Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
28 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
81-year-old McDonald's worker Jose arrested during peaceful protest in Time Square, NYC (Original Post) Omaha Steve Sep 2014 OP
I fully support sabbat hunter Sep 2014 #1
where is the traffic exemption in the bill of rights? questionseverything Sep 2014 #5
Peaceably to assemble--when you block traffic, you are disturbing the peace. MADem Sep 2014 #6
and in ferguson they told them they had to keep walking questionseverything Sep 2014 #10
I am not endorsing the Ferguson thing, but police were probably relying on a local ordinance MADem Sep 2014 #13
according to your thinking questionseverything Sep 2014 #14
Who was "blocking" the sidewalk? MADem Sep 2014 #15
Freedom of speech doesn't allow a person to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. cheapdate Sep 2014 #9
because sabbat hunter Sep 2014 #24
Well aware? I think the purpose of blocking traffic WAS to get arrested. MADem Sep 2014 #8
I love this picture. xmas74 Sep 2014 #18
Me too--it's a human rights issue, and he's an icon! nt MADem Sep 2014 #20
I think a few have forgotten that with some protests xmas74 Sep 2014 #21
Look at all the police around him like he is some kind of dangerous criminal. SummerSnow Sep 2014 #2
He IS a dangerous criminal! Scootaloo Sep 2014 #3
How dare he, the nerve. SummerSnow Sep 2014 #12
Yet Criminals around the block demand 600%, and are protected . orpupilofnature57 Sep 2014 #4
+1 nt Live and Learn Sep 2014 #25
kick Liberal_in_LA Sep 2014 #7
It's a strategy called "Civil Disobedience" yallerdawg Sep 2014 #11
Precisely! nt MADem Sep 2014 #16
Powerful image, I hope it grows legs! Deadbeat Republicans Sep 2014 #17
What a great face marions ghost Sep 2014 #19
Why are union workshops exempt from SeaTac's $15 minimum wage law? garf Sep 2014 #22
What does this have to do with the post under which you're commenting? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Sep 2014 #26
k&r rbrnmw Sep 2014 #23
He is awesome! littlemissmartypants Sep 2014 #27
Cheers! Laffy Kat Sep 2014 #28

sabbat hunter

(6,825 posts)
1. I fully support
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 01:15 PM
Sep 2014

the protest and the workers getting higher wages, however when you protest and block traffic, etc you run the risk of getting arrested. I think that Jose was well aware of this risk and I think that is a look of proud defiance on his face in this picture.

questionseverything

(9,631 posts)
5. where is the traffic exemption in the bill of rights?
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 03:47 PM
Sep 2014

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 peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

MADem

(135,425 posts)
6. Peaceably to assemble--when you block traffic, you are disturbing the peace.
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:03 PM
Sep 2014

You are inconveniencing and distressing and preventing other citizens from going about their business.

That said, 81 year old Jose is the Rosa Parks of fast food workers.

They knew what they were doing, and this arrest lets everyone else, across the country, know what they are doing too.

You think anyone would have covered a picketing of a Mickey D's in NYC without any arrests?

MADem

(135,425 posts)
13. I am not endorsing the Ferguson thing, but police were probably relying on a local ordinance
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 05:26 PM
Sep 2014

against "loitering."

The difference between this action and Ferguson is as follows--those Mickey Dee's people blocked access because they WANTED to be arrested. See what happened? No one would know who the hell 81 year old Jose was if he stood on the picket line with a sign. No one would see him, and if they picked him out of a picture of a larger group of demonstrators, they wouldn't peg him for an octogenarian.

Now his face is seen round the world. His name and age--and where he works to make ends meet--are known to all. That was the point and the purpose of his civil disobedience.

In Ferguson, the community just wanted to protest a blatant, immediate and specific injustice--the murder of a teen by a police on their streets. They weren't interested in civil disobedience. They wanted to make it clear that they felt that police overreach had come to a crisis point. The police used selective enforcement of local laws to break up the demonstrations, and they also used violence.

The two incidents aren't the same at all, not in purpose, and not in execution. They both had a "fight the power" theme, but that's as far as the similarity goes.

questionseverything

(9,631 posts)
14. according to your thinking
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 06:12 PM
Sep 2014

wouldn't blocking sidewalk traffic disturb the peace too?

so no freedom to assemble on the sidewalk,not on the street,certainly not on private property without owners permission,not on public property without a permit

so exactly where can American citizens freely assemble?

MADem

(135,425 posts)
15. Who was "blocking" the sidewalk?
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 06:17 PM
Sep 2014

Standing on the sidewalk behind an organized picket isn't the same as blocking it, so your inference fails.

People are not permitted to stand in the streets. They will get ticketed for even jaywalking, for goodness' sake. If you're in the street, you'd better be crossing at a crosswalk or you're in violation of the law.

cheapdate

(3,811 posts)
9. Freedom of speech doesn't allow a person to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:13 PM
Sep 2014

The right to peaceably assemble doesn't allow protestors to gather anywhere, anytime, without any limitations whatsoever.

The Bill of Rights imposes (or is supposed to) a very high burden on the government for restricting covered activities. But there are and always will be reasonable limits. These freedoms are not absolute and they have never been understood that way.

The arguments over where the limits should be have been occurring for over 200 years and will always continue.

You can't block the streets -- not without being subject to arrest.

That said, I support street protests, these protestors, and their goals 100%.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
8. Well aware? I think the purpose of blocking traffic WAS to get arrested.
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:05 PM
Sep 2014

Who would have given a shit otherwise?

The visual of an older dude, shoulders back, dignified, in handcuffs is powerful.

It's more powerful when you learn how OLD the guy is.

xmas74

(29,658 posts)
21. I think a few have forgotten that with some protests
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 07:45 PM
Sep 2014

you chooses specific people for the front line to purposely be arrested. You want sympathetic people with clean records so their stories will capture the attention of the media. His story and his picture did just that.

It's a great picture and a great backstory.

yallerdawg

(16,104 posts)
11. It's a strategy called "Civil Disobedience"
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 04:32 PM
Sep 2014

Thoreau, King, Gandhi and Mandela were all proponents.

Now we include Jose!

 

garf

(14 posts)
22. Why are union workshops exempt from SeaTac's $15 minimum wage law?
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 07:47 PM
Sep 2014

.I don't understand. It was unions who got this law passed in the first place. Why are union workshops exempt from it?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-no-calamity-yet-as-seatac-wash-adjusts-to-15-minimum-wage/2014/09/05/d12ba922-3503-11e4-9e92-0899b306bbea_story.html

"Those who opposed the $15 wage in SeaTac and Seattle admit there has been no calamity so far. Paul Guppy, vice president for research at the free-market Washington Policy Center, said SeaTac is a “boutique” case because of its size. Airport workers have been left out for now because of a lawsuit, and union workplaces are exempt, so only about 1,600 got raises."

Erich Bloodaxe BSN

(14,733 posts)
26. What does this have to do with the post under which you're commenting?
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 09:00 PM
Sep 2014

Generally speaking, when you post a comment under another one, it should bear some actual relation to the comment under which you posted. If you wanted to talk about your own subject, you need to post enough actual replies to other people first, and then you'll be given the ability to post your own 'top level' comments.

As to your question, no idea, but I'd guess that most unionized places already pay better. If they didn't, all of those union workers would be quitting to go work at the places that now pay $15/hr.

(Edit: Yes, I do see the $15/hr part, btw. I just don't feel SeaTac has much relation to McDonald's workers in NYC.)

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»81-year-old McDonald's wo...