Occupy Portland

Nikki Keisler

Article 1

Ore. police arrest about 30 Wallstreet Protesters

http://www.nctimes.com/news/national/article_10372fdb-8117-5688-bf1c-0659b4499b8d.html

Basic Freedoms-Amendment 1

         

                This article is how wall street protester were protesting in a park in Portland. The protested in The Pearl District, most say they are the wealthy demographic they are protesting. Most protesters backed off once the police were involved except about 30 people. The police moved in after the protesters violated a midnight curfew.The 30 sat in a circle and waited to be arrested. They were eventually arrested. The police dragged and carried them because the protesters went limp to defy but there was no violence involved. The police said they arrested them on charges of interfering with a police officer, criminal trespassing, and disorderly conduct. The protester had a meeting earlier confirming that they would pass curfew and face being arrested. Police have allowed people to protest in other parks but haven't permitted camping. The Mayor said he would not allow let any more parks be taken over by the protesters. 

             This connects to what we are studying because protesters can argue in court that their right to assemble peacefully was violated by police. They could state that no violence was in any part of the demonstration. There for the police could have no right to arrest them. But the police didn't arrest them under violent protesting. But they still arrested them. So could you argue this amendment? 

                 This connects to my life as a citizen because I have witnessed this and my dad was in San Fransisco when the Occupy Oakland riot broke out. For example other youth and I have witness this and we might have to do to change something. When we grow up we might have to exercise our right to Assemble peacefully. Also if these protesters change something in the system it will affect our generation once we grow up. The protesters can either create positive change for us or negative change.

                  My opinion on the subject is that the protesters should of been arrested. For instance, they were on  property protesting after curfew. So, they were unlawfully trespassing on private property. But I don't think they should be charged with interfering with police officers. In the article it never stated what they did to interfere. I do think they should be charged with disorderly conduct. They were disturbing the residents of The Pearl District. So I do think they should be charged with this crime.