Police brutality around the world has been going on for many years. In America, people can trace it all the way back to when the waves of immigrants in the 18-19th centuries. Racial slurs were given to these people, like the Chinese and the Irishmen on the building of the railroads, or like the Northern Europeans (Swedes, Norweigans, etc) when they settled into the plains. All of these people were discriminated upon the majority race (Americans) in that area. It is a shame really that people who work for the law and swore to protect the people could do such a horrid act. Once again, the Jim Crow South and Civil Rights Movement is a perfect example to show how the law enforcement did not recognize Black people or even considered them to be American citizens. It was during the civil rights movement that the police sprayed high pressured water onto activists, or set the dogs on them so the demonstration could be broken up. Now, in the Occupy movement, a police officer threw a smoke bomb towards a former Marine. When the bomb exploded, the Marine became unconscious and suffered third degree burns. Now, police officers say, “these people were armed and I’m protecting myself.” I disagree. I believe if you are willing to play fire with fire, then you are going to get burned. Now, whether or not these policemen received any damages from the Irish travelers are true, I believe a non bias witness account will be better. Overall, I think it is sad these people were evicted off of free land. Obviously, these people live in poor conditions and this place is the only place they could live. I mean, does the British government think these travelers want to live there by choice? In my opinion, I think this traveler site is commonly a last resort for people who work below minimum wage and they live there [traveler site] because that is all they could afford. Plus, at the end of the day, all they want to do is close eyes and go to sleep.
I am not sure what to think about the situation in Essex. If, in fact, the site had been illegally occupied for 10 years, the government was totally justified in their action. The video seemed to suggest that the protesters instigated the violence and the police were acting to insure their own safety. I would think that the people illegally occupying the site were given many chances to evacuate before the incident of rioting took place. It is not as if the police showed up one morning and started tearing down the place one random day. The people illegally occupying the Dale Farm site most likely knew that this was going to happen and blatantly broke the law by refusing to evacuate the site. The government can not simply look over this blatant disrespect for law and is justified in using force in this case. On that end, it obviously seems to be the case that the government was not acting in the best interest of the peoples by making the Dale Farm residents evacuate in the first place. If this property was legally purchased and provided shelter for hundreds of people it would seem as if the most rational thing to do was leave it as is. The article suggests that the land was legally purchased but did not have proper permission to build on parts of it. I firmly believe that people should have the right to built what they want on land that is their own. It is not the job of the government to tell you what you can and can not do with your private property unless it inflicts on the well-being of society as a whole. In the case of the Dale Farm site, it would appear as if Dale Farm site greatly helped society as a whole by providing sufficient shelter for a great amount of people.
Police brutality around the world has been going on for many years. In America, people can trace it all the way back to when the waves of immigrants in the 18-19th centuries. Racial slurs were given to these people, like the Chinese and the Irishmen on the building of the railroads, or like the Northern Europeans (Swedes, Norweigans, etc) when they settled into the plains. All of these people were discriminated upon the majority race (Americans) in that area. It is a shame really that people who work for the law and swore to protect the people could do such a horrid act. Once again, the Jim Crow South and Civil Rights Movement is a perfect example to show how the law enforcement did not recognize Black people or even considered them to be American citizens. It was during the civil rights movement that the police sprayed high pressured water onto activists, or set the dogs on them so the demonstration could be broken up. Now, in the Occupy movement, a police officer threw a smoke bomb towards a former Marine. When the bomb exploded, the Marine became unconscious and suffered third degree burns. Now, police officers say, “these people were armed and I’m protecting myself.” I disagree. I believe if you are willing to play fire with fire, then you are going to get burned. Now, whether or not these policemen received any damages from the Irish travelers are true, I believe a non bias witness account will be better. Overall, I think it is sad these people were evicted off of free land. Obviously, these people live in poor conditions and this place is the only place they could live. I mean, does the British government think these travelers want to live there by choice? In my opinion, I think this traveler site is commonly a last resort for people who work below minimum wage and they live there [traveler site] because that is all they could afford. Plus, at the end of the day, all they want to do is close eyes and go to sleep.
ReplyDeleteClashes as UK police evict travelers: Bingram
ReplyDeleteI am not sure what to think about the situation in Essex. If, in fact, the site had been illegally occupied for 10 years, the government was totally justified in their action. The video seemed to suggest that the protesters instigated the violence and the police were acting to insure their own safety. I would think that the people illegally occupying the site were given many chances to evacuate before the incident of rioting took place. It is not as if the police showed up one morning and started tearing down the place one random day. The people illegally occupying the Dale Farm site most likely knew that this was going to happen and blatantly broke the law by refusing to evacuate the site. The government can not simply look over this blatant disrespect for law and is justified in using force in this case.
On that end, it obviously seems to be the case that the government was not acting in the best interest of the peoples by making the Dale Farm residents evacuate in the first place. If this property was legally purchased and provided shelter for hundreds of people it would seem as if the most rational thing to do was leave it as is. The article suggests that the land was legally purchased but did not have proper permission to build on parts of it. I firmly believe that people should have the right to built what they want on land that is their own. It is not the job of the government to tell you what you can and can not do with your private property unless it inflicts on the well-being of society as a whole. In the case of the Dale Farm site, it would appear as if Dale Farm site greatly helped society as a whole by providing sufficient shelter for a great amount of people.