>I think it is fair and reasonable that the police be able to remove people who block the flow of traffic on roads. If they are peaceful and well-behaved maybe let them have their 10 minutes but then it should be possible to remove them.
Police should not only be able to remove people who set up illegal roadblocks, these people should be jailed and face consequences for breaking the law and illegally impeding the free movement of others in a public place, and not simply be removed from the road.
That being said, I completely disagree that police should have the power to preemptively shut down a protest that hasn't yet occurred. As many have pointed out, this is no different than prosecuting "thought crimes". It is the job of police to arrest people who have broken the law, not punish people who they guess might break the law in the future. This law is absolutely Orwellian.
The core of the issue is that nobody has the right to break the law, even if you do it in the name of "protesting". The central part of civil disobedience is that one is willing to suffer the legal consequences for their actions. When there are no legal consequences for breaking the law in the name of "protest", you end up with the chaotic situation we have today, where people are free to go around setting up roadblocks and physically restricting others from moving freely in public with no (or virtually no) consequence. It is unfortunate that instead of implementing reasonable, common-sense policies (like swift removal and moderate punishment of those setting up illegal roadblocks), authorities always overreach and use the situation for a power grab.
Police should not only be able to remove people who set up illegal roadblocks, these people should be jailed and face consequences for breaking the law and illegally impeding the free movement of others in a public place, and not simply be removed from the road.
That being said, I completely disagree that police should have the power to preemptively shut down a protest that hasn't yet occurred. As many have pointed out, this is no different than prosecuting "thought crimes". It is the job of police to arrest people who have broken the law, not punish people who they guess might break the law in the future. This law is absolutely Orwellian.
The core of the issue is that nobody has the right to break the law, even if you do it in the name of "protesting". The central part of civil disobedience is that one is willing to suffer the legal consequences for their actions. When there are no legal consequences for breaking the law in the name of "protest", you end up with the chaotic situation we have today, where people are free to go around setting up roadblocks and physically restricting others from moving freely in public with no (or virtually no) consequence. It is unfortunate that instead of implementing reasonable, common-sense policies (like swift removal and moderate punishment of those setting up illegal roadblocks), authorities always overreach and use the situation for a power grab.