“Oh shit those guys know their rights and are armed, I’m reconsidering my power tripping. :F”
It’s very ironic that basically that Black Panthers were the reason for gun control laws. That, like someone said today, the only way to make things happen in the US is when the rich white people become utterly scared.
I’m going to be honest, I used to feel that exact way, but then looking at the way the cops treated unarmed BLM protestors vs. the way they treated armed Proud Boys counter-protests made me feel… a little bit less clear about that feeling. I wouldn’t call it a clear feeling one way or the other, and I’m appalled at the idea of crossfire at what ought to be a non-violent protest, but it’s hard for me to take an absolutely pacifistic stance anymore.
Providing material aid to voters in line can be construed as electioneering. Even an unlabeled water bottle. It sucks, but it keeps the harrasing threatening bully types away from voter queue lines.
If water bottles are such a hot button issue we need to be discussing the mental fitness of adults who are unable to think ahead or bring their own supplies.
Do you support or condemn interfering with election processes?
Edit: I noticed no one is answering the question above.
In other countries going to vote is a sub-15 min task, you can do it on your way to work/school. in the US it can be a multi-hour experience which is designed to be as difficult as possible.
More older people vote than young people, so perhaps the whataboutism question here should be, “why do you want to torture older people?”
handing people water while in line does not support a specific party
So, you’re right on the merits, but you’re wrong on the political strategy.
Long lines are a deliberate consequence of under-supplied polling locations. And under-supplied polling locations are a result of disenfranchisement efforts by incumbents. By subverting the intent of the incumbents to discourage voting, you are de facto in support of anti-incumbency candidates and are therefore breaking the spirit of the law.
You’ll note that the long-line polling locations also tend to be over-policed and over-surveilled precisely for the purpose of identifying edge-cases that violate the law and prosecuting it. Neighborhoods with richer and more incumbent-friendly voters tend to have a police presence more fixated on hedging out anti-incumbent protesters and keeping out people not registered to vote in these wealthy enclaves.
I just don’t agree with your assertion that voter disenfranchisement efforts are necessarily a function of an incumbent party. There are many politicians who want people to vote even if it’s not for them.
There are many politicians who want people to vote even if it’s not for them.
I’ve never met a politician that’s spent money or resources turning out voters for the opposition.
I’ll spot you that plenty of politicians are blasie about losing or so overconfident that they don’t see their defeat coming. Consequently, they don’t work to undermine election integrity deliberately. But any instance in which a politician or party seeks to disenfranchise the voting pool, it is consistently in defense of their partisan self-interest.
Joke aside, giving homeless people isn’t actually illegal right? That’d be almost as insane as half the stuff the US has inacted lately.
Edit: oh wow, that is disgunstingly inhumane and I have no idea how someone can support policy that bans charity and still sleep at night.
Armed to deter cops? Wouldn’t that give them more reasons though?
Cops don’t like fair fights. And they really don’t like it when people are carrying guns that will send bullets straight through their lvl III plates.
“Oh shit those guys know their rights and are armed, I’m reconsidering my power tripping. :F”
It’s very ironic that basically that Black Panthers were the reason for gun control laws. That, like someone said today, the only way to make things happen in the US is when the rich white people become utterly scared.
On that note…
Unfortunately, it probably doesn’t take many Brian Thomspons before Republicans start saying, huh, y’know, maybe gun bans are okay after all…
I’m going to be honest, I used to feel that exact way, but then looking at the way the cops treated unarmed BLM protestors vs. the way they treated armed Proud Boys counter-protests made me feel… a little bit less clear about that feeling. I wouldn’t call it a clear feeling one way or the other, and I’m appalled at the idea of crossfire at what ought to be a non-violent protest, but it’s hard for me to take an absolutely pacifistic stance anymore.
Uh, there might be another reason for that difference. In fact that difference might explain why the Proud Boys felt comfortable packing.
deleted by creator
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/04/texas-volunteers-fined-feeding-homeless-heat
https://reason.com/2013/03/29/feeding-the-homeless-without-permission/
It’s legal if you do it for Jesus. Not if you do it because of your heart.
deleted by creator
Depends on the area but it certainly is illegal in some places.
Edited to add, to be clear it’s not really laws that say “you cannot feed homeless people”. But that is how they are enforced.
it’s illegal where I am in the USA to give housed people a bottle of water standing for hours in the direct sunlight if they’re in line to vote.
The hope is that will disincentive people to vote.
I would get in the habit of carrying cases of bottled water past lines of voters and tripping.
Yes, electioneering is illegal.
and which party is the dehydration party again?
Providing material aid to voters in line can be construed as electioneering. Even an unlabeled water bottle. It sucks, but it keeps the harrasing threatening bully types away from voter queue lines.
no, it does not. this is a false narrative designed to obfuscate voter suppression.
deleted by creator
If water bottles are such a hot button issue we need to be discussing the mental fitness of adults who are unable to think ahead or bring their own supplies.
Do you support or condemn interfering with election processes?
Edit: I noticed no one is answering the question above.
Some voters in Houston were stuck in excessively long lines and were forced to wait more than six hours to cast their ballots.
Stupid voters should have known better. It’s their own fault.
If you need to wait in line to vote maybe your country is already a failed democracy, at which point let the people get their fucking water
In other countries going to vote is a sub-15 min task, you can do it on your way to work/school. in the US it can be a multi-hour experience which is designed to be as difficult as possible.
More older people vote than young people, so perhaps the whataboutism question here should be, “why do you want to torture older people?”
What in the strawman? You are fucked in the head
Only by the stupid.
There was literally harassment in this presidential election the fuck you on about?
https://bridgingdivides.princeton.edu/analysis-threat-and-harassment-data-2024-election
Those laws exist to suppress voters.
Wait, what the fuck are you even talking about? Do you know what electioneering is?
in general it’s telling people who to vote for
in context it’s telling people who to vote for while in line
the “joke” I was making is that handing people water while in line does not support a specific party
So, you’re right on the merits, but you’re wrong on the political strategy.
Long lines are a deliberate consequence of under-supplied polling locations. And under-supplied polling locations are a result of disenfranchisement efforts by incumbents. By subverting the intent of the incumbents to discourage voting, you are de facto in support of anti-incumbency candidates and are therefore breaking the spirit of the law.
You’ll note that the long-line polling locations also tend to be over-policed and over-surveilled precisely for the purpose of identifying edge-cases that violate the law and prosecuting it. Neighborhoods with richer and more incumbent-friendly voters tend to have a police presence more fixated on hedging out anti-incumbent protesters and keeping out people not registered to vote in these wealthy enclaves.
I just don’t agree with your assertion that voter disenfranchisement efforts are necessarily a function of an incumbent party. There are many politicians who want people to vote even if it’s not for them.
I’ve never met a politician that’s spent money or resources turning out voters for the opposition.
I’ll spot you that plenty of politicians are blasie about losing or so overconfident that they don’t see their defeat coming. Consequently, they don’t work to undermine election integrity deliberately. But any instance in which a politician or party seeks to disenfranchise the voting pool, it is consistently in defense of their partisan self-interest.
https://www.wyso.org/news/2024-04-22/dayton-man-feeding-homeless-arrested-charged-for-giving-out-food-without-permit
https://www.newsweek.com/illegal-feed-criminalizing-homeless-america-782861
Just like actively doing something against climate change. They are striving to make both things illegal and punishable.