sadly, masking yourself when protesting is forbidden here in my country :c
Facepaint? Some designs can confound facial recognition systems
But it won't protect against tear gas or rubber bullets.
Ironically neither does a mask?
Not a balaclava, but there are goggles and full-face masks that offer some protection. And even a balaclava is better than nothing against rubber bullets and bean bags.
I have been shot with a bean bag. Balaclava isn't going to do shit. I was wearing a leather coat and almost my whole torso was deeply bruised.
It doesn't help that cops purposefully misuse those types of guns. If I recall correctly, they're supposed to "bounce" the round off the ground and into the target, reducing the total amount of force hitting the target since some of the impact will be reduced from the first impact on the ground.
The number of cops who just shoot people straight with these things point blank is too god damned high. However, you can still get deeply fucked up, even if they're using it "correctly."
not just straight at people, they have caught police, on video, intentionally getting within arms reach and shooting at the head.
Is that how you inspired your username?
I wish.
I didn't say it wouldn't leave a bruise. Even solid armor plates won't stop that amount of kinetic energy without leaving a mark. But having soft padding between the projectile and your skin will reduce the abrasion and force of low-angle impacts. "Better than nothing" in this case means the difference between a deep bruise, and a deep bruise under potentially an open and bleeding wound.
Look to nature. Butterfly wing patterns.
Nah. Dazzle pattern, or paint an extra nose and a few eyes.
Now that I think about it, that is butterfly pattern isn't it.
It kinda makes sense, protests are supposed to be peaceful, why bring a mask if your intent is a peaceful protest?
Protest is never peaceful, if it is you're doing it wrong. It should be non-violent and as respectful as possible but it needs to be disruptive and you can't be peacefully disruptive
Peaceful and non-violent are synonyms….
You also contradict yourself as well. You say to be non-violent, then you say you can’t be peacefully disruptive… those contradict each other.
If me and my fellow protestors block a road, we are being non-violent, but we are being disruptive.
And that is peaceful as well, until it isn’t.
...and in 99% of the cases where it stops being "peaceful" it's because cops come in and violently assault everyone to try to break up the protest.
I'm really not sure of the point you're trying to make. Protest can be peaceful, non-violent and disruptive.
You’re the one arguing with me after I said protests are peaceful. What the fucking hell is going on here?
Sorry, my bad, I confused you with the guy above you. That ones on me.
No, they aren't. You must be disruptive, which isn't peaceful.
How can you be non-violent and not peaceful at the same time…? lmfao. They mean the exact same thing.
Hmm I see what the dictionaries are saying but (using an example from above) I think argument exists that:
If me and my fellow protestors block a road, we are being non-violent, but we are not being peaceful.
But it's Friday and no time for argument!
What’s not peaceful about blocking a road?
The argument falls apart when you ask for the difference lol.
Peaceful: freedom from disturbance; tranquility.
It is a disturbance to the system, and it isn't tranquil. They are not synonyms. Non-violent means you aren't hurting anyone, peaceful means you aren't disturbing anything. You can't be violent and peaceful but you can be non-violent and non-peaceful. Peace is sufficient but not necessary for non-violence.
Literally the next definition after that one….
not involving war or violence.
SYNONYMS…
Peaceful literally means non-violent…. Literally defines the bloody term lmfao.
One definition of peaceful is synonymous, and one isn't. This is exactly why language has so many synonyms, each one is sliiiightly different. Choosing one intentionally instead of another is important.
In this instance, "peace" is being defined (not directly, but through context) as status quo, going about your day unhindered. "Violence" is being defined as causing direct physical harm to a person, and possibly property depending on who you ask.
With these definitions laid out, it's easy enough to see a situation that is not violent (no one got hurt at all) and also not peaceful (some people's days were interrupted) - one person mentioned blocking a road. This is a FANTASTIC example of non-peaceful non-violent protest. No one likes a pedant.
No one likes a pedant.
Goes on a bloviated pedantic rant…
Yep, just like the people trying to say blocking a road isn’t peaceful. They are trying to pedantically choose a definition to make a point. Blocking a road is absolutely peaceful, trying to explain it any other way would be to be pendantic. Lmfao.
the next definition
So, overlapping meanings, not synonyms
They are both, one is defined by other, AND they are synonyms.
Isn’t language fucked up?
I see a lot of other people have responded with examples and argument.
So I'll disagree and say the argument falls apart when I don't argue. (Cause it's Friday. You ain't got no job. You ain't got shit to do. I'm gonna get you high today.)
Disruptive doesn't mean violent, but it isn't peaceful.
Peaceful and non-violent mean the exact same thing…
They do not.
Peaceful and non-violent mean the exact same thing…
They do not.
Skydiving isn't peaceful, but it certainly isn't violent.
What’s not peaceful about skydiving…?
I'd go with the wind, noise, speed, and imminent possiblity of death.
wind, noise, speed.
So going for a drive wouldn’t be peaceful either…?
imminent possiblity of death.
So… driving again? Or riding a motor bike? Not peaceful…? Strange perspective to have…
Strange example to try and use lol.
Go ahead, take a nice bath, read a book, or do some origami while skydiving, or driving at 200mph with the top down.
Non-violent in the context of political action does not exclude property damage and looting. A non violent protest is still disruptive, it's the entire point
In the USA its because they use facial recognition and then decide to harass you for the next decade over every small infraction they can.
Because nobody in a position of power would ever abuse that power! /s
There have been events where nazis show up to counter protest and film/photograph you to then share among themselves so they can attack you later.
Thats happening a lot lately in Germany. At every fucking Antifa protest at least one suspicious looking guy films with his handy. I honestly doubt, that they have the necessary skill and contact with other fascists in other cities to identify everybody, but I still don‘t want them to know my face
Because a nasty disease spread mostly by sneezing and coughing is going around.
Protest is not meant to be peaceful. You're thinking of a demonstration
Masks are no indicator of criminality. The idea that bad protesters wear masks is complete horseshit. It serves to divide movements and prevent momentum from being gained. It seeks to dissolve solidarity that couls have been gained at the protests.
Masks allow peaceful protests to remain peaceful if they prevent the violence of the justice system. Sometimes protesters and organizers are simply arrested and thrown in jail for a bit, sometimes even given nonsense charges, which is something that happens to organizers and some protesters in my area.
As well as that, masks can simply be good secops in some counter-protests such as protesting against fascist marches, gatherings, etc. If I’m showing up to show nazis or boogaloos or proud boys that they are unwelcome, the last thing I want is a violent right wing extremist group to try and doxx me. If I’m escorting people to a drag-queen story hour, I don’t want fascists to doxx me.
It’s also smart in some areas, such as Harvard’s campus where organizers are constantly doxxed and accused of antisemitism even though they are not.
Finally, what if the government makes your particular movement illegal? What if they start throwing the book people, accusing everyone involved(or at least the ones they can catch) of domestic terrorism? Wearing a mask will make it a lot easier for you to maintain your freedom when faced with the tyrrany of the state.
Also, masks look cool, and that’s a pretty good reason imo.
Protests only work because they carry an unstated show of force.
"Peaceful protest" is the ideal they push because it doesn't work. If it worked it wouldn't be praised. They don't want change.
Who is "they"?
In this specific instance, anyone who stands to benefit from the status quo
sadly, masking yourself when protesting is forbidden here in my country :c
Facepaint? Some designs can confound facial recognition systems
But it won't protect against tear gas or rubber bullets.
Ironically neither does a mask?
Not a balaclava, but there are goggles and full-face masks that offer some protection. And even a balaclava is better than nothing against rubber bullets and bean bags.
I have been shot with a bean bag. Balaclava isn't going to do shit. I was wearing a leather coat and almost my whole torso was deeply bruised.
It doesn't help that cops purposefully misuse those types of guns. If I recall correctly, they're supposed to "bounce" the round off the ground and into the target, reducing the total amount of force hitting the target since some of the impact will be reduced from the first impact on the ground.
The number of cops who just shoot people straight with these things point blank is too god damned high. However, you can still get deeply fucked up, even if they're using it "correctly."
not just straight at people, they have caught police, on video, intentionally getting within arms reach and shooting at the head.
Is that how you inspired your username?
I wish.
I didn't say it wouldn't leave a bruise. Even solid armor plates won't stop that amount of kinetic energy without leaving a mark. But having soft padding between the projectile and your skin will reduce the abrasion and force of low-angle impacts. "Better than nothing" in this case means the difference between a deep bruise, and a deep bruise under potentially an open and bleeding wound.
Look to nature. Butterfly wing patterns.
Nah. Dazzle pattern, or paint an extra nose and a few eyes.
Now that I think about it, that is butterfly pattern isn't it.
It kinda makes sense, protests are supposed to be peaceful, why bring a mask if your intent is a peaceful protest?
Protest is never peaceful, if it is you're doing it wrong. It should be non-violent and as respectful as possible but it needs to be disruptive and you can't be peacefully disruptive
Peaceful and non-violent are synonyms….
You also contradict yourself as well. You say to be non-violent, then you say you can’t be peacefully disruptive… those contradict each other.
If me and my fellow protestors block a road, we are being non-violent, but we are being disruptive.
And that is peaceful as well, until it isn’t.
...and in 99% of the cases where it stops being "peaceful" it's because cops come in and violently assault everyone to try to break up the protest.
I'm really not sure of the point you're trying to make. Protest can be peaceful, non-violent and disruptive.
You’re the one arguing with me after I said protests are peaceful. What the fucking hell is going on here?
Sorry, my bad, I confused you with the guy above you. That ones on me.
No, they aren't. You must be disruptive, which isn't peaceful.
How can you be non-violent and not peaceful at the same time…? lmfao. They mean the exact same thing.
Hmm I see what the dictionaries are saying but (using an example from above) I think argument exists that:
If me and my fellow protestors block a road, we are being non-violent, but we are not being peaceful.
But it's Friday and no time for argument!
What’s not peaceful about blocking a road?
The argument falls apart when you ask for the difference lol.
Peaceful: freedom from disturbance; tranquility.
It is a disturbance to the system, and it isn't tranquil. They are not synonyms. Non-violent means you aren't hurting anyone, peaceful means you aren't disturbing anything. You can't be violent and peaceful but you can be non-violent and non-peaceful. Peace is sufficient but not necessary for non-violence.
Literally the next definition after that one….
SYNONYMS…
Peaceful literally means non-violent…. Literally defines the bloody term lmfao.
One definition of peaceful is synonymous, and one isn't. This is exactly why language has so many synonyms, each one is sliiiightly different. Choosing one intentionally instead of another is important.
In this instance, "peace" is being defined (not directly, but through context) as status quo, going about your day unhindered. "Violence" is being defined as causing direct physical harm to a person, and possibly property depending on who you ask.
With these definitions laid out, it's easy enough to see a situation that is not violent (no one got hurt at all) and also not peaceful (some people's days were interrupted) - one person mentioned blocking a road. This is a FANTASTIC example of non-peaceful non-violent protest. No one likes a pedant.
Goes on a bloviated pedantic rant…
Yep, just like the people trying to say blocking a road isn’t peaceful. They are trying to pedantically choose a definition to make a point. Blocking a road is absolutely peaceful, trying to explain it any other way would be to be pendantic. Lmfao.
So, overlapping meanings, not synonyms
They are both, one is defined by other, AND they are synonyms.
Isn’t language fucked up?
I see a lot of other people have responded with examples and argument.
So I'll disagree and say the argument falls apart when I don't argue. (Cause it's Friday. You ain't got no job. You ain't got shit to do. I'm gonna get you high today.)
Disruptive doesn't mean violent, but it isn't peaceful.
Peaceful and non-violent mean the exact same thing…
They do not.
Peaceful and non-violent mean the exact same thing…
They do not.
Skydiving isn't peaceful, but it certainly isn't violent.
What’s not peaceful about skydiving…?
I'd go with the wind, noise, speed, and imminent possiblity of death.
So going for a drive wouldn’t be peaceful either…?
So… driving again? Or riding a motor bike? Not peaceful…? Strange perspective to have…
Strange example to try and use lol.
Go ahead, take a nice bath, read a book, or do some origami while skydiving, or driving at 200mph with the top down.
You know what is peaceful? Take a hike.
Peaceful means not being disturbed, nonviolent means no violence.
Peaceful literally means non-violent.
If you are being non-violent by definition you are also being peaceful….
Non-violent in the context of political action does not exclude property damage and looting. A non violent protest is still disruptive, it's the entire point
In the USA its because they use facial recognition and then decide to harass you for the next decade over every small infraction they can.
Because nobody in a position of power would ever abuse that power! /s
There have been events where nazis show up to counter protest and film/photograph you to then share among themselves so they can attack you later.
Thats happening a lot lately in Germany. At every fucking Antifa protest at least one suspicious looking guy films with his handy. I honestly doubt, that they have the necessary skill and contact with other fascists in other cities to identify everybody, but I still don‘t want them to know my face
Because a nasty disease spread mostly by sneezing and coughing is going around.
Protest is not meant to be peaceful. You're thinking of a demonstration
Masks are no indicator of criminality. The idea that bad protesters wear masks is complete horseshit. It serves to divide movements and prevent momentum from being gained. It seeks to dissolve solidarity that couls have been gained at the protests.
Masks allow peaceful protests to remain peaceful if they prevent the violence of the justice system. Sometimes protesters and organizers are simply arrested and thrown in jail for a bit, sometimes even given nonsense charges, which is something that happens to organizers and some protesters in my area.
As well as that, masks can simply be good secops in some counter-protests such as protesting against fascist marches, gatherings, etc. If I’m showing up to show nazis or boogaloos or proud boys that they are unwelcome, the last thing I want is a violent right wing extremist group to try and doxx me. If I’m escorting people to a drag-queen story hour, I don’t want fascists to doxx me.
It’s also smart in some areas, such as Harvard’s campus where organizers are constantly doxxed and accused of antisemitism even though they are not.
Finally, what if the government makes your particular movement illegal? What if they start throwing the book people, accusing everyone involved(or at least the ones they can catch) of domestic terrorism? Wearing a mask will make it a lot easier for you to maintain your freedom when faced with the tyrrany of the state.
Also, masks look cool, and that’s a pretty good reason imo.
Protests only work because they carry an unstated show of force.
"Peaceful protest" is the ideal they push because it doesn't work. If it worked it wouldn't be praised. They don't want change.
Who is "they"?
In this specific instance, anyone who stands to benefit from the status quo