EDHS Contemporary World Affairs

Beccawicks · Senior Member

Blue Man Group-Conventions Gone Awry

Danika · Veteran Member

Yes! Everyone has a right to free speech! I understand if the protesters were getting out of hand they would have to use force to control the situation, but using tear gas to prevent protesting is unacceptable.

KirstenHarms · Veteran Member

They most certianly are! Tear gas is just outrageous and uncalled for, if the people were getting that out of hand they could use a milder type of force.

cdavila · Veteran Member

Free speech is a right that everyone has. Tear gas isn't necessary to simply break up a protest...

alliestoom · Senior Member

a 72 year old nun? come on national guard was that really necessary? protests have been much worse than this and nothing like this has happened. of course they are abusing their power, this is just redonkulous >:[ it's just because it's days before a major political event.

agghhh minnesota!

cupcakeshauna · Veteran Member

They did have some of their rights abused and re-acted way out of hand because freedom of speech is in the Constitution!

Matt. mhm · Veteran Member

Free speech is fine. But if the protestors are getting outta hand, you have to do something about it right? Even though they could have handled a few people differently, *hint *hint the nun. But who knows how these people were behaving, if they were outta hand. Its gotta stop sooner or later.

patrickisoverrated · Senior Member

this is only one side of the story
the national guard wouldn't launch a defense like this unprovoked-they know better
both sides need to be heard in order to form an opinion concerning this matter.

KSF{Kodies} · Senior Member

The people have the right to protest to a certain extent. when the protesting leads to chaos and people becoming out of control that freedom can be taken away until the protest can be controlled. if the national gaurd of minnesota felt it was necessary to control the protestors the way they did due to the behavior of the people then they can take the right to protest away until the situation calms down.

rtheisen · Senior Member

People have a right to free speach and to protest, but those rights end when they jeopordize the rights of convention goers to attend the event safely. Protest correctly, and you should be treated correctly. If the protesters were being safe and just expressing their opinions, then shame on the National Guard. But like patrickisoverrated said, we don't know what the National Gaurd saw.

meganrizzo · Veteran Member

The National Guard was just doing their job, trying to protect the people going to the convention and the political people. If they arrested that many people it seems to me that there might have been a good reason behind it that we are just not hearing about. I don't know, there are crazy protesters out there.

Sabrinaaaa! · Veteran Member

It was mentioned that the protesters crossed the barrier. Of course the National Guard had the right to do what they did. The people protesting knew the limit line and still crossed it. I think it's great to know The National Guard is fulfilling their duty.

natamakove · Veteran Member

Yes, they are. It, of course, can be a hard time controlling the crowd and at the same time not violating their constitutional rights

Beccawicks · Senior Member

I agree that the National Guard has to control protesters who are getting out of hand. However, to those who said that they are protecting convention goers, the convention had not started when this occured. Also, raiding homes to prevent protests absolutely go against constitutional rights. No search without a warrant? Thats a pretty basic one. The article says that there was out of control protests, however, several journalists who were simply reporting were among those tear gassed. Arrests are one thing. Uncontrolled gassing is not.

coolkidchaney · Veteran Member

Everyone has freedom of speech but it is hard controlling a size of that crowd.

cstair23 · Senior Member

It is definetly accurate that the national guard blew the situation out of proportion. However what would have happened if they didnt make these preemptive strikes? The fact of the matter is that they reacted to the situation that they thought was best and unfortutantely that reaction broke some basic human rights. As consequence they re catching a media firestorm.

davidtvelasco · Veteran Member

If the crowds protesting begins to escalate into a mobs rioting and cross the police line then the police have the right to use tear gas to disperse the crowd in the interest of public safety, although in this case it seems like the police got cared away.

-- Edited by davidtvelasco at 05:48, 2008-09-05

Janell · Veteran Member

We do have freedom of expression but if they were breaking the law or being violent the Minnesota National Guard had reason to intervene. Tear gas was a little much, i mean if there were 72 year old nuns at this protest, i can't imagine how out of hand they were getting. I believe in protesting but i also don't think it should be abused.

nicholeoli · Veteran Member

The Minnesota National Guard was abusing their power, freedom of speech is a constitutional right and for them to tell people what they can and can't say then that is a violation! And all this violence is rediculous! seriously, because you are givin athority doesnt mean you have to abuse it!

CharlieBurling · Veteran Member

I do agree that we don't know both sides of the story. However, I doubt it was approaching "riot status" where people's lives or well-being might be in danger. I think the National Guard did overreact.

Miles · Newbie

Some crowd control is better than nun.

JoeTwaddle · Member

I think the nation gaurd did the right thing in handling the protesters. They obviously disobeyed a rule by rossing a limit line, therefore breaking a rule that was placed at the convention.

Scottster · Senior Member

i believe that a certain amount of these actions are necessary, but no matter how much you attempt to only do it to this point, it will always get out of hand, someone will always take these things too far, look at the democratic convention in 1968 Chicago, things always get taken too far. the constitution was created to allow people these sort of rights, but radical protestors, like abbie hoffman, also make the cops look like the bad guys when in fact its not just the cops that make these things happen, if they would keep it controlled, then these measures wouldnt be necessary and 72 year-old nuns wouldnt be getting arrested and people wouldnt be getting hurt, so to an extent, yes, i do believe what the police did was right, but they crossed a line and then things got out of hand, i.e. teargas,raids,etc...so inb this case, the cops were the "bad-guys" but they also have to take measures to protect their own lives, they are family men just like the rest of us