urbanMSP

BLM and NOC work closely together.

NOC works with a lot of people, but there are some pretty clear differences in the tactics, rhetoric, and leadership of the two organizations.

Well sure, they have different but related aims.

What I'm clumsily trying to say is that the ideas put forward by NOC about what investment should look like are pretty much what I've heard from BLM leaders. That's not just a coincidence.

This isn't strictly relevant to police in the Twin Cities, but the new Netflix show Making a Murderer is a documentary series that delves deeply into a few criminal cases in Manitowoc County in Wisconsin. No black people in this instance, but the defendants are low-income and mentally challenged. It's a fantastic show exploring the system that they're up against.

Earlier criticism aside, I cannot for the life of me understand why MOA is so terrified of BLM. The protest will obviously occur in some form or another no matter what, give them a reasonable forum to conduct it.

Presumably they don't like the precedent of allowing any group with a free speech itch to scratch to take over one of their rotundas.

KKK rally, anyone?

The KKK has a long history of ethnic cleansing. BLM is a group asking for the affirmation of humanity and an end to uneven applications of state sanctioned violence. In no way are the two analogous.

I think the mall is more worried about being considered a public space than anything else, because it comes with all sorts of implications and caveats. If they fiercely defend their status as an exclusively private space they can do all sorts of things that wouldn't fly otherwise.

That said, I still think their private space claim is bullshit for a number of reasons, most notably that there is a transit center embedded in it and you must traverse mall land to cross the street to and from it to the south and now I guess the north too. That's ignoring the massive public subsidies and fact that Bloomington PD patrol it like a city street instead of waiting to be called like you would for all other private property.

It doesn't have to be the KKK for the analogy to work. Allowing protest groups of any kind offers no benefits to the mall.

And let's not pretend this is designed to be some sort of quiet gathering. The entire premise is that the protestors will get attention by disrupting the status quo.

If BLM feels this protest will make a difference, they should go through with it. But it's odd that people expect the mall to embrace it.

To be clear, the *only* thing I was suggesting that BLM and the KKK have in common is a predilection for public, disruptive demonstrations that are protected by constitutional free speech rights.

Call the protest a fundraiser

http://www.startribune.com/thousands-jo ... 361644321/

To be clear, the *only* thing I was suggesting that BLM and the KKK have in common is a predilection for public, disruptive demonstrations that are protected by constitutional free speech rights.

I really hope that this statement is true and in good faith.

It can be argued that BLM is most notable for disruptive rallies. But the KKK is most notable for murdering thousands of innocent people and through acts of terrorism caused one of the largest forced migrations in human history.

One should be very careful when making casual references.

When is the last time anyone on here witnessed a Klan rally? And no, when you watched your copy of 'Blues Brothers' on DVD does not count.

When is the last time anyone on here witnessed a Klan rally? And no, when you watched your copy of 'Blues Brothers' on DVD does not count.

You're thinking of Illinois Nazis. I hate Illinois Nazis.

One should be very careful when making casual references.

Man, obviously he was just giving an extreme example to show why MOA wouldn't want to give all groups an unfettered right to demonstrate. Geez.

Anyway, the whole "public space" angle is circumvented entirely if MOA just voluntarily gives BLM a forum for a few hours. The mall still gets to claim it exercises discretion over its space and BLM gets to do what it will do anyway. Too bad both sides are probably itching for a fight and are unlikely to stand for anything resembling an amicably negotiated solution.

When is the last time anyone on here witnessed a Klan rally?

KKK rallies really aren't that uncommon. And since they usually take place in an official capacity — registered with the city, police escorts etc. — the KKK rally is the textbook example used when learning about the first amendment. So let's not pretend MNdible's example was something it obviously wasn't.

Studio Gang is working on a great project in Chicago to transform police stations into community centers. This is a really great idea, and it is certainly something Minneapolis should look into. Police stations already provide safe places for craigslist transactions, or safe drop spots for package deliveries, and they could become even more engage with the communities they serve.

It is funny that BLM claims to be doing this because of an event in another city, and making demands that the MOA has absolutely no control over.

Also, the claim that MOA is a public space because of subsidies is absolutely crazy. Would BLM be allowed to protest on the field during a Vikings or Twins game? I doubt it

Actually blm tactics have been effective. It's started a national conversation about policing and criminal justice reform. Locally the planned tc marathon protest got blm a meeting with Chris Coleman.

The fact that Susan Gaertner is able to find work as an attorney after how she handled the Koua Fong Lee case is proof enough we have a very long way to go in this country.

Also, the claim that MOA is a public space because of subsidies is absolutely crazy. Would BLM be allowed to protest on the field during a Vikings or Twins game? I doubt it

That comparison isn't the best, I'd say I'm with trigonal on this one. The MoA defacto functions like a public space, despite not being one legally. Shopping malls *did* replace some public spaces that had the same function (town markets, corridors of businesses on public streets, etc), effectively privatizing them, and eroding the extent of protection offered by the bill of rights. While the stores inside the mall are fully private in terms of function and law, the corridors/Commons between them aren't. They *were* designed rather explicitly to be indoor replacements for them, given our climate.

I'd further say that there are some other things such as skyways (which are directly comparable to malls) and many websites (just 2 things that immediately come to mind) that function as public forums/Commons, and that at some point in time we'll need to address the fact that our basic constitutional rights can be circumvented by simply privatizing public spaces.

What exactly would happen if some lolbertarians took over a town's government and placed public street/sidewalk ROW under the control of a private company? Since it's "private" then one could say protesting or free passage are no longer guaranteed. We already have some regulations on the books that deal with private property rights vs. the public good when it comes to a couple things like railroads and Internet access, so this isn't exactly fantasy land.

Also, the claim that MOA is a public space because of subsidies is absolutely crazy. Would BLM be allowed to protest on the field during a Vikings or Twins game? I doubt it

That comparison isn't the best, I'd say I'm with trigonal on this one. The MoA defacto functions like a public space, despite not being one legally. Shopping malls *did* replace some public spaces that had the same function (town markets, corridors of businesses on public streets, etc), effectively privatizing them, and eroding the extent of protection offered by the bill of rights. While the stores inside the mall are fully private in terms of function and law, the corridors/Commons between them aren't. They *were* designed rather explicitly to be indoor replacements for them, given our climate.

I'd further say that there are some other things such as skyways (which are directly comparable to malls) and many websites (just 2 things that immediately come to mind) that function as public forums/Commons, and that at some point in time we'll need to address the fact that our basic constitutional rights can be circumvented by simply privatizing public spaces.

What exactly would happen if some lolbertarians took over a town's government and placed public street/sidewalk ROW under the control of a private company? Since it's "private" then one could say protesting or free passage are no longer guaranteed. We already have some regulations on the books that deal with private property rights vs. the public good when it comes to a couple things like railroads and Internet access, so this isn't exactly fantasy land.

You're trying really hard but the MoA is without question private property in terms of the law. Ideals and "defacto functions" don't count in real life. Trying to act like what is clearly private property is somehow public property is a waste of time and not what this country is about. The tax breaks that MoA has gotten over the years don't make it a public space. Almost 100% of buildings in this country have received some sort of tax break. If tax breaks make a private building public, I'm going to move in to a house that received a First Time Homebuyers Credit.