Protesting through the halls of the Cheshire Hotel. SMH
Where should they be protesting?
You think it's ok to trespass, to terrorize the guest of a hotel by marching and screaming through the halls?
What have the protests gotten the protesters so far? Are they getting the response they're looking for? What is the goal moving forward? How do they reach that goal?
They have stated pretty clearly that they wish to disrupt the system of free exchange of goods and services, (capitalism). They would rather have a central planning type system. So, in Ferguson, they burned down a QT and put up a community center in its place (success!). Once the functioning businesses are driven out of a place by violence, along with the jobs, there is nowhere else to turn but the government. This is the goal. Let's measure their success by watching what happens next. More economic activity=failure. Less=success.
Do you think Amazon is paying attention to the events here this week?
You think it's ok to trespass, to terrorize the guest of a hotel by marching and screaming through the halls?
What have the protests gotten the protesters so far? Are they getting the response they're looking for? What is the goal moving forward? How do they reach that goal?
They have stated pretty clearly that they wish to disrupt the system of free exchange of goods and services, (capitalism). They would rather have a central planning type system. So, in Ferguson, they burned down a QT and put up a community center in its place (success!). Once the functioning businesses are driven out of a place by violence, along with the jobs, there is nowhere else to turn but the government. This is the goal. Let's measure their success by watching what happens next. More economic activity=failure. Less=success.
Do you think Amazon is paying attention to the events here this week?
But...I read the comments on STLToday about the "Honor" that the City gave to Mr. Smith. Last I saw there were about 250 comments, and I'd say probably 248 of them were outraged by the resolution. Half of them used it to re-enforce their opposition to any City/County merger.
You think it's ok to trespass, to terrorize the guest of a hotel by marching and screaming through the halls?
What have the protests gotten the protesters so far? Are they getting the response they're looking for? What is the goal moving forward? How do they reach that goal?
I've always found reading the opinion polls of how americans viewed the civil rights protests of the 60's fascinating. Stunningly low % of people supported the civil rights protesters, thought they were accomplishing their goals, etc.
Looking at those polls and the headlines from that era helps add a ton of perspective to today's issues. Not the same issues, but it helps add that perspective.
You know when a city is on mercy when you pledged the remembrance of a drug dealer.. If thats the case what about the young lady that was recently shot in the back of her neck while doing laundry? and all the other senseless killings? The mayor needs to stop trying to appease to everyone and get to the real important issues. For every protest what has the city really accomplished?
Hey why don't you just rename Lacledes Landing to Lamar Smith Landing oh wait the city will just rename a stretch of Florissant Ave Lamar Smith Ave how pathetic has this city gone?
Half of them used it to re-enforce their opposition to any City/County merger.
There are plenty of City folks who are upset with the BOA resolution.
And there are plenty that are pleased with it. And of those upset doubtless some are angry that it doesn't go far enough or do anything tangible. I'd be interested in seeing a survey as to who outnumbers whom. I liked it. It seemed simple and respectful. I live in the city. I pay my taxes. I seek the peace. I yearn for justice.
St.Louis1764 wrote:If thats the case what about the young lady that was recently shot in the back of her neck while doing laundry? and all the other senseless killings?
It's a simple acknowledgement. A bit of respect for those whose life the agents of the city brought to a close in the name of the city during the performance of their regular duties. That makes this a little special. Was the woman shot in the neck killed by agents of the government? Is the city directly responsible for her death? If someone who is drunk stumbles and falls into the street in front of a car that's exceeding the speed limit by a factor of two is the driver innocent, simply because the pedestrian was drunk? If they chooses to pay their respects to the deceased are they then obliged to pay their respects to everyone killed by drunk drivers? Is it a useless gesture to pay your respects and pledge change?
This is a special case. It deserves special attention.
I really wish there was a way to start with a clean slate in the city (get rid of anyone in a position of power: Mayor, BOA, everyone) and start new. I get tired of the same thing happening over and over. Nothing changes. I have no clue what they thought honoring Lamar Smith is going to accomplish, it is only going to increase the divide. No one has handled anything over the last week very well. I had hope at the beginning. You had cops clearing the streets for the protesters and things seemed to be mostly peaceful. Now you have a fight between protesters and police in the Galleria, reporters being arrested and pepper sprayed, and a general lack of control on something that shouldn't be a huge deal to keep in check.
I don't know why something couldn't have been worked out where the police agree to let people protest wherever they want, provided it is in a public area (even if that means the police close down a road to accommodate them). If I have to go a couple blocks out of my way because some people are standing in the road, so be it. In turn, the protesters agree to end any protest by 5 pm so that there is plenty of time, while it is still light out, to disband and not have things carry into the evening when they start to get violent.
In my mind there is a way to protest and get your point across without hurting local businesses or making national headlines for protests that get out of hand. I am tired of St. Louis shooting itself in the foot at every turn. We have enough trouble trying to keep up with other cities as it is, we don't need to be the ones holding ourselves back.
I believe the point is to hurt local businesses and create national headlines. Not too sure if the protesters are having much of an impact on either, however.
I have no clue what they thought honoring Lamar Smith is going to accomplish, it is only going to increase the divide.
I think there's some confusion that's been spread by individuals like Jeff Roorda. The resolution I've read, Resolution 139, is just a simple remembrance and a call for a brief reflective pause. After some biography of Mr. Smith the actual resolution itself says only this:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Aldermen of the City of St. Louis that we
pause in our deliberations to remember Anthony Lamar Smith and we further direct the Clerk of this Board
to spread a copy of this Resolution across the minutes of these proceeding and to prepare a memorial copy
to the end that it may be presented at a time and place deemed appropriate by the Sponsor.
I don't believe anyone gave him an award. He's not being raised up as a model citizen. The leaders of the city took a moment to reflect soberly on a person that an agent of our city killed. In effect, they apologized to his family and in their remarks called for change, acknowledging and echoing the calls of the protesters. Unless there's a great deal more that was done I see no reason this small action should cause any controversy. Moreover I think anger about what is fundamentally a compassionate act can cause pain right now. Take a moment. Read the resolution in full, if you wish. It's really remarkably short. It acknowledges Smith's humanity. The biography paints him in a rather positive light, which doesn't seem unreasonable for something that's kith and kin to a short eulogy. We don't usually talk about the sins of the dead at their funerals.
We all need to step back for a moment and breathe. Many of us are angry for both good reasons and bad. There's a lot of misinformation out there. Some of it is coming from fairly (if perhaps dubiously) respectable sources.
For better or worse, I believe it is self evident that police generally and the metropolitan police specifically have lost the confidence of a large portion of the citizens of our great city. Is it unreasonable for the representatives of the people to discuss the change that so many are so obviously and energetically demanding? When we express anger at the protests we run the risk of appearing to dismiss their concerns. When we angrily suggest that the government shouldn't pay their respects to the dead we appear to devalue his family and all those who believe they share his identity or the dangers that he faced because of it.
I do not wish to see anyone in our city paupered. I do not wish to see anyone killed without justice.
If you want to hear the comments at the meeting surrounding the resolution they're on youtube:
The relevant portion begins at about 5:20 and continue for several minutes. The comments take the protest to City Hall, which is, in many ways, exactly the right forum for it. That was very much the point, I think. If we want peace then I think we will have to support our Alderpersons in their attempt to work through these issues. It is in City Hall that we can seek a more just system. With justice there might be peace. With peace there will be no more protests. City Hall is precisely the venue for this. If there was an injustice done it was done in the name of the city by an agent of the city: either in the killing of Smith or in the exoneration of Stockley. Let the City sort this out. Let our representatives discuss the functioning of our police system. If you want peace I really believe this is not merely the best way for us to get it, but maybe the only way. I won't presuppose what change is needed, but if we keep on in the manner we're going then I cannot see any outcome but more anger, more tension, and more bloodshed. We cannot eat and expect our neighbors to quietly starve. We cannot sit in comfort and prosperity and expect our neighbors to quietly suffer in poverty and despair. We cannot terrorize half the city to protect the other half. We rise or fall together.
And there are plenty that are pleased with it. And of those upset doubtless some are angry that it doesn't go far enough or do anything tangible. I'd be interested in seeing a survey as to who outnumbers whom. I liked it. It seemed simple and respectful. I live in the city. I pay my taxes. I seek the peace. I yearn for justice.
I appreciate your perspective. I do. The people in the city who were upset with resolution wasn't because it didn't go far enough.
Oldenburg is my Alderman. I read his blog on the matter. It put things in perspective. I respect his reasoning. That said, it was a mistake for the BOA set aside time for this. Krewson sharing a moment with Smith's Mother -- I totally understand that. But Smith did not deserve a remembrance. 100's of people die every day, who lived much more noble lives than Smith. They are much more deserving but get no special mention beyond their friends & family....
For what it's worth, I've been travelling around New England since the decision came out and no one seems to know anything about this. I know the national papers and 24 hour news channels have had stories on it, but it doesn't seem like anyone outside of St. Louis is paying attention.
As has been pointed out, there are protests and riots every day now about countless different issues. No one cares anymore.
I have no clue what they thought honoring Lamar Smith is going to accomplish, it is only going to increase the divide.
I think there's some confusion that's been spread by individuals like Jeff Roorda. The resolution I've read, Resolution 139, is just a simple remembrance and a call for a brief reflective pause. After some biography of Mr. Smith the actual resolution itself says only this:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Aldermen of the City of St. Louis that we
pause in our deliberations to remember Anthony Lamar Smith and we further direct the Clerk of this Board
to spread a copy of this Resolution across the minutes of these proceeding and to prepare a memorial copy
to the end that it may be presented at a time and place deemed appropriate by the Sponsor.
I don't believe anyone gave him an award. He's not being raised up as a model citizen. The leaders of the city took a moment to reflect soberly on a person that an agent of our city killed. In effect, they apologized to his family and in their remarks called for change, acknowledging and echoing the calls of the protesters. Unless there's a great deal more that was done I see no reason this small action should cause any controversy. Moreover I think anger about what is fundamentally a compassionate act can cause pain right now. Take a moment. Read the resolution in full, if you wish. It's really remarkably short. It acknowledges Smith's humanity. The biography paints him in a rather positive light, which doesn't seem unreasonable for something that's kith and kin to a short eulogy. We don't usually talk about the sins of the dead at their funerals.
We all need to step back for a moment and breathe. Many of us are angry for both good reasons and bad. There's a lot of misinformation out there. Some of it is coming from fairly (if perhaps dubiously) respectable sources.
For better or worse, I believe it is self evident that police generally and the metropolitan police specifically have lost the confidence of a large portion of the citizens of our great city. Is it unreasonable for the representatives of the people to discuss the change that so many are so obviously and energetically demanding? When we express anger at the protests we run the risk of appearing to dismiss their concerns. When we angrily suggest that the government shouldn't pay their respects to the dead we appear to devalue his family and all those who believe they share his identity or the dangers that he faced because of it.
I do not wish to see anyone in our city paupered. I do not wish to see anyone killed without justice.
If you want to hear the comments at the meeting surrounding the resolution they're on youtube:
The relevant portion begins at about 5:20 and continue for several minutes. The comments take the protest to City Hall, which is, in many ways, exactly the right forum for it. That was very much the point, I think. If we want peace then I think we will have to support our Alderpersons in their attempt to work through these issues. It is in City Hall that we can seek a more just system. With justice there might be peace. With peace there will be no more protests. City Hall is precisely the venue for this. If there was an injustice done it was done in the name of the city by an agent of the city: either in the killing of Smith or in the exoneration of Stockley. Let the City sort this out. Let our representatives discuss the functioning of our police system. If you want peace I really believe this is not merely the best way for us to get it, but maybe the only way. I won't presuppose what change is needed, but if we keep on in the manner we're going then I cannot see any outcome but more anger, more tension, and more bloodshed. We cannot eat and expect our neighbors to quietly starve. We cannot sit in comfort and prosperity and expect our neighbors to quietly suffer in poverty and despair. We cannot terrorize half the city to protect the other half. We rise or fall together.
I like and respect some of the people I've publicly disagreed with here, so it seems worth trying to be polite. Probably bears emphasis that I do indeed not only respect but actually like folks on the other side of this one. It is by no means a simple issue.
Very interesting poll results of likely general election voters in the City of St. Louis:
Krewson:
Approve: 36
Disapprove: 36
Protesters:
Approve: 41
Disapprove 41
Police:
Approve: 39
Disapprove: 41
I agree, very interesting numbers. The Krewson poll surprised me. Would have expected her disapproval to be way higher.
Speaking of her, what are everyone’s opinions of her thus far? I frankly believe she’s doing alright. She’s in a tightrope walk. She’s doing her best. I think she’s doing better than Tishaura would have done, IMHO.
Bruce Franks is a member of the Missouri House of Representatives. Wouldn't his time be better spent drafting bills to enact changes in MO law/policies rather than leading daily protests? It seems to me that he's not utilizing his elected powers to make change. Thoughts?
Bruce Franks is a member of the Missouri House of Representatives. Wouldn't his time be better spent drafting bills to enact changes in MO law/policies rather than leading daily protests? It seems to me that he's not utilizing his elected powers to make change. Thoughts?
If he's inspiring people from outside his constituency to vote in more progressive candidates, wouldn't the task of enacting changes become easier? Aside from being an elected official, he's also an active citizen. Does it have to be binary?
Bruce Franks is a member of the Missouri House of Representatives. Wouldn't his time be better spent drafting bills to enact changes in MO law/policies rather than leading daily protests? It seems to me that he's not utilizing his elected powers to make change. Thoughts?
well he did get like $6M for youth jobs last session.
Also bills cant be filled until December so he has plenty of time.
