Are you ok with people protesting past curfew?

Curfews are not a feature of a democratic society. They’re unjustifiable authoritarian acts.
Breaking a curfew is a good, moral thing to do.

Yes. They should be at home IN BED!

It’s the law.

@hmmmmmm You make it sound like curfews are never ok. You obviously have never lived through a Hurricane that takes out electricity for miles.

@Yellowdog Do you think if the curfew is very early people my legitimately have an argument that it’s too strict and challenge it? Or, they should just accept whatever limits the city doles out?

@JLeslie: “You make it sound like curfews are never ok.”

That is correct. Curfews are never ok. And they especially wrong when used to strengthen a police state and criminalize dissent.

@JLeslie: “I remember the first time I heard I was living under a curfew I though it was so odd to be happening in America, but in very short order I understood why we had one.”

Maybe you could explain your comfort with curfews overall. Then make sure to explain your comfort with protest curfews.

Q (@JLeslie): Are you ok with people protesting past curfew?

A (@Yellowdog): Yes. They should be at home IN BED!

??

Civil disobedience is a matter of perspective. To my way of thinking, (peaceful) protesting in the dark is stupid. But then, large congregations of people roaming the streets in the midst of a pandemic is also low on my list of viable tactics. I have friends who were busy marching. I’m sadly puzzled that so many have hope.

@hmmmmmm When there is a total black out of electricity the roads are incredibly dark at night. In suburbia if people drive on these blacked out roads they easily can blow through an intersection, because there is no light, not traffic light, no nothing. Even some drivers who see the intersection don’t know the laws for intersections when the traffic light doesn’t work, and if they are on a main road they think they don’t have to stop. During the day there is lots of traffic stopping at the intersections, but at night it’s easy to just miss it. The possibility of a deadly crash on some of the faster roads is very real.

Plus, after the hurricane there are downed branches and all sorts of things in the middle of the roads that you can miss in the pitch black.

A person just walking at night can trip on something that was blown into a sidewalk or road, because they don’t see it.

There are downed electrical wires, and if they become live, or are live, a person is more likely to miss it in the dark and get electrocuted. Often, they purposely turn of power across an entire section of a grid of the city has concerns about this.

There are almost always some injuries or deaths after a storm that are considered deaths related to the storm, because someone did something unsafe even when the storm itself is no longer there as a threat. The aftermath is still dangerous. We see accidents, fires from candles, carbon monoxide poisonings from generators, car accidents, etc. The state does everything it can to reduce the risk to the public.

Lastly, if there is any looting going on, it’s usually at night.

People are too ignorant on their own to realize how dangerous the roads are in the dark of night unless they have experienced it before, and Florida every time there is a hurricane has a lot of new people experiencing it. Putting in the curfew is for their own safety and the safety of others. The curfews are just during the dark hours.

With protest curfews I already explained it. It’s for the safety of the people protesting, and protecting the community in general. The police need to be concerned with the safety, and especially with the looting and vandalism going on with these people invading the protests it’s even more of a concern. A lot of these rioting people are being messaged by White Supremacists, and they could really be dangerous. By protesting in large numbers 24 hours a day the police need to increase patrolling day and night. In some cities there are parks that are closed during dark hours all year long. It’s the same concept—safety.

Some cities have more of a concern than others. In some places they may not see a need for curfews, and that’s fine.

Some places I think the protesting would fade late at night anyway, but because there is a curfew some protestors see fit to spite the curfew and be out there when they would not have bothered if there was no curfew. It’s like spiting you’re parents when the rule they put in place was to protect you, and then you have to cause them worry. They don’t need to put a curfew if you just handle yourself in a wise way to begin with.

Around the country curfews are lifted when they are no longer necessary. Watch what really happens rather than just being afraid or pissed off.

During the pandemic, of course they should observe social distancing rules and the curfew.
At the same time though, they should also be outside en masse and protest.
You have two valid causes in direct conflict with each other, and you have to decide, which of them takes precedence.
For me, the protests do.

What I don’t understand is how our elected leaders rewrite rules to accommodate the protesters. I heard of two places, one in Contra Costa county CA and the other in VA where the elected officials have rewritten the Covid-19 rules so the protesters aren’t violating them. Example: You are limited to personal gatherings of no more than 10 people, unless you are protesting and then it goes up to 100 people. So I guess if you are protesting then you are at less risk of spreading Covid-19? The curfew issue is even more bizarre. The curfews were put in place because of the protests that got carried away!. To suddenly change them to accommodate the protesters is completely loony. Either you have a curfew and you enforce it or you just scrap the entire thing.

@seawulf575 They are changing and adjusting to accommodate the situation. It’s to try to give clear instruction to the people and the authorities under an extreme circumstance. That’s a good thing I think. Government just digging its heals in is as bad as protesters completely disregarding what might be a safety issue. Government and the people should be working together.

@ragingloli I think both can be achieved within reason. A lot people in the protests now in America are wearing masks, not a lot of chanting, and some distancing, although still closer than ideal. Finally cable stations like MSNBC changed their message from “how courageous people were to take to the streets during covid” (which really pissed me off) to “people should wear masks and try to distance while protesting.”

@ragingloli Makes the most sense.

@seawulf575 I was just going to add that most cities that are opening up aren’t putting limits of ten outdoors, it’s more about distancing outside. Most of the limits are indoors. I’m not sure in your state what the situation is. Maybe they were slacking changing those rules anyway.

The 10–50-100 doesn’t make a ton of sense without knowing how many people it is within a certain square footage. 100 people spread out across a football stadium is different than 100 people in Applebee’s.

People need to use their brains, but we know a lot people don’t.

@janbb Still try to be safe though right? Masks? Some space between people if possible. Or, do you think just throw caution to the wind for the cause?

@JLeslie I think it’s an individual choice. Yes, try to stay safe but from what I’m seeing it is impossible to physically distance even if people are wearing masks. Being older, I’ve decided not to protest physcially but to donate money and to fight systemic racism in the ways that I can.. But I agree with loli that there are two conflicting valid causes. Unfortunately, the protests will probably cause an uptick in cases but so will partying in the Lake of the Ozarks or at Daytona Beach.

If I lived in an area where there were protests, and the curfew was something reasonable like 8, I’d think that by 8 or 8:30 or 9, my protesting would be done and I’d want to be in the house. Especially if there was looting and rock throwing and stuff like what was going on in NYC. I wouldn’t want to be out in that.

If it was after a storm, there might be looting gong on too, so I’d want to be in the house guarding my stuff.

If civil unrest is going on, and cops are stressed out and overworked, something might happen. Yes we can sue, yes the cop might lose his job (if you could prove what the cop did), but nothing takes the place of your health.

Just to address the curfew question. It’s not an issue I know enough about the efficacy of, so I reserve judgment on that.

@JLeslie I don’t see it that way. They are kow-towing to the mob mentality. They are trying to justify why they won’t actually take action against someone who has violated their precious Covid orders. Is it a matter or rights? The Constitution does allow for the right to protest. But then, it gives the people the right to exercise their religion too. Yet everyone thought it was in the public’s best interest to curtail that right because of the spread of Covid-19. So why is protesting any different? Maybe I should just gather as many people as I can together for a bash and call it a protest, what do you think?

In my area, on FB group posts, people are upset about high schoolers not able to have a graduation ceremony. Some are saying they should have the ceremony and call it a protest and it should be ok. It’s similar to what you’re saying, @Yellowdog.

@JLeslie: “When there is a total black out of electricity the roads are incredibly dark at night. In suburbia if people drive on these blacked out roads they easily can blow through an intersection, because there is no light, not traffic light, no nothing. Even some drivers who see the intersection don’t know the laws for intersections when the traffic light doesn’t work, and if they are on a main road they think they don’t have to stop. During the day there is lots of traffic stopping at the intersections, but at night it’s easy to just miss it. The possibility of a deadly crash on some of the faster roads is very real.”

I live in a part of the country that loses electricity quite often – sometimes up to a week at a time. Somehow, we’re able to not have curfews and everyone is fine.

But more importantly, you’re saying that things are dangerous, so rather than warn people, you are advocating for curfews. There is a huge difference here, even while we’re not discussing the issue of curfews and public dissent. You’re advocating handing more power to the police in an attempt to keep people safe. There is much to be said about where these lines should be drawn and how you happen to be happy to hand over your rights to the state for supposed safety. I think you need to figure out what you’re arguing here.

@JLeslie: “Plus, after the hurricane there are downed branches and all sorts of things in the middle of the roads that you can miss in the pitch black.

A person just walking at night can trip on something that was blown into a sidewalk or road, because they don’t see it.”

I can hardly tell if you’re being serious. You do realize that your weather-related curfews aren’t solving a problem, right? If the public were forced to go skipping around at night while there were no traffic lights and wires down, then simply lifting that enforcement would be a solution. But since people are not forced to go out at night after a storm, all you are proposing is that the state is justified in implementing a police state because if they disregard warnings, there may be a few people who get hurt.

This logic can be used to curtail or eliminate every single human right we feel are important. Every single one. This brings us to the real issue, and why we’re discussing curfews in the context of public dissent.

You realize that curfews have historically been used for this purpose, right? That is the whole point of a curfew. Watch the hoards of “peaceful” people getting corralled into places they can’t escape right after curfews are enacted, where the police beat people with clubs, spray them, tear gas them, and arrest them. When faced with the question of why this is happening to “peaceful” protesters, the excuse is that these people were breaking the law (curfew).

To argue for more police power at this time seems especially absurd. These protests against police brutality (especially against black people) have shown the world how much of a problem police are. Not only are people raising their voice against injustice, they are allowing police violence to be seen by everyone.

You are happy with giving the police more power to criminalize the population, and that is a problem. You are advocating for the squashing of dissent and violence against people. Curfews = violence, and you should be ashamed for trying to justify them.

So, not only do I feel that you have insufficiently dealt with the “safety vs rights” concept – you have dug in on a particularly egregious example of an injustice in advocating for handing significantly more power to the police and state.

The police are a problem. A solution to that problem isn’t a larger police presence, more police power, turning the National Guard on its citizens, and criminalizing dissent. Figure out what side you’re on.

@hmmmmmm In my state, it is the Governor who calls a State of Emergency in cases of hurricanes or blizzards so that emergency workers can clear the roads, fix downed power lines, etc. Nothing to do with the police except that it may be state troopers who block off the motorways. I don’t have any problem in those situations staying home so that the greater good can be effected.

To me, this seems irrelevant to the issue of curfews to stop rioters which as I said above, I reserve judgment on.

@janbb: “To me, this seems irrelevant to the issue of curfews to stop rioters which as I said above, I reserve judgment on.”

I think to some extent it is irrelevant, and was surprised that @JLeslie mentioned it. But since @JLeslie used weather-related curfews as justification for her base level of comfort with the concept, I do think it was worth addressing. The issue of governments using curfews to crush movements and dissent are so vile a concept, we should expect immediate pushback from the population. In @JLeslie‘s case, it appears that she has been primed to accept curfews being used as a weapon against the public due by the frequent, less-threatening weather-related ones.

I’m only saying I have seen curfews come and go, and they are always removed as quickly as possible, and I see no reason to assume my county officials or governor is using a curfew for some sort of oppressive reason to control the population with police or military force forever more.

It’s ALL safety related. Hurricane, COVID19, looting, rioting, it’s all safety.

I’m not arguing for more police, I’m arguing the police are still an important part of our society, and sure police brutality needs to be seriously addressed, but if some maniac comes into a crowd shooting, or if someone is robbing your neighbor’s house, or if you hear a girl screaming help me, I assume you are going to call the police? Or, what are you going to do?

@janbb I saw the service for Floyd, and although it didn’t have hundreds of people, which I’m sure easily could have been the case, the people were not spaced when there were plenty of empty seats. I’ve had two relatives of friends die the last two months and no more than ten were able to attend. My governors baby was born, and I’m sure he could have used his position to be by his wife’s side, but she delivered alone.

I see some protests where people are spacing themselves and a lot of people wearing masks. They can do it. I just think it’s important we don’t make it “brave” to protest and have no concern about the pandemic. I have Republicans all around me saying “I’m not afraid, I don’t need a mask, if you’re afraid stay home.”

Last I heard no one at the Ozarks party developed C19, so that’s good.

I grew up in an area prone to extreme weather events, severe thunderstorms, tornadoes, ice storms in the winter, that would down trees, down powerlines, scatter debris all over and knock out power for days at a time. Somehow we all managed just fine without curfews. Curfews are nothing more than a shallow justification for the state to assert even more authority over the people.

@Darth_Algar I’ve lived through bad blizzards and ice storms, and lived in tornado places, and they are nothing like a hurricane. Not all hurricanes cause curfews, and the curfews are in very specific areas that are affected. It depends what is happening in the aftermath of that specific storm.

@JLeslie

And hurricanes are nothing like protests. But my point was that curfews, whatever the justification for them, accomplish nothing.

@Darth_Algar Just curious, were you ok with the government closing businesses, churches, and stadiums to slow the transmission of COVID?