Is Protesting People's Homes Acceptable?

As long as you’re ok with me letting my dog loose, sure, protest away.

jgarden said:

If you or someone in your family has a pre-existing condition and insured under Obamacare, another conservative vote in the Supreme Court could have that coverage declared unconstitutional - any congressional politician who would subject their constituents to those risks is not deserving of respect!

Click to expand...

Government should not be in the business of Healthcare whether it's dictating what treatments are allowed, what must or must not be in a health insurance policy nor should the pay a penny in healthcare costs. .

AvilaSurfer said:

As long as you’re ok with me letting my dog loose, sure, protest away.

Click to expand...

I'm sure the protesters come with their own lawyers - in this age of litigation and phone cameras, your house could be one dog attack away from becoming their house!

thecolorsblend said:

A fair question.

Honestly, if the left is serious about abolishing the police then we need to reexamine our trespassing laws, self-defense laws and so forth. Because if local police departments are abolished then help is not on the way and the assumptions made by our current laws no longer apply. Therefore, citizens should be afforded greater liberty than they presently have in defending themselves and their property.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that makes sense.

If law enforcement is cancelled, won't it go back to frontier law?

Redwingfan9 said:

Government should not be in the business of Healthcare whether it's dictating what treatments are allowed, what must or must not be in a health insurance policy nor should the pay a penny in healthcare costs. .

Click to expand...

That's your opinion, but the reality is that in modern democracies with universal healthcare systems, those nation's spend far less of their GDP on medical care, have a better return on their investment and their governments are much less intrusive, than private insurance companies, when it comes to "dictating what treatments are allowed!"

As a nation, America is paying top dollar for its healthcare system while leaving millions of its citizens uninsured - the health of its citizens and their ability to afford medical care should not be ignored based on outdated conservative ideologies!

Michael Collum said:

Yeah, that makes sense.

If law enforcement is cancelled, won't it go back to frontier law?

Click to expand...

Given that Biden has stated repeatedly that he is opposed to defunding the police this is a non-issue that the Republicans are using as part of their "fear" campaign!

Yekcidmij said:

I think in every state the general answer is, no. If someone is stumbling down the street drunk and stumbles onto your property and passes out in the front yard, would you really be justified in shooting them? No, obviously not.

Though the laws will be state specific, and so you should look up the ones in your state, I think the general idea that you will find is is one of reciprocity where your response to a violation, or threat of violation, of your life or property has to be in proportion to the actual violation committed or threatened. So just because someone violates a property right doesn't mean you're justified in shooting them. Now if someone is armed and breaking into your house through the back window, it may be a different story. Typically, it seems that if it's a reasonable judgment that your life is threatened, you are permitted to act in self defense. Of course, this could be tricky depending on the actual circumstances one encounters. And so you're left asking, who determines what is "reasonable?" The D.A, a judge or a jury.

Click to expand...

Thanks for that.

Michael Collum said:

Yeah, that makes sense.

If law enforcement is cancelled, won't it go back to frontier law?

Click to expand...

If we're being reasonable, it probably should.

But there's nothing reasonable about the times in which we live.

thecolorsblend said:

If we're being reasonable, it probably should.

But there's nothing reasonable about the times in which we live.

Click to expand...

I guess it isn't reasonable at all.

even so, come Lord Jesus.

jgarden said:

Given that Biden has stated repeatedly that he is opposed to defunding the police this is a non-issue that the Republicans are using as part of their "fear" campaign!

Click to expand...

I tend to associate the defunding the police bit with BLM, maybe the root is different in the US.

Aldebaran said:

How do protesters harass someone at their home in the middle of the night within the law?

Click to expand...

Who said it was?

Michael Collum said:

I tend to associate the defunding the police bit with BLM, maybe the root is different in the US.

Click to expand...

Given that America's "visible minorities" will become the new majority by 2050, "defunding the police" means reinventing the role of the police given its longstanding adversarial role with the nation's "non-White" groups!

Part of the problem also stems from poverty where young people who are exposed to crime everyday eventually come to the realization that it's their only alternative to escape from the ghetto and achieve their "American Dream!!"

Aldebaran said:

How do protesters harass someone at their home in the middle of the night within the law?

Click to expand...

Stay on the sidewalk.

If politicians can keep their policies from affecting citizens in their own homes, then citizens ought not be able to protest politicians' homes. But that's not how it works. Everything politicians do touches people in their homes. If people can't escape the politicians, why should the politicians be able to escape the people?

iluvatar5150 said:

Stay on the sidewalk.

If politicians can keep their policies from affecting citizens in their own homes, then citizens ought not be able to protest politicians' homes. But that's not how it works. Everything politicians do touches people in their homes. If people can't escape the politicians, why should the politicians be able to escape the people?

Click to expand...

Can we protest politicians' wombs, too?

usexpat97 said:

Can we protest politicians' wombs, too?

Click to expand...

If you can find a politician in utero, have at it.

jgarden said:

I'm sure the protesters come with their own lawyers - in this age of litigation and phone cameras, your house could be one dog attack away from becoming their house!

Click to expand...

Doubtful

WrappedUpinHisLove3 said:

I

I live in England and we have the expression here that an Englishman home is their castle. I wholeheartedly go along with this. I don't even answer the door to door step traders, scammers, midnight strangers in distress. No appointment, no entry! We British are private , introverted people and a crowd protesting on my property would be my worst nightmare

Click to expand...

All property should have moats around them and archers. Especially in Britain.

jgarden said:

Given that America's "visible minorities" will become the new majority by 2050, "defunding the police" means reinventing the role of the police given its longstanding adversarial role with the nation's "non-White" groups!

Part of the problem also stems from poverty where young people who are exposed to crime everyday eventually come to the realization that it's their only alternative to escape from the ghetto and achieve their "American Dream!!"

Click to expand...

I can see that.

jgarden said:

That's your opinion, but the reality is that in modern democracies with universal healthcare systems, those nation's spend far less of their GDP on medical care, have a better return on their investment and their governments are much less intrusive, than private insurance companies, when it comes to "dictating what treatments are allowed!"

As a nation, America is paying top dollar for its healthcare system while leaving millions of its citizens uninsured - the health of its citizens and their ability to afford medical care should not be ignored based on outdated conservative ideologies!

Click to expand...

It's true they spend less. They also offer less service. Canada and the other western democracies have massive waiting lists for basic diagnostic testing and surgery. It's easy to cut costs when you offer slow service.

Redwingfan9 said:

It's true they spend less. They also offer less service. Canada and the other western democracies have massive waiting lists for basic diagnostic testing and surgery. It's easy to cut costs when you offer slow service.

Click to expand...

According to the CIA Factbook, Canada, which has a universal healthcare system, ranks 6th in terms of average life expectancy at 83,3 years.
America, the nation that shares 5,250 miles of common border with Canada, ranks 45th with an average age expectancy of 80.3 years (tied with the Turks and Caicos Islands).

In terms of infant mortality, Canada ranks at 83rd with 4.3 deaths per 1,000 (tied with Cuba and Poland).
America ranks 174th with an infant mortality rate of 5.3 per 1,000 (tied with the United Arab Eremites).
Apparently having so-called less service, massive waiting lists and slow service doesn't translate into having decreased life expectancy and increased infant mortality rates - which both serve as measures to evaluate the success of a nation's healthcare system.

Prior to 1970 when Canada introduced universal healthcare coverage, it had approximately the same life expectancy and infant mortality rates as the US - the gap between the 2 nations has only occurred within the last 50 years and while American medical costs have skyrocketing!

Before the Pandemic, Canadians traveled extensively in the US and were aware of the relative strengths and weaknesses of both healthcare systems - there is no popular support in Canada to revert to the more expensive, less effective American model!