portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article portland metro

actions & protests | police / legal m20: day x

Direct Action has never been less arrestable in Portland

the positive side of budget cuts!
budget cuts have changed the face of protest and direct action here in portland, but we haven't quite figured that out yet as a movement. remember how all those people were released from jails back in january 'cos there's just not the money to keep them in there? have you heard about how only violent crimes are being prosecuted right now in many cases? or how even people caught red-handed for crimes like burglarly are not being held? this city is quite simply incapable of mass arrests right now. i think that's why they only took one person on saturday on the morrison bridge. they had enough cops and a good enough position to arrest 40+ people on the I-5 ramp, but they didn't. why not? because they simply can't afford to. nowhere to put us and no money to prosecute.

this is not to say that direct action won't result in any arrests at all. just that it's clear the resources don't exist to do mass arrests, and that this fact can work for us, big-time.

of course, this doesn't apply on federal property. that's another pot of money, and they're not in as bad of trouble (yet).

and, there's always pepper-spray that can be used for clearing people away. as we saw on saturday, officer marty rowley, badge #8969, for one, is very anxious to use it, too. he was seen breathlessly asking lt. commander rosie sizemore if he could start spraying. that two-faced bitch let him do it, too.

but the cops move slowly. their military maneuvers take planning and time to execute. we, on the other hand, can be more flexible. once they're all lined up carefully, blocking a bridge (for example), we can quickly move on to another target. we can move faster than they can.

here's a scenario: the bombing starts. folks gather at terry shrunk plaza. at 5::00 the call for a march and direct action goes out. 3-4 thousand people strike off to do this. the crowd makes stops at several targets, including bridges, malls, big intersections, and -- of course -- I-5. (Maybe 405, downtown, where the ramps are shorter and it doesn't take as long to get down to the traffic.) At each stop, a few hundred people sit or stand in the middle until cops arrive and get into their positions. then, the majority of people move on. after 5-6 places, the cops'll be spread very very thin and won't be able to do as much at any given place. in this way we could shut down downtown's major traffic arteries, and hence the city itself. it's not difficult, it's non-violent, and it's effective. and, it probably won't result in many arrests.

so those are some thoughts i've had about the day the war starts. any others?
fyi 17.Mar.2003 07:39

love

the term "red-handed" is a deragatory one against Native Americans..., though clearly it is the white blooded aMEricans who are the thieves!

ooops 17.Mar.2003 09:43

observer

yes, you're right -- i shouldn't've use that term. thanks for pointing it out.

Not True 17.Mar.2003 12:20

jbk

Actually the origin of the phrase "Caught Red Handed" is not related to native americans but rather being caught with blood on one's hands. Anyone have a source relating to the phrase being deragatory against Native Americans then please post it.

Source: Oxford English Dictionary:

The phrase "red-handed," meaning "in the very act of crime, having the evidences of guilt still upon the person," is quite a bit older than exploding bags of money or organized nut theft. It first appeared in that form in English in the mid-19th century, and as the adjective "redhand" was common in Scots (the language of Scotland) since the 15th century. A moment's consideration of the history of 15th century may clue you into what the "red" really was -- blood. A murderer caught "red-handed" still had the blood of his victim on his hands. We have, since the 18th century, also used "red-handed" to describe any criminal caught in the act or bearing irrefutable evidence of guilt.

Also see  http://www.takeourword.com/TOW128/page2.html

The phrase started life as redhand, a legal term from 15th century Scotland. It meant, basically, "red handed", as in caught red-handed. By the 16th century we find the Scottish phrase taken red-handed (or as the Scots put it, tane red-handed), and it wasn't until Walter Scott (a Scotsman) wrote Ivanhoe in 1819 that taken red-handed caught on in English and was caught red-handed by 1857.

etymology 17.Mar.2003 13:09

no one in particular

 http://www.takeourword.com/TOW128/page2.html

The phrase started life as redhand, a legal term from 15th century Scotland. It meant, basically, "red handed", as in caught red-handed. By the 16th century we find the Scottish phrase taken red-handed (or as the Scots put it, tane red-handed), and it wasn't until Walter Scott (a Scotsman) wrote Ivanhoe in 1819 that taken red-handed caught on in English and was caught red-handed by 1857.

Why red-handed, you ask? We heard one layperson suggest that it might be because of the dye bombs put in ransom money to mark and/or ruin the bills. Well, such bombs weren't in use in 15th century Scotland. This phrase's origin is more obvious than that: to be caught red-handed is to be caught with blood on one's hands, perhaps literally when the phrase was first used, but now it is a figurative sense. We'll leave you with this quotation from Scotland in 1609: Gif he is takin with reid or hait hand of slauchter ("if he is taken with red or hot hand of slaughter").

their own medicine 17.Mar.2003 15:37

.^.

Ya know it would be a lot easier and safer to use 3 car/trucks to block a highway. Rolling road block --> 0 m.p.h.

Who needs a march... 17.Mar.2003 21:40

Rebel Rouser

... It would only take 2-3 people and 2-3 cars to block a freeway. Easy enough. Why go to the bother of getting people together to march? I bet a multiple blocked freeways would divert attention from the happenings of downtown...

2 cars blocking 2 of 3 lanes, or 3 cars blocking 3 of 4 lanes.

A moving road block could slow / halt traffic at will, and restart at will. Semi trucks do it all the time during rush hour, although they don't stop... I wonder...

... could plans be in the making?

anti tire devices could just as easily be dumped over ANY overpass, but you didn't hear that from me. Boy would that make people mad though. That would take things to the next level and the folks who do that will be labeled terrorists.

-rr

Use your heads guys...the one that rattles 18.Mar.2003 22:50

Oz

Doing any of the things you are talking here would be a quick ticket to jail - make that prison (8-12 years), especially dropping spikes on the highway. Similar things have been done (dropping rocks from overpasses) and the charges included attempted murder (multiple counts).

Rolling roadblocks would make it easier to apprehend you - duh - you would be the guys in the front when the cops approach from the empty highway in front of you...


Any other bright ideas?