Does anybody ever expect a police chief to say her men behaved unlawfully? Sometimes expectations behinds the outcome to these scenarios is comical. Or at least it would be if law-abiding citizens weren't harmed or criminalize for exercising their constitutional rights. The court are suppose to be neutral. Yet in every encounter they almost always side with the cops, not the people. Does anyone ever consider why the people are protesting in the first place? Is it because they have nothing better to do. Or is it because their rights and freedom is being threatened? There is one logical reality that authorities always tend to ignore: First, people don't riot when they're happy with their government. And second, the government serves the people. Not the other way around.
Does anybody ever expect a police chief to say her men behaved unlawfully? Sometimes expectations behinds the outcome to these scenarios is comical. Or at least it would be if law-abiding citizens weren't harmed or criminalize for exercising their constitutional rights.
The court are suppose to be neutral. Yet in every encounter they almost always side with the cops, not the people. Does anyone ever consider why the people are protesting in the first place? Is it because they have nothing better to do. Or is it because their rights and freedom is being threatened?
There is one logical reality that authorities always tend to ignore: First, people don't riot when they're happy with their government. And second, the government serves the people. Not the other way around.
Puente v city of Phoenix
lol despite
Court will always be for the cop's because that's how they get paid