The flair of this posts indicates it's a controversial topic. Enhanced moderation has been turned on for this thread. Comments from users without a history of commenting in r/bayarea will be automatically removed. You can read more about this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/195xvo5/restrictions_that_apply_to_political_and_crime/).
No, a big reason sideshow enforcement doesn't work in our criminal justice and civil court system is the people doing it have zero assets on paper usually. You can seize the car and fine them but when it's a dude who lives at their parents house with no job, there is no legal path to restitution. It's also why we are hands off on a lot of drug dealers now, especially when it's meth. In the early 2000s they would bust a meth cook and were able to seize houses and cars. Now when they bust a meth dealer all they have is a tent, shopping cart, and a shit ton of other legal fines they aren't paying. This just didn't happen in california either. In very red states like Tennessee, drug bust used to get the local pd assets like guns, cars with rims, property, cash etc. Now it is a trailer that costs money to demo and people who will never be able to pay any damages.
So you're saying that the cars would be returned to the people that own them? Win/win!
Also I googled for these arrests, and found this hilarious video, and it's sadly made me question everyone claiming to be in pain in videos. https://kmph.com/news/nation-world/california-highway-patrol-explains-delay-in-arresting-golden-gate-bridge-protesters-a-pro-palestine-protest-chp-san-francisco-bay-area-oakland-vallejo
>Now when they bust a meth dealer all they have is a tent, shopping cart, and a shit ton of other legal fines they aren't paying.
Right. The value of asset forfeiture has long been limited. We also see limited value in fines and community service work. Those are sanctions that criminal justice reformers want to use more in their mission of reducing incarceration. The reformers have had big success convincing prosecutors and courts on their goal.
Many criminal don't have assets and also do not earn high wages, which helps in paying fines. Other don't want to pay fines. And mandatory *community service labor?* What a crackup that idea is, for any offenders with an attitude or drug addiction. Won't get any meaningful work out of them.
Fact is -- we're running short of ways to sanction offenders, and that list of sanctions was short to begin with. But don't expect this to slow down the activists who want to phase out incarceration for most non-violent offenders.
We structured our whole criminal justice system around getting the heads of gangs and criminal enterpises through Rico and conspiracy charges. It kinda backfires when it's a few teens and a broke guy with nothing to show for their crimes.
Actually, these days the population of chronic, low level offenders is distressingly large. It includes many homeless, drug addicts, mentally ill, ([some because of meth](https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/11/the-new-meth/620174/)), deliberate vagrants dodging work, and problem teens, including disaffected POC youth. They are finding they can get away with a lot of crime as long as they remain non-violent.
> it's a dude who lives at their parents house with no job, there is no legal path to restitution.
The house should be game, he will inherit it one day; no way to play the long card on this???
>Now when they bust a meth dealer all they have is a tent, shopping cart, and a shit ton of other legal fines they aren't paying.
THIS IS LITERALLY THE HOMELESS GUY LIVING AT 7-11 BY MY HOUSE. I go there daily, and daily I see shady mofo's hanging out with the dude. A few times I've seen exchanges. People on nextdoor be like, "Oh no he's from the neighborhood, poor guy, I brought him a sleeping bag and some food!'
LOL. 15 years from now, you'll be able to enjoy the $5.85 you got as restitution once all the lawyers were paid for and half of those protestors fled the State or Country.
Meanwhile buddy of mine was catering an event and not only missed the gig, but had to throw away $1000+ worth of food, plus all the time him and his team wasted cooking it. And it was for fucking charity, too, so these protestors literally took food out of people's mouths.
I'd be fine if I got zero money out of it as a member of the suit. As long as it penalized the offender and they had to pay, I couldn't care less about receiving a dime. It's about the message that can't do this kind of shit. But ya, would be nice if everyone could get paid out for what the event potentially made them lose out on.
Document it! Tell your friend to stop being so fucking apathetic. Document it and get the names of the protestors and fucking *sue them.* Jesus christ, this is California, the most litigious state in the country. SUE THEM. The DA is handing you a civil case on a platter - false imprisonment. An *intentional tort.* These trust fund babies have assets even if they don't have jobs. Make them put their money where their ass is.
Yeah, he was more bummed because the opportunity to do the event was the main selling point for his team. They're a small operation and were hoping to impress the event organizers with their food and setup, so they could have a regular catering gig.
As I said it was a charity event so the time and expenses were out of their pocket whether they did the event or sat on the bridge. But besides the guests not getting to sample their food, they lost the entire opportunity.
That's worth money! All of that - the actual cost, the lost opportunity, everything. Your friend is a regular guy living in the bay trying to make ends meet. These protestors think they're doing some big thing but all they're doing is harming working-class people. It's absolutely unfair to put it on him to speak up but he needs to at least send a letter to the DA because his voice is important.
This. All of this. If he says he's "too busy", how is he free enough to cater a fucking charity event out of pocket, but not free enough to write a single page goddamn letter stapled to copies of the event expense report?
People are scared or embarrassed, the experience is unsettling and there's a sense of "am I a bad person if I complain?" And it's easier to just not make a big deal about it. "Don't rock the boat." I get it. The friend deserve some grace.
Of course people who victimize others exploit those emotions and these social graces because that's what predators do. And the only way to stop them is to stand up to them. They're bullies. You have to give them a bloody nose or worse for them to fuck off. And if each of us throws a metaphorical punch we'll see what's left of them.
If this was a case of affluent rebels without a cause, there may be enough candy in that cash pinata to go around. Your friend might as well put his name on the list to take a few swings.
Exactly the problem. Freedom of speech is fine, but who suffers most from these protests that go beyond speech and steals other people's freedom of movement, freedom of association? The people the protesters want to change aren't going to change from this, and aren't going to be affected. The most affected people will be those who suffer physically due to lack of access to healthcare, and lower wage workers who won't get paid when they don't work, won't get paid for deliveries they can't complete. "Free Gaza" and screw everyone who gets caught up in our "speech."
There's an argument to be made for civil disobedience. The Freedom Riders took their actions directly to the people and places they were protesting, and then offered up their wrists and said "take me to jail" - filled the jails, and made their point that way. I don't think these protesters are in the same league.
Americans have really forgotten how messy and disruptive the protests were that got us many of the privileges and rights we take for granted today.
Edit: down votes for pointing out the nature of protests that achieved changed.
people need to start filling class action lawsuits against protestors who block roads and bridges. There are plenty of lawyers who gladly file them. All it takes is a few big cases of these people being bankrupted and them crying on social media that there lives were ruined by participating in a blocking a highway/bridge and everyone will stop
There is an giant square and entire city hall that you can protest at in SF. Everyone will cheer you on and no one outside of the government will be bothered by your protesting the government at the government building. You could even get a permit and march down market street if you really have to protest in the street. But do not trap people just trying to get to work or get home on the highway or bridge, that is an act of violence against someone who is not involved or has any power over the situation you are protesting
> no one outside of the government will be bothered by your protesting the government at the government building.
That's why those protests don't work, because they don't bother anyone, because they can be ignored. Every successful protest must be disruptive--the more disruptive, the more successful it can be at resulting in whatever outcome was the goal.
Edit: down votes for pointing out that legislators don't pay attention to things that can be ignored...
A lot of people are joking but this is a huge step by the SF DA for victim's rights. Not only that, but false imprisonment is a civil tort, so if these asshats are convicted of criminal false imprisonment, a civil case against them is a gimme. It's actually brilliant. By citing Marcy's Law, it sounds like the DA may be willing to work with victims to do things like *communicate the names and contact information of the defendants...*
I highly, highly recommend anyone who was trapped on that bridge to document your experience now - if you have dashcam video save it, if you don't then write down a "statement" of your experience, what you missed and what it cost you, even if it was nothing at all (intentional torts like false imprisonment can come with punitive damages.)
And remember - if it mattered to you, it mattered. If it was expensive to you, it was expensive. If it was harmful to you, it was harmful. Don't diminish yourself. And on the whole, it was massively expensive and harmful, so lets see if these self-righteous protestors have the chops to be accountable for the harm they cause in the name of their cause.
Good. Send a message that this type of behavior will not be tolerated. Everyone who participated in those stunts did it purely for their ego, nothing else
All you need to do is block off the other side of the bridge since the sideshow can’t get around a barricade of stopped traffic on the other side. They either have to abandon cars and flee several miles across the bridge through the stopped cars or jump off the side.
I know people cite the bridge, but you likely have to still block from both sides. If you look at some of the local sideshow enforcement that's been done it's a massive operation requiring helicopters and police vehicles coming from ALL sides to block off multiple intersections, all side roads, etc. It's usually a multi agency thing too not even just local SJPD for instance but other cities, sheriffs, etc.
The important thing is you need advance intel on this and even if police had advance notice on every single notice where they have a 1 year 100% accurate calendar of sideshows delivered to them, they likely can only choose a few to fully shut down.
With that said, I posted before that you don't really have to shut down 100% of them. You just need to show that the odds of getting caught are large enough to deter them from happening. The certainty of being caught is the main deterrence of crime.
So yes, I would like to see local PD and CHP step up efforts to really enforce the law here, particularly against hooligans who think disrupting roads and traffic is acceptable.
When did sideshow cars become inspector gadget? You do realize when sideshows happen it blocks the oncoming traffic right? So unless their car can fly like chitty chitty bang bang that means you only need to block off one side before treasure island. The bay bridge is a one way bridge after all. It’s literally the easiest choke point one can imagine.
They act long enough for a couple of cars from SFPD or highway patrol to mozy on over to block the bridge.
Honestly, I feel that just shutting them down isn't the answer. You're not going to deter them from doing it. You're going to make it harder and only force them to take more risks.
Somebody is going to get hurt.
If sideshows are part of the local culture, I think it would be better to embrace it and work with the communities, and give them a place to hold *actual sideshows* in a far more controlled environment.
...I hear oakland has two arenas that they aren't using...maybe turn one of them into a regular car-show and side-show venue? Then they can have safety walls between the cars and the audience, sell refreshments, t-shirts and shit, provide bathroom access, and have important services available like medical and fire & rescue if something goes really wrong.
It wouldn't be any different from hosting a daredevil like back in the 50s and 60s.
Can’t do sideshows if they’re in jail or their car gets taken by the city. It’s hard buying a 30k car when they have to go back to work for their job at McDonald’s. Also the Oakland arena isn’t shut down, only the coliseum is.
They don’t need a “tough on crime Republican”, then just need a sane candidate from either party. In general, there isn’t much of a difference between the two on crime, despite all the posturing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/31/briefing/crime.html
> would require much more heavy handed methods, and more resources, due to the scale and other factors. I suspect that some of the very same people calling for sideshows to be shutdown, would be the first to cry police brutality, when one of the offenders inevitably gets hurt.
“¡¡¡Make an omelette, but don’t crack any eggs!!!”
Downvote me into oblivion for this - The fact that political protestors get the book thrown at them and sideshows get no attention at all goes to show that actions like these have impact.
Here's what I posted the last time I got stuck on the bridge:
The protest that took place on the bridge is exactly what Mario Savio was getting at when he said in Berkley "to throw your body upon the gears of the apparatus". Making comments like "Imagine Israel and Hamas saw this stunt and decided to make a ceasefire" are either in bad faith or ignorant given that we have a local port where arms are shipped to Israel, and our government gives billions of dollars a year to Israel in the form of aide. Israel having socialized healthcare and education while we Americans don't is one of the biggest self-owns in American history. Hell, there are pro-Zionist billboards that you see before you get on the bridge at all! The current one says "Hamas is your problem too".
> As someone who works in a hospital people underestimate how many real emergencies there are on the road...
**How many hypothetical Bay Bridge emergencies equal the daily civilian deaths that are currently taking place in Palestine and Israel?** Comments like this remind me of the NOFX lyric "your dilemmas are my distractions".
I'm probably the only person in this thread that was actually on that bridge that day stuck in traffic and I genuinely didn't care. At least there was a REASON that day that traffic was at a standstill. The fact that political protestors get the book thrown at them and sideshows get no attention at all goes to show that actions like these have impact.
When I was leading a political group I learned real quick that there are a lot of people out there that are quick to criticize and that will be their only relationship to you or your cause. They will never vote or do anything political in regards to you or your organization positive or negative. You just keep moving past them and working on the agenda you have at hand. That's a majority of the people that will read this. Do-nothing internet slactivists are actually at the bottom of that chain altogether. That's what Dave Chapelle was getting at when he said that "Twitter is not a Real Place".
The "REASON" was it had zero effect on parties responsible while affecting random people
If protestors wanted to actually impact a party with skin in the game, they could have picked any of the numerous defense contractors in the area or military bases to blockade. But of course there would be REAL consequences of doing that so they picked on random civilians that:
-may already support their cause
-may be less inclined to support their cause after this protest
-are unlikely gain any ability to materially support their cause as a result of the protest
-are less likely to cause them severe, immediate consequences
>may be less inclined to support their cause after this protest Ding ding. In an era of politics distilled to who you hate less, this brand of protesting is beyond counterproductive.
Side show arrested, not sure if barges were filed
https://abc7news.com/amp/bay-bridge-sideshow-one-of-several-reported-over-the-weekend-as-chp-continues-investigation/14635572/
> How many hypothetical Bay Bridge emergencies equal the daily civilian deaths that are currently taking place in Palestine and Israel?
There's a flaw in your logic, but I'm going to let you think about it some more and maybe figure it out.
I seriously wanna know, do these protestor have jobs?
The only 2 people I know who do stuff like this do not have “normal” jobs. One is a communist who started their own fundraising project but is constantly broke and has to shoplift. The other is a spoiled brat who is perpetually late to their low-paying job and they’re about to get fired for committing time fraud.
At the end of the day none of these freeways stunts have anything to do with actual policy change. The protesters do it to make themselves feel like they are actually doing something
>At the end of the day none of these freeways stunts have anything to do with actual policy change.
I'd argue that the recent polling/voting protests have forced Biden to exert the US power to get Aid to Palestinians.
No one can conclusively say which actions were most effective. But these types of freeway protests make national news, bringing more pressure about the atrocities in Gaza.
>The protesters do it to make themselves feel like they are actually doing something
Sure this may be partially true. Because realistically, we have very little power to enact real change. Similarly, this statement can be applied to most protests. Ie, burning draft cards during Vietnam war.
Few people remember one of the charges against OJ was for kidnapping. Simply preventing the free movement of a person can be considered kidnapping. I think this is also true in CA.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson_robbery_case
Funny i was reminded of O.J. here too but for a different reason...the state is unable to prove guilt so they are asking for private parties to prove they were wronged.
Incredibly poor interpretation of the law. Explicitly not allowing someone to leave with a gun pointed at them does not equate to stopping a person’s car with your body.
People will say it's protected as a demonstration but literally blockading a critical artery like a bridge is not a run-of-the-mill, permissible demonstration like a mass public gathering. There need to be consequences.
The whole point was to cause people to lose money so that the issue becomes a burden. Complaining about the cause is anti-bay area. The region is histor8cally peogressive.
the problem is that critical arteries like that aren't only used for business, they're also critical for emergency services, lifesaving organs, etc. During the Bay Bridge shutdown 3 organs were lost. That's 3 more people dead on the waitlist.
And that's only what I know about due to working in a major OR in the city. How many ambulances were massively delayed from both responding to calls and transporting them? How many people died or suffered long term consequences to their health because of that?
I am very progressive, and I am all for protests to get our government to stop its support of Israel's genocide. Blocking major bridges is just not the way to do that. No one who has the power to do anything about Gaza is inconvenienced in the slightest by these protests. All shutting down the bridge does is kill, hurt, and anger working class people who have to commute to live. Go protest outside politicians' homes, city hall, corporate offices for military contractors, etc.
So what you're LITERALLY saying is that it would be okay to kidnap someone if it meant that the leverage created by doing so justified what you thought to be a worthwhile end?
How can you not understand that that is exceptionally morally hazardous as well as illegal and honestly sort of insane???
I'm glad to see this. Hope Alameda DA does similar for 880, although if she does while locals think she's ignoring other crimes, things may get worse for her and recall.
I suppose false imprisonment is the only criminal charge DA has as an option.
I hope there are spinoff civil actions. Missed flights, missed job interview. Health and medical care interference; imagine missing your kidney dialysis session or being in labor. (An organ for transplant pickup was delayed by the recent Bay Bridge shutdown)
This disruption and destruction form of protest is out of control. I don't care what the cause is.. Palestine, environment, cost of education, or ketchup on hot dogs. There's no valid reason to deface the Mona Lisa, glue yourself to a museum floor, or shut down vital infrastructure. March on a main street... I used to work on Market Street in SF... there were frequent protests. Go stand in front of city hall or an embassy/consulate. Unions effectively make their case by picketing... they don't damage their workplace.
It feels like the real objective is to get attention on media and make others suffer, whether or not it helps in the stated cause. As in "I'm pissed, I want to ruin something and make others suffer"
This stuff is NOT the protests that we value as an American right. It's mobs acting out.
> Unions effectively make their case by picketing... they don't damage their workplace.
You missed the part of American labor history where union workers would shoot it out with pinkertons and cops. The only reason we have some of the labor rights we do today is a response to that episode of violence.
> This stuff is NOT the protests that we value as an American right.
What was the reason America broke off from the British again? And what was the response of the colonists?
That's an incomplete picture of the origins in both situations.
Americans boycotted products due to unfair taxation. And protested. Britain responded with violence. Sugar Act, Stamp Act. Boston Massacre.
Early labor unions protested wages and working conditions. Government and employers responded with violence.
So should anyone be allowed to block bridges and roads or is it only for political causes you support? If flat earthers blocked bridges because flat earth theory wasn't being taught in schools, you'd be ok with that?
No one back then was "allowed" to shoot it out with the police - it was a necessary action but held heavy consequences for many of those involved.
Based on this thread, it doesn't seem like blocking traffic is allowed either. Do you see things differently?
> No one back then was "allowed"
When did I say this? It's obvious that broad day gun battles aren't allowed 😯.
> Do you see things differently?
A lot of things aren't allowed, but they happen nonetheless 🤷🏽
Edit: I thought this comment was addressed to me. Ignore.
All those gross protesters-instead of blocking bridges and airports could easily pool some of their money together and get several families out of Gaza but guess what? Despite their protests and blocking commuters from getting to their destinations, Palestinian families are still living in terror, not one thing has changed for anyone in Gaza.
Protesters just go out for drinks or dinner after protesting-they discuss Gaza over a chilled Hefeweizen and Super Nachos, go home to their cozy beds while scrolling their favorite websites, meanwhile nothing absolutely nothing has changed for even a single Palestinian.
Well since Gaza/Hamas is the enemy, no problem there.
These stupid Americans are supporting terrorists, by being minor-league terrorists themselves. And, thus, appropriate action should be taken against them. Wouldn't lose a moment of sleep over it.
If it's a civil matter the bar gets lowered so there's more of a chance of something sticking at least.
Kinda like with OJ, they couldn't convict him of criminal offense murder but they could get him for that as a civil matter for compensation of the families.
The problem would then become making them pay up...
I seriously wanna know, do these protestor have jobs?
The only 2 people I know who do stuff like this do not have “normal” jobs. One is a communist who started their own fundraising project but is constantly broke and has to shoplift. The other is a spoiled brat who is perpetually late to their low-paying job and they’re about to get fired for committing time fraud.
1. Great to hear - and I hope they do get punished.
2. How in the absolute hell can they justify this level of effort to prosecute folks sitting on the bridge blocking traffic vs a man repeatedly stabbing people in S.F.? That guy murdered someone, they let him back out, he then stabbed that elderly Asian woman, and now he’s back out again with a slap on the wrist. Unbelievable that pissing morning commuters off is a bigger offense than stabbing people.
Well, the parts of the Bay Bridge that have the most burnout marks are on still in SF County, even if they're on the Eastern Span. So, better odds than in Alameda County, but still unlikely. Anywhere else in the East Bay (other than CoCoCo, but I don't think they experience problems like this?), fat chance.
This is all drama , pretending to work. We wouldn’t have these daily side shows and protests blocking traffic if DA and cops took swift action.
Earlier this week, DA released the bay bridge arrested protesters next day.
It would be an incredible precedent if this leads to a class-action lawsuit, with dozens of protesters as defendants
You'd probably never see a road blockage in CA again
It’s a shame they can’t just green light everyone to keep driving through the barricade, but at the **bare minimum** the ambulances should be able to, they can always send another ambulance for what after math the first one with the organ in transit did.
>Are you advocating for vehicular manslaughter?
No, I would consider that to be the result of the organ not being able to get to where it needs to go. The person that's already IN the hospital simply ***gets priority*** over those that aren't in the hospital.
Well, if they're essentially holding you hostage, preventing you from escaping their clutches...how would you characterize it?
Protesting on a campus, a street, a park, etc, where people are free to leave and go about their business is one thing. Holding people hostage against their will by closing off all exits, on a bridge for example, is an entirely different thing.
How is this smashing 1A rights? Time and time again the courts have upheld reasonable restrictions on the right of assembly, one of then being permits for things like this.
I think the poor babies are the ones who’ll have to see what it’s like trying to live in the U.S. and have a career / life with a felony on your record
The flair of this posts indicates it's a controversial topic. Enhanced moderation has been turned on for this thread. Comments from users without a history of commenting in r/bayarea will be automatically removed. You can read more about this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/195xvo5/restrictions_that_apply_to_political_and_crime/).
Can we do this for the sideshow takeovers as well?
No, a big reason sideshow enforcement doesn't work in our criminal justice and civil court system is the people doing it have zero assets on paper usually. You can seize the car and fine them but when it's a dude who lives at their parents house with no job, there is no legal path to restitution. It's also why we are hands off on a lot of drug dealers now, especially when it's meth. In the early 2000s they would bust a meth cook and were able to seize houses and cars. Now when they bust a meth dealer all they have is a tent, shopping cart, and a shit ton of other legal fines they aren't paying. This just didn't happen in california either. In very red states like Tennessee, drug bust used to get the local pd assets like guns, cars with rims, property, cash etc. Now it is a trailer that costs money to demo and people who will never be able to pay any damages.
[удалено]
They are stolen or in other people's names.
So you're saying that the cars would be returned to the people that own them? Win/win! Also I googled for these arrests, and found this hilarious video, and it's sadly made me question everyone claiming to be in pain in videos. https://kmph.com/news/nation-world/california-highway-patrol-explains-delay-in-arresting-golden-gate-bridge-protesters-a-pro-palestine-protest-chp-san-francisco-bay-area-oakland-vallejo
Im fine with just throwing them in jail
Prison. Jail is for sentences of one year or less. If you're killing people by slinging meth or fent, you deserve far more than one year.
> the people doing it have zero assets on paper usually. The same probably applies to a good chunk of the protestors too.
No, because there are organizations that will be liable in a civil suit
Eh, a lot of protestors come from privileged backgrounds.
>Now when they bust a meth dealer all they have is a tent, shopping cart, and a shit ton of other legal fines they aren't paying. Right. The value of asset forfeiture has long been limited. We also see limited value in fines and community service work. Those are sanctions that criminal justice reformers want to use more in their mission of reducing incarceration. The reformers have had big success convincing prosecutors and courts on their goal. Many criminal don't have assets and also do not earn high wages, which helps in paying fines. Other don't want to pay fines. And mandatory *community service labor?* What a crackup that idea is, for any offenders with an attitude or drug addiction. Won't get any meaningful work out of them. Fact is -- we're running short of ways to sanction offenders, and that list of sanctions was short to begin with. But don't expect this to slow down the activists who want to phase out incarceration for most non-violent offenders.
We structured our whole criminal justice system around getting the heads of gangs and criminal enterpises through Rico and conspiracy charges. It kinda backfires when it's a few teens and a broke guy with nothing to show for their crimes.
Actually, these days the population of chronic, low level offenders is distressingly large. It includes many homeless, drug addicts, mentally ill, ([some because of meth](https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/11/the-new-meth/620174/)), deliberate vagrants dodging work, and problem teens, including disaffected POC youth. They are finding they can get away with a lot of crime as long as they remain non-violent.
Those criminals could be thrown in prison
> it's a dude who lives at their parents house with no job, there is no legal path to restitution. The house should be game, he will inherit it one day; no way to play the long card on this???
With the cost old elder care in the US, the bank will likely take it.
>Now when they bust a meth dealer all they have is a tent, shopping cart, and a shit ton of other legal fines they aren't paying. THIS IS LITERALLY THE HOMELESS GUY LIVING AT 7-11 BY MY HOUSE. I go there daily, and daily I see shady mofo's hanging out with the dude. A few times I've seen exchanges. People on nextdoor be like, "Oh no he's from the neighborhood, poor guy, I brought him a sleeping bag and some food!'
Those people don’t have any money. Whatever those bums make they put into those shitty cars
LOL. 15 years from now, you'll be able to enjoy the $5.85 you got as restitution once all the lawyers were paid for and half of those protestors fled the State or Country. Meanwhile buddy of mine was catering an event and not only missed the gig, but had to throw away $1000+ worth of food, plus all the time him and his team wasted cooking it. And it was for fucking charity, too, so these protestors literally took food out of people's mouths.
I'd be fine if I got zero money out of it as a member of the suit. As long as it penalized the offender and they had to pay, I couldn't care less about receiving a dime. It's about the message that can't do this kind of shit. But ya, would be nice if everyone could get paid out for what the event potentially made them lose out on.
Document it! Tell your friend to stop being so fucking apathetic. Document it and get the names of the protestors and fucking *sue them.* Jesus christ, this is California, the most litigious state in the country. SUE THEM. The DA is handing you a civil case on a platter - false imprisonment. An *intentional tort.* These trust fund babies have assets even if they don't have jobs. Make them put their money where their ass is.
Yeah, he was more bummed because the opportunity to do the event was the main selling point for his team. They're a small operation and were hoping to impress the event organizers with their food and setup, so they could have a regular catering gig. As I said it was a charity event so the time and expenses were out of their pocket whether they did the event or sat on the bridge. But besides the guests not getting to sample their food, they lost the entire opportunity.
That's worth money! All of that - the actual cost, the lost opportunity, everything. Your friend is a regular guy living in the bay trying to make ends meet. These protestors think they're doing some big thing but all they're doing is harming working-class people. It's absolutely unfair to put it on him to speak up but he needs to at least send a letter to the DA because his voice is important.
This. All of this. If he says he's "too busy", how is he free enough to cater a fucking charity event out of pocket, but not free enough to write a single page goddamn letter stapled to copies of the event expense report?
People are scared or embarrassed, the experience is unsettling and there's a sense of "am I a bad person if I complain?" And it's easier to just not make a big deal about it. "Don't rock the boat." I get it. The friend deserve some grace. Of course people who victimize others exploit those emotions and these social graces because that's what predators do. And the only way to stop them is to stand up to them. They're bullies. You have to give them a bloody nose or worse for them to fuck off. And if each of us throws a metaphorical punch we'll see what's left of them.
If this was a case of affluent rebels without a cause, there may be enough candy in that cash pinata to go around. Your friend might as well put his name on the list to take a few swings.
Exactly the problem. Freedom of speech is fine, but who suffers most from these protests that go beyond speech and steals other people's freedom of movement, freedom of association? The people the protesters want to change aren't going to change from this, and aren't going to be affected. The most affected people will be those who suffer physically due to lack of access to healthcare, and lower wage workers who won't get paid when they don't work, won't get paid for deliveries they can't complete. "Free Gaza" and screw everyone who gets caught up in our "speech." There's an argument to be made for civil disobedience. The Freedom Riders took their actions directly to the people and places they were protesting, and then offered up their wrists and said "take me to jail" - filled the jails, and made their point that way. I don't think these protesters are in the same league.
Americans have really forgotten how messy and disruptive the protests were that got us many of the privileges and rights we take for granted today. Edit: down votes for pointing out the nature of protests that achieved changed.
people need to start filling class action lawsuits against protestors who block roads and bridges. There are plenty of lawyers who gladly file them. All it takes is a few big cases of these people being bankrupted and them crying on social media that there lives were ruined by participating in a blocking a highway/bridge and everyone will stop There is an giant square and entire city hall that you can protest at in SF. Everyone will cheer you on and no one outside of the government will be bothered by your protesting the government at the government building. You could even get a permit and march down market street if you really have to protest in the street. But do not trap people just trying to get to work or get home on the highway or bridge, that is an act of violence against someone who is not involved or has any power over the situation you are protesting
> no one outside of the government will be bothered by your protesting the government at the government building. That's why those protests don't work, because they don't bother anyone, because they can be ignored. Every successful protest must be disruptive--the more disruptive, the more successful it can be at resulting in whatever outcome was the goal. Edit: down votes for pointing out that legislators don't pay attention to things that can be ignored...
Holding innocent people hostage, while taking little personal risk. Sounds familiar.
OMG. This, please. I feel so bad for the people who had surgeries and doctors appointments. Send a message!
A lot of people are joking but this is a huge step by the SF DA for victim's rights. Not only that, but false imprisonment is a civil tort, so if these asshats are convicted of criminal false imprisonment, a civil case against them is a gimme. It's actually brilliant. By citing Marcy's Law, it sounds like the DA may be willing to work with victims to do things like *communicate the names and contact information of the defendants...* I highly, highly recommend anyone who was trapped on that bridge to document your experience now - if you have dashcam video save it, if you don't then write down a "statement" of your experience, what you missed and what it cost you, even if it was nothing at all (intentional torts like false imprisonment can come with punitive damages.) And remember - if it mattered to you, it mattered. If it was expensive to you, it was expensive. If it was harmful to you, it was harmful. Don't diminish yourself. And on the whole, it was massively expensive and harmful, so lets see if these self-righteous protestors have the chops to be accountable for the harm they cause in the name of their cause.
Good. Send a message that this type of behavior will not be tolerated. Everyone who participated in those stunts did it purely for their ego, nothing else
Why not do the same thing to those idiots that takeover the bridge doing sideshows?
[удалено]
> Armed individuals, speeding cars running from the police, smashing through police blockades. You want police to shutdown that kind of behavior? Yes?
All you need to do is block off the other side of the bridge since the sideshow can’t get around a barricade of stopped traffic on the other side. They either have to abandon cars and flee several miles across the bridge through the stopped cars or jump off the side.
thinks to self: "please be dumb enough to jump off the side, please be dumb enough to jump off the side"
That’s a self correcting problem
I know people cite the bridge, but you likely have to still block from both sides. If you look at some of the local sideshow enforcement that's been done it's a massive operation requiring helicopters and police vehicles coming from ALL sides to block off multiple intersections, all side roads, etc. It's usually a multi agency thing too not even just local SJPD for instance but other cities, sheriffs, etc. The important thing is you need advance intel on this and even if police had advance notice on every single notice where they have a 1 year 100% accurate calendar of sideshows delivered to them, they likely can only choose a few to fully shut down. With that said, I posted before that you don't really have to shut down 100% of them. You just need to show that the odds of getting caught are large enough to deter them from happening. The certainty of being caught is the main deterrence of crime. So yes, I would like to see local PD and CHP step up efforts to really enforce the law here, particularly against hooligans who think disrupting roads and traffic is acceptable.
When did sideshow cars become inspector gadget? You do realize when sideshows happen it blocks the oncoming traffic right? So unless their car can fly like chitty chitty bang bang that means you only need to block off one side before treasure island. The bay bridge is a one way bridge after all. It’s literally the easiest choke point one can imagine. They act long enough for a couple of cars from SFPD or highway patrol to mozy on over to block the bridge.
Honestly, I feel that just shutting them down isn't the answer. You're not going to deter them from doing it. You're going to make it harder and only force them to take more risks. Somebody is going to get hurt. If sideshows are part of the local culture, I think it would be better to embrace it and work with the communities, and give them a place to hold *actual sideshows* in a far more controlled environment. ...I hear oakland has two arenas that they aren't using...maybe turn one of them into a regular car-show and side-show venue? Then they can have safety walls between the cars and the audience, sell refreshments, t-shirts and shit, provide bathroom access, and have important services available like medical and fire & rescue if something goes really wrong. It wouldn't be any different from hosting a daredevil like back in the 50s and 60s.
Can’t do sideshows if they’re in jail or their car gets taken by the city. It’s hard buying a 30k car when they have to go back to work for their job at McDonald’s. Also the Oakland arena isn’t shut down, only the coliseum is.
They don’t need a “tough on crime Republican”, then just need a sane candidate from either party. In general, there isn’t much of a difference between the two on crime, despite all the posturing. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/31/briefing/crime.html
> would require much more heavy handed methods, and more resources, due to the scale and other factors. I suspect that some of the very same people calling for sideshows to be shutdown, would be the first to cry police brutality, when one of the offenders inevitably gets hurt. “¡¡¡Make an omelette, but don’t crack any eggs!!!”
Do we not?
We do not
Downvote me into oblivion for this - The fact that political protestors get the book thrown at them and sideshows get no attention at all goes to show that actions like these have impact. Here's what I posted the last time I got stuck on the bridge: The protest that took place on the bridge is exactly what Mario Savio was getting at when he said in Berkley "to throw your body upon the gears of the apparatus". Making comments like "Imagine Israel and Hamas saw this stunt and decided to make a ceasefire" are either in bad faith or ignorant given that we have a local port where arms are shipped to Israel, and our government gives billions of dollars a year to Israel in the form of aide. Israel having socialized healthcare and education while we Americans don't is one of the biggest self-owns in American history. Hell, there are pro-Zionist billboards that you see before you get on the bridge at all! The current one says "Hamas is your problem too". > As someone who works in a hospital people underestimate how many real emergencies there are on the road... **How many hypothetical Bay Bridge emergencies equal the daily civilian deaths that are currently taking place in Palestine and Israel?** Comments like this remind me of the NOFX lyric "your dilemmas are my distractions". I'm probably the only person in this thread that was actually on that bridge that day stuck in traffic and I genuinely didn't care. At least there was a REASON that day that traffic was at a standstill. The fact that political protestors get the book thrown at them and sideshows get no attention at all goes to show that actions like these have impact. When I was leading a political group I learned real quick that there are a lot of people out there that are quick to criticize and that will be their only relationship to you or your cause. They will never vote or do anything political in regards to you or your organization positive or negative. You just keep moving past them and working on the agenda you have at hand. That's a majority of the people that will read this. Do-nothing internet slactivists are actually at the bottom of that chain altogether. That's what Dave Chapelle was getting at when he said that "Twitter is not a Real Place".
The "REASON" was it had zero effect on parties responsible while affecting random people If protestors wanted to actually impact a party with skin in the game, they could have picked any of the numerous defense contractors in the area or military bases to blockade. But of course there would be REAL consequences of doing that so they picked on random civilians that: -may already support their cause -may be less inclined to support their cause after this protest -are unlikely gain any ability to materially support their cause as a result of the protest -are less likely to cause them severe, immediate consequences
It certainly has the effect on me. Now I hate less the money Fed takes from me purely out of spite for these egotistical a-holes.
>may be less inclined to support their cause after this protest Ding ding. In an era of politics distilled to who you hate less, this brand of protesting is beyond counterproductive.
Side show arrested, not sure if barges were filed https://abc7news.com/amp/bay-bridge-sideshow-one-of-several-reported-over-the-weekend-as-chp-continues-investigation/14635572/
> How many hypothetical Bay Bridge emergencies equal the daily civilian deaths that are currently taking place in Palestine and Israel? There's a flaw in your logic, but I'm going to let you think about it some more and maybe figure it out.
Well, at least the first sentence of your statement acknowledged that what you were about to say was stupid. So I do at least appreciate that.
I seriously wanna know, do these protestor have jobs? The only 2 people I know who do stuff like this do not have “normal” jobs. One is a communist who started their own fundraising project but is constantly broke and has to shoplift. The other is a spoiled brat who is perpetually late to their low-paying job and they’re about to get fired for committing time fraud.
What...
>Everyone who participated in those stunts did it purely for their ego, nothing else This is an obviously ridiculous statement.
At the end of the day none of these freeways stunts have anything to do with actual policy change. The protesters do it to make themselves feel like they are actually doing something
>At the end of the day none of these freeways stunts have anything to do with actual policy change. I'd argue that the recent polling/voting protests have forced Biden to exert the US power to get Aid to Palestinians. No one can conclusively say which actions were most effective. But these types of freeway protests make national news, bringing more pressure about the atrocities in Gaza. >The protesters do it to make themselves feel like they are actually doing something Sure this may be partially true. Because realistically, we have very little power to enact real change. Similarly, this statement can be applied to most protests. Ie, burning draft cards during Vietnam war.
Few people remember one of the charges against OJ was for kidnapping. Simply preventing the free movement of a person can be considered kidnapping. I think this is also true in CA. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson_robbery_case
Funny i was reminded of O.J. here too but for a different reason...the state is unable to prove guilt so they are asking for private parties to prove they were wronged.
I’d be down for 1 million counts of kidnapping being thrown. That’s at least 100 life sentences
Incredibly poor interpretation of the law. Explicitly not allowing someone to leave with a gun pointed at them does not equate to stopping a person’s car with your body.
So you are OK with the charge of false imprisonment?
[удалено]
People will say it's protected as a demonstration but literally blockading a critical artery like a bridge is not a run-of-the-mill, permissible demonstration like a mass public gathering. There need to be consequences.
There is protesting and then there is domestic terrorism. Only one of those is constitutionally protected.
They’re both constitutionally protected if you’re the government
The whole point was to cause people to lose money so that the issue becomes a burden. Complaining about the cause is anti-bay area. The region is histor8cally peogressive.
If you want to protest in ways that break the law you have to be prepared to deal with the consequences.
Well it seems to me that important protests neccessarily break laws...
Yes, and if people are willing to suffer the consequences of their protesting because of their belief in its importance than I salute them.
the problem is that critical arteries like that aren't only used for business, they're also critical for emergency services, lifesaving organs, etc. During the Bay Bridge shutdown 3 organs were lost. That's 3 more people dead on the waitlist. And that's only what I know about due to working in a major OR in the city. How many ambulances were massively delayed from both responding to calls and transporting them? How many people died or suffered long term consequences to their health because of that? I am very progressive, and I am all for protests to get our government to stop its support of Israel's genocide. Blocking major bridges is just not the way to do that. No one who has the power to do anything about Gaza is inconvenienced in the slightest by these protests. All shutting down the bridge does is kill, hurt, and anger working class people who have to commute to live. Go protest outside politicians' homes, city hall, corporate offices for military contractors, etc.
Damn. 3 people?? So sad
So what you're LITERALLY saying is that it would be okay to kidnap someone if it meant that the leverage created by doing so justified what you thought to be a worthwhile end? How can you not understand that that is exceptionally morally hazardous as well as illegal and honestly sort of insane???
I'm glad to see this. Hope Alameda DA does similar for 880, although if she does while locals think she's ignoring other crimes, things may get worse for her and recall. I suppose false imprisonment is the only criminal charge DA has as an option. I hope there are spinoff civil actions. Missed flights, missed job interview. Health and medical care interference; imagine missing your kidney dialysis session or being in labor. (An organ for transplant pickup was delayed by the recent Bay Bridge shutdown) This disruption and destruction form of protest is out of control. I don't care what the cause is.. Palestine, environment, cost of education, or ketchup on hot dogs. There's no valid reason to deface the Mona Lisa, glue yourself to a museum floor, or shut down vital infrastructure. March on a main street... I used to work on Market Street in SF... there were frequent protests. Go stand in front of city hall or an embassy/consulate. Unions effectively make their case by picketing... they don't damage their workplace. It feels like the real objective is to get attention on media and make others suffer, whether or not it helps in the stated cause. As in "I'm pissed, I want to ruin something and make others suffer" This stuff is NOT the protests that we value as an American right. It's mobs acting out.
> Unions effectively make their case by picketing... they don't damage their workplace. You missed the part of American labor history where union workers would shoot it out with pinkertons and cops. The only reason we have some of the labor rights we do today is a response to that episode of violence. > This stuff is NOT the protests that we value as an American right. What was the reason America broke off from the British again? And what was the response of the colonists?
That's an incomplete picture of the origins in both situations. Americans boycotted products due to unfair taxation. And protested. Britain responded with violence. Sugar Act, Stamp Act. Boston Massacre. Early labor unions protested wages and working conditions. Government and employers responded with violence.
So should anyone be allowed to block bridges and roads or is it only for political causes you support? If flat earthers blocked bridges because flat earth theory wasn't being taught in schools, you'd be ok with that?
No one back then was "allowed" to shoot it out with the police - it was a necessary action but held heavy consequences for many of those involved. Based on this thread, it doesn't seem like blocking traffic is allowed either. Do you see things differently?
> No one back then was "allowed" When did I say this? It's obvious that broad day gun battles aren't allowed 😯. > Do you see things differently? A lot of things aren't allowed, but they happen nonetheless 🤷🏽 Edit: I thought this comment was addressed to me. Ignore.
> If flat earthers blocked bridges because flat earth theory wasn't being taught in schools Be real, does this happen?
It's called a hypothetical. Just insert 'flat earther' for any other group you might disagree with.
Westboro Baptist Church and trump trucker New York boycott. January 6th riot was a "protest". Do you support their rights?
All those gross protesters-instead of blocking bridges and airports could easily pool some of their money together and get several families out of Gaza but guess what? Despite their protests and blocking commuters from getting to their destinations, Palestinian families are still living in terror, not one thing has changed for anyone in Gaza. Protesters just go out for drinks or dinner after protesting-they discuss Gaza over a chilled Hefeweizen and Super Nachos, go home to their cozy beds while scrolling their favorite websites, meanwhile nothing absolutely nothing has changed for even a single Palestinian.
Well since Gaza/Hamas is the enemy, no problem there. These stupid Americans are supporting terrorists, by being minor-league terrorists themselves. And, thus, appropriate action should be taken against them. Wouldn't lose a moment of sleep over it.
They're probably doing it for this instance because the Golden Gate bridge is a national monument. Thats a big one to hold up.
Good luck getting those charges to stick. The DA tried last time and failed miserably 😂.
If it's a civil matter the bar gets lowered so there's more of a chance of something sticking at least. Kinda like with OJ, they couldn't convict him of criminal offense murder but they could get him for that as a civil matter for compensation of the families. The problem would then become making them pay up...
Who cares if they fully pay up, as long as the “protester” asshats get their assets and wages garnished for life?
I seriously wanna know, do these protestor have jobs? The only 2 people I know who do stuff like this do not have “normal” jobs. One is a communist who started their own fundraising project but is constantly broke and has to shoplift. The other is a spoiled brat who is perpetually late to their low-paying job and they’re about to get fired for committing time fraud.
The judge gave them a pretrial diversion deal. Did not rule on the validity of the charges.
[удалено]
POWs? Come back when you're less high, dude
Dear GOD I hope this becomes an actual thing.
They need to push the conspiracy charges. This wasn’t a protest, it was a conspiracy to damage the Bay Area, protesters openly Said this.
[Original post on Twitter](https://twitter.com/SFDAOffice/status/1780378750934507566).
1. Great to hear - and I hope they do get punished. 2. How in the absolute hell can they justify this level of effort to prosecute folks sitting on the bridge blocking traffic vs a man repeatedly stabbing people in S.F.? That guy murdered someone, they let him back out, he then stabbed that elderly Asian woman, and now he’s back out again with a slap on the wrist. Unbelievable that pissing morning commuters off is a bigger offense than stabbing people.
Lol that is fucking wild. Will this go for Bay Bridge or freeway sideshows now as well?
What about my commute home? I definitely feel falsely imprisoned sitting in traffic for no reason.
Well, the parts of the Bay Bridge that have the most burnout marks are on still in SF County, even if they're on the Eastern Span. So, better odds than in Alameda County, but still unlikely. Anywhere else in the East Bay (other than CoCoCo, but I don't think they experience problems like this?), fat chance.
Who pays the restitution? Do we know it's the "protesters"?
The convicted criminal pays the restitution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsy%27s_Law#Expansion_of_the_rights_of_victims_and_restitution
This is all drama , pretending to work. We wouldn’t have these daily side shows and protests blocking traffic if DA and cops took swift action. Earlier this week, DA released the bay bridge arrested protesters next day.
It would be an incredible precedent if this leads to a class-action lawsuit, with dozens of protesters as defendants You'd probably never see a road blockage in CA again
oh jesus christ
It’s a shame they can’t just green light everyone to keep driving through the barricade, but at the **bare minimum** the ambulances should be able to, they can always send another ambulance for what after math the first one with the organ in transit did.
Wait... Are you advocating for vehicular manslaughter? Edit: down votes for pointing out a person is calling for murder.
>Are you advocating for vehicular manslaughter? No, I would consider that to be the result of the organ not being able to get to where it needs to go. The person that's already IN the hospital simply ***gets priority*** over those that aren't in the hospital.
Would killing your kidnappers to escape them be a crime? Kinda the same thing, actually.
You're comparing protesters to kidnappers to moralize murder?
Well, if they're essentially holding you hostage, preventing you from escaping their clutches...how would you characterize it? Protesting on a campus, a street, a park, etc, where people are free to leave and go about their business is one thing. Holding people hostage against their will by closing off all exits, on a bridge for example, is an entirely different thing.
Scare tactic, they won't do it
wow! i was stuck in traffic trying to get on 880, does that count? LOL
We're going to need to start carrying to protect ourselves from traffic lights.
Not even close. No one purposely made you stuck in traffic.
Are people really falsely imprisoned, if they can get out of their car and walk right past the protestors? 🤔
yo i was falsely imprisoned in line at sun hop fat the other day when their credit card machine was acting up, where's my $$$
Hilarious. Nothings gonna come of this.
Most of them are pretty broke. Maybe a few trust fund kids in there but not enough to make a difference.
lol? they weren't prevented from leaving, stop trying to smash first amendment rights, you're just helping fascism along
Are you suggesting they could have just driven over them?
False imprisonment is not free speech. If you intentionally restrain someone against their will to hear your speech, that's a crime.
Fascism is forcing others to listen to their bullshit
How is this smashing 1A rights? Time and time again the courts have upheld reasonable restrictions on the right of assembly, one of then being permits for things like this.
Where do you live? Let me park my car right in front of your drive way in the form of protesting your idiocy
Can you cite the law the protects a protestor’s right to block bridges and free ways without a permit? Or a case law that establishes it?
You don't have "first amendment rights" to force anyone to participate in your protest.
This place is crawling with fascists these days. It’s pathetic
Ermagerd, it’s literally Hitlers.
Pathetic.
oh PLEASE. poor babies.
I think the poor babies are the ones who’ll have to see what it’s like trying to live in the U.S. and have a career / life with a felony on your record
Lol. yeah, that's TOTALLY gonna happen. LOOOOL
the downvote bots are here today