to whether or not it inconveniences you.
Protests aren't about your convenience. Police conduct is the issue and it fails miserably. No action is being taken in any equitable way. Nothing is being done and every day brings more suffering to minority communities. Protests bring the issues public in an urgent manner. Pressure must be applied thru peaceful, however inconvenient, protests.
If being inconvenienced is how your support is meted out, well, no big loss. Really.
christx30
(6,241 posts)and since I can't fix the problem you're having, I shouldn't be the one that has to go through it. Block the police garage. Make sure cop cars can't enter or exit. Block the entrance of the legislature and the courthouse. Make sure lawmakers can't get in or out. Put them under siege if you have to. But the every day people have absolutely no say in the matter shouldn't be blocked from their daily lives. It's like stopping my kids from playing because I can't get a raise at work.
I don't blame drivers if they park their bumper 3 inches off your legs and lean on the horn. Or push through your group. Or cheer when the cops use pepper spray against the group to get traffic flowing again. Because when you interrupt people's daily lives, you become the bad guys, and the police are seeing as the helpful people. If you can't see that, then I'm sorry things will never change for you.
katsy
(4,246 posts)First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. ~~~~ Niemöller
No I think what you wrote reminds me of that other saying: I'm not my brother's keeper so fuck off I have a life.
Nice.
christx30
(6,241 posts)I can help you. That's what is in my power to assist with. If you want to change the way police interact with people of color, I have absolutely no power to control it. You're targeting the wrong people with your protests. Inconvience the people that can make a difference.
I care about the issue. You have my vote on Election Day. But i don't support the tactics of BLM in the least.
If the Tea Party did this crap, you wouldn't be standing up defending the tactic. You'd be saying pretty much what I'm saying.
katsy
(4,246 posts)As well as racist's rights to free speech & protests.
And idk how you come to the conclusion that these protests belong to any one group.
Conversation is over.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)I think you have more power than you realize. You can go to city/county meetings, or meetings of your local police commission, or even just stay in touch with your local city officials on Facebook or Twitter. Or even interact with police officers that way. I had a week-long argument (albeit a polite one) with a chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police on Facebook last year pressuring them to make a statement about an officer who turned out to be really corrupt, eventually they caved and put up a grudging statement condemning his actions.
If I can do this, so can you, and more. I'm an illegal immigrant, so I can't vote and though I pay taxes I enjoy very few legal rights compared to you. Since I can't vote I don't appear on the register of electors, nobody in power cares about my political opinion because I am not allowed to make political donations, I don't even get called for surveys or anything. But I can still participate in the life of my community by showing up and holding a sign or speaking during a public comment period or writing a letter. Yeah, it's time-consuming and a drag, and it's a task I prefer to avoid because I have serious social anxiety and really do not enjoy talking to strangers, but I feel a responsibility to pay attention and participate when I can.
And if the Tea Party did this I would stand up to defend it. I loathe the Tea Party and most of what it stands for but I'm strongly supportive of their right to protest. Where I would draw the line is at destruction of property or armed/forcible occupation, eg when the Bundy family tried occupying that federal wildlife refuge in Oregon some months back. Destroying things (as sometimes happens here in Oakland when local protests are hijacked by our nutbar anarchist contingent not only pisses people off, but goes against the grain of our Constitution and is therefore an ineffective political maneuver. Infringing upon others' convenience, on the other hand, is provided for within the constitutional framework.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)That's practically the same as putting a bullet in someone's head.
You can do something about the problem - which I consider to be everybody's problem since we're all paying for compensation issued by courts in response to unjustifiable use of force, even if some think that it's only a problem of black people - by contacting your legislators and executives and demanding police reform.
If people are so wrapped up in their own concerns that they literally can't tell the difference, then those people are pretty poor citizens and I really don't care how they feel.
peace13
(11,076 posts)One that can accommodate, let's say 20,000. This would be a small group. It needs to be free.
When the Cavs won that big game last month the entire city was jammed for the party. People couldn't get to work and the ones that did couldn't get home from work. The Convention comes next week and people are working from home for the entire week and the roads will still be gridlocked. What should be done about that? Who might die because of this and who should we sue?
Life is full of inconveniences. Some are just more irritating than others.
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)If this happens again, don't be surprised if an emergency vehicle (or nervous civilians trying to get to the hospital) simply run the protestors over.
heresAthingdotcom
(160 posts)it inconveniences people and could put their lives at risk if you can't get through to the hospital....
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)BLM interrupted traffic and inconvenienced motorists until the police pulled them away. BTW, at BLM protests here in Oakland protesters liason with police to en ensure availability of a lane for ambulances, fire engines, and other urgent need drivers.
When the governor of a state orders something, their orders are implemented by a large organized staff backed up by the police and national guard forces, as needed. Not only that, but a public official like a governor has immunity from prosecution for bad policy decisions in most cases.
heresAthingdotcom
(160 posts)According to that officer, there were no child deaths at Le Bonheur Children’s Hospital on the night the incident purportedly took place. Moreover, the officer stated that when two critically ill individuals (a woman and a child) required transport to the hospital during the protest in question, police officers and protesters quickly cleared the road, and neither patient was delayed or denied passage. Police "double-checked" to ensure the story was false and were unable to find any incidents even remotely similar to the tale presented here.
http://www.snopes.com/black-lives-matter-protests-kill-girl-waiting-for-transplant-in-memphis/
peace13
(11,076 posts)..but Coulda, Woulda and Shoulda were kept waiting! : )
Thanks for the info. It will be a miracle if it stops the commentary.
Judi Lynn
(160,415 posts)