Anyone venturing into a 3.3-square-mile “event zone” surrounding next month’s Republican National Convention will be prohibited from carrying tennis balls, tape, rope, bike locks, sleeping bags, or any object they could stand on to rise above the crowd and speak. They won’t be allowed to carry swords or water guns. But if they have a license, they’ll be permitted to openly carry real guns, including assault weapons.
As Cleveland gears up to host one of the most controversial GOP conventions in decades, Ohio’s permissive gun policy isn’t the only red flag raised by prospective protesters and civil rights advocates. Many also warn that the regulations put in place by the city place “unacceptable restrictions on free speech” and risk escalating conflict, rather than diffusing it, by forcing rival groups of demonstrators to share tight quarters and schedules while keeping them out of sight and earshot of delegates and the media.
The restrictions imposed on the large event zone drawn around Cleveland’s Quicken Loans Arena — known locally as “The Q”— have earned the city a lawsuit filed by the ACLU of Ohio and widespread criticism across the spectrum of groups planning to show up at the convention to make their voices heard.
A man carries a semi-automatic pistol while he waits in line to purchase groceries at a Safeway grocery store in Alexandria, Va., Nov. 21, 2015.
Photo: Cliff Owen/AP
The nearly 30 groups that have applied for permits to protest at the convention have been told marches can only take place between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., with an hour off for lunch, while most action inside the convention hall is expected to take place in the evening. Marches are restricted to a 1-mile route over a bridge where they can hardly be seen. “The route takes a sharp right away from the Quicken Loans Arena and kind of dumps people into an industrial wasteland,” Christine Link, the executive director of the ACLU of Ohio, told The Intercept. “There’s nowhere to get a bottle of water, and it’s a long way back to your car.”
Protesters fear they will be effectively silenced by the isolation, but also worry about the close scheduling of groups on polar opposites of the political spectrum. For instance, members of the radical leftist Revolution Books are set to share one of two small gathering places with Westboro Baptist Church, an anti-gay hate group best known for picketing high-profile funerals. “As you can imagine,” Link said, “these groups are not going to be very friendly to each other.”
The ACLU lawsuit was filed on behalf of three groups: Citizens for Trump; Organize Ohio, a coalition of grassroots organizations planning an anti-poverty march during the convention; and the Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless, which is not planning to protest but argues that the broad event zone imposes an unfair burden on an area that includes three homeless shelters and two homeless encampments.
The groups that applied for permits are only a fraction of those expected to show up at the convention. “Anarchists don’t typically ask for permits,” Link observed. Those hoping to protest by the book have had to deal with malfunctioning electronic request forms, delays, and a lack of communication from the city. The restrictions now imposed on protesters are only going to push more people to rally without authorization.
“They have to know that most people will never go along with this,” said Larry Bresler, a member of Organize Ohio. “It’s like they have no understanding whatsoever of what can be expected to go on during a convention.”
Cleveland’s Division of Police referred all convention-related questions to the mayor’s office, which did not respond to requests for comment.
Cleveland received a $50 million federal grant to gear up for the RNC. A complete list of items the city has obtained has not been made public, but according to the National Lawyers Guild (NLG), which has been monitoring preparations, it includes 10,000 sets of flex cuffs; “nonlethal munitions” like bean bag pellets; pepper spray; 2,000 sets of riot gear; 2,000 retractable steel batons; 3.7 miles’ worth of steel barriers; as well as body armor, including ballistic helmets, face visors and shields, and chest, arm, leg, and groin protection. The list also includes video surveillance equipment, laptops, night vision devices, and 16 Pointer Illuminator Aiming Lasers, which a technology retailer describes as being used for “night direct-fire aiming and illumination.” The NLG also raised concerns that Cleveland may deploy Stingray cellphone tracking devices to track down activists, as well as a Long Range Acoustical Device (LRAD), a crowd-control tool emitting painful sounds to force people to disperse.
The LRAD, which was designed after the al Qaeda bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen, in 2000, was originally intended for U.S. warships to warn off vessels approaching without permission. The device was used for the first time against protesters in 2009, during the G20 summit in Pittsburgh, and a bystander who suffered permanent hearing damage sued the city. Police departments across the country have continued to use the LRAD to disperse protests and rallies, including in Ferguson, Missouri, and New York City.
“That militarized equipment or any security equipment that they buy for the RNC remains there long after the delegates leave,” said Jocelyn Rosnick, a coordinator for the Ohio Chapter of the NLG. “We believe that people have a right to know what’s coming into their city.”
Cleveland also paid $1.5 million to an insurance broker to secure a $10 million policy for liabilities relating to the convention. “Protest insurance” has become common for cities hosting political conventions and is intended to protect the city and its employees, including officers, against any claims and losses arising from its role as RNC host, including its “law enforcement, safety, and security services,” city officials wrote in a call for bids. But the implication of the insurance policy — that the city assumes it will be sued over its handling of protests — doesn’t sit well with civil rights advocates. “These policies go far beyond general slip and fall type coverage,” said Rosnick. “They also indemnify the city for lawsuits related to constitutional violations and other civil liberties concerns.”
While Cleveland’s police have mostly responded to protests with restraint, for instance during the rallies following the killing by an officer of 12-year-old Tamir Rice, a Department of Justice investigation found that the department has engaged in a pattern of excessive force in its regular operations. In a December 2014 report, the DOJ determined that “insufficient accountability, inadequate training, ineffective policies, and inadequate engagement with the community” contributed to Cleveland police’s “use of unreasonable force.” Following the report, a police monitor was brought in, and reforms were promised. “But there hasn’t been enough time to fix anything,” said the ACLU’s Link, who questioned the department’s preparedness to handle the large number of protesters coming to town for the convention. “That’s the worry we have: This is not a sophisticated, well-run police department.”
The convention center itself is under the control of the Secret Service, which has imposed a separate set of restrictions, including a ban on weapons. An online petition to allow licensed owners to carry guns inside the convention center gathered nearly 55,000 signatures before it was revealed that it was set up as a parody by a gun-control advocate.
Protesters planning to rally outside — with or without permits — worry that poor planning by the city and the hateful rhetoric that has marked much of the Republican race may turn into a dangerous combination. Some have already elected to stay home out of fear of violence, leaving those choosing to protest at an even greater risk.
Bresler, of Organize Ohio, said he met with organizers of the pro-Trump camp and that both groups are committed to nonviolent protest. “But you don’t always know who’s going to come in and join, and what’s going to happen,” he added. Pensley, the career protester, predicts that only the more radical will show up in Cleveland, while both liberals and radicals will descend on Philadelphia, for the Democratic National Convention.
“A lot of people I know who usually would be protesting at both conventions are skipping out on Cleveland because they are scared,” he said. “And I don’t blame them.”
There is only one motive to open-carry at a political rally of any kind: intimidation.
It is uttering a threat. Again with the dog-whistles from right wing organizations like the State government of Ohio.
Kent State, to Ohio officials, was not a tragedy, but a practice run.
I experienced a designated Special Security Zone in Pittsburg at the G-20 in 2009.
Total CBD military lockdown – LRAD and military tactics are totalitarian – some pics:
http://www.wolfenotes.com/2009/09/g-20-summit-massive-militarized-police-presence-in-pittsburgh/
Want to stop this stupidity and violence? Go read the 2003 DOJ Agreement with the LAPD and most large Police Depts. in the U.S. It is DOJ Cooperative Agreement Number 2003 -HS-WX-K040. This is as a result of no one following the 2001 DOJ Agreement concerning the “Ramparts LAPD Police Scandal.”
This concerns “Internal Affairs.” They are the ones who say killing people is within Policy. They are breaking the law nationally. I have both of the LAPD and Chicago Police recent, in the last two weeks, reports on their police violence for the last 10 years. Guess what they forgot to talk about, why the 2003 Agreement they all signed. I have run the school district revenues/student/year and all the press is lying to you. Ferguson has last year $14, 860, Philadelphia, with no bathrooms, has $16,000, D.C. $32,000 and N.Y. $22,000. They are not broke. I read the general fund budget and it seems that all others sit at home with a drink and say they know when all they did is listen to the spin of the district or some other fake person with no real knowledge. I have busted LAUSD so many times it is unreal on not knowing a thing.
LAUSD has over 136,000 students who do not come to school everyday. You get paid on ADA, average daily attendance, not on enrollment. 136,000 = 22%. Oakland is 25%, another L.A. County is at 35% and the teachers in this district are the highest paid in L.A. County. What a joke.
Want real information. I have it.
Go to George Buzzetti-You Tube and you can watch Chief Beck of the LAPD and the entire LAPD Police Commission at the 5-5-15, Cinco De Mayo, Police Commission Meeting erase the audio of the meeting and ILLEGALLY, P.C. 132, erase the audio of the meeting and ILLEGALLY insert a section of an L.A. City Council Meeting. Go to minute 23:10 and watch my lips move and listen to the L.A. City Council. After they finally figured out I had that video they hacked it off their site and put up the real one and I downloaded that also and it is also on the site. It was at my civil rights website aaee.rocks at Arvixe only Arvixe let the site be hacked and will not let me know who did it and when also they refuse to let me use my site for months and when I told them not to get paid until this is fixed over 3 times they illegally attempted to attack my bank account. This is how it really is along with no legal care and my for the second time Health Care and Social Security taken away as I make too much money at a whole $680/month and in California the limit is $1,491/month.
I have a letter to Congresswoman Karen Bass from California State Senator Holly Mitchell taking these issues to the DOJ delivered to me from Holly Mitchell on Feb.1, 2016 and it is not delivered to this day.
WHO GOT TO THEM???
Hey, get with the updates :-)
There is a settlement in ACLU lawsuit and rules in Cleveland are to be revised, but revisions have yet to be made public.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/06/24/rnc-protest-rules-be-revised-after-judge-says-theyre-unconstitutional
“These policies go far beyond general slip and fall type coverage,” said Rosnick. “They also indemnify the city for lawsuits related to constitutional violations and other civil liberties concerns.”
That is one kick-ass insurance policy! So, if I want to bump someone off, all I need to do is get one of these million dollar policies, and I’ll walk free! Ain’t capitalism great?
Indemnify means to pay the city financial losses. If an officer is charged and convicted of murder, the insurance policy won’t keep him from going to prison. Isn’t knowing the facts great?
Welcome to the two-party system.
What market ended up writing the insurance policy?
I don’t understand, since when were guns allowed at the Republican Convention? Either I missed something big or this article is flat out lying…
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/03/27/3763744/republican-convention-guns/
http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/no-guns-gop-convention-cleveland-221300
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/03/28/secret-service-no-guns-at-july-gop-convention/
Guns are not allowed INSIDE the Republican convention.
Open Carry is allowed OUTSIDE it.
This is grossly unfair to the delegates who have a right to defend themselves. They should allow Open Carry INSIDE the convention as well.
It would ensure that “justice” would be done and be a great benefit to the entire country.
Free to openly carry unless you’re a 12 year old colored boy with a toy gun that looks real….
Amen, Dawn.
Or a grown black man carrying a pellet gun in a big-box store….
I often imagine trying to explain all this insanity to an alien species who visit our planet. I don’t think we could make them understand since it’s all so nonsensical. You can have a semi-auto gun but not a sleeping bag? Unbelievable.
Exactly what I was going to write, Dawn.
“Free Speech zones” are for suckers and sheep. Which is what the 1% want you to be. Guns, like money, is now considered “free speech”. Police/military will drop the Hammer on anyone who gets in the way of the Corporate coup d’tat.
Welcome to the Global Plantation.
What if they made a mini-duration police clampdown zone, and nobody came? Protesters who are predictable are making a questionable contribution.
Let all those cops stand there in their paramilitary outfits guarding nothing a few times.
Stop playing the cop game. Stop offering yourselves up as guinea pigs for their latest repressive technology showcase.
Being somewhat within the physical vicinity of an indoor convention is a meaningless act. The media doesn’t even cover the protests, the people inside can’t hear you.
Show up someplace else. Disperse. Reform at another location. Rinse. Repeat. It’s the 21st century.
good points. amy goodman will follow them wherever they go so they might as well go to cabo
Dear Lee Fang and Robert Mackey: This is a perfect example of adversarial journalism. This is not a blog. Quotes are attributed, no personal opinions sprinkled in… clearly biased and one-sided but still journalism.
Hasn’t every recent convention / during Occupy had one of these protest zones? Not really a new concept.
>clearly biased and one-sided but still journalism
You poor, poor person. To not even have control over your own MIND. I recommend reading, and lots of it. Get a library card and don’t look back. To be awake is to be alive.
I do not need your pity sir. Every single word you chose is an assumption.
The ideas you express about what defines journalism are mistaken.
You are correct sir. Call these people out.
I’m just so impressed with your work here. Your recommendations so prescient. /s
Is there some legal or logical reason why licensed people (presumably having passed background checks, at least) shouldn’t be able to carry weapons in that zone?
And, for the hundred-thousandth time (not that it will ever convince the willfully-ignorant): assault weapons are, and have long been, illegal across the US. When you say “assault weapon, what you mean is, “a gun that looks even scarier (to me) than others.”
Now, go back and rewrite the headline and the piece so that it focuses on the real issues covered — the suppression of protest and the paramilitary madness of the authorities.
Please give one reason why they should be allowed to carry under those circumstances. This is coming from a Vietnam vet who has owned guns most of my life. This makes about as much sense as when they swarmed about during the Obama visit to Arizona several years ago, making the job of the Secret Service more difficult than it already is. You make sense most of the time Doug, but not this time. It’s a stupid ruling, IMO.
I own copies of the three weapons I had in Vietnam, i.e., a 1911, the civilian version of an M-14 and the semi-automatic version of a Thompson submachinegun. But no way in hell would I ever consider carrying them to a public event in order to intimidate others.
That’s good, subbob. I would never want you to use weapons to intimidate others, except, of course, assailants or attackers in cases where intimidation might prevent worse outcomes.
Now, what does that have to do with what I said?
I carry a semi-automatic concealed. Sometimes I wonder if people would think less of me because I do but the reality is most don’t know it even exists. It was not their decision, it’s mine and I care more about my rights and ability to protect myself then what someone who hates me thinks about me. In California where I cannot carry a pistol I am forced to open carry my larger knifes. Some people who saw my weapon may have concluded it was there for intimidation. But unlike the military I do not use my weapon to intimidate. I carry them in case of an unfortunate situation where I have to protect my family and myself (I know, how crazy and irrational). I carry everywhere and I get in many verbal confrontations. It has never even crossed my mind to use my weapon in any of those heated moments because I’m not an indecent person. Maybe some only carried when they were very angry and in the military trying to intimidate their enemies with their weapons. But my mindset and many who carry is much different. Just because you were in the military does not mean you are an ultimate authority on weapons and the intentions of all people who love to bear arms.
During WWII many saboteurs operating behind enemy lines did not carry guns. Their reasoning was that 1) having a gun would make you likely to use it when some other approach would be far better under the circumstances. NOT having a gun removed the temptation to do what would have been, in most circumstances, the worst possible thing to have done. (especially in guaranteeing plenty of additional unwanted attention).
While the adverse results of using one would be somewhat difference in a protest type situation, the probability that using it would be the worst possible thing to have done would be just as great. Even if the person carrying it did not use it, the obvious fact that he had it would be likely to provoke someone else into doing something rash. – Like knocking him over the head from behind when he was having a confrontation with someone else.
All that carrying a gun does is to prop up a weak mind, at the great expense of vastly increasing the risk of a very serious incident. What happens all too often is that someone who would have backed off and thereby prevented a serious incident at the trivial cost of a bit of loss of face, instead ruins one or more lives because having a gun lets his worst instincts take full control.
Which is exactly why they SHOULD allow Open Carry INSIDE the Republican Convention. Because those imposing this insanity on the public should be subject to it in the same way themselves.
For the military who are empowered to kill by the State, this may make sense. In my comment I specifically argued that it is different from a civilian only perceptive. I have not been in the military or police forces and have never been empowered to use deadly force by the State. There are crazy people everywhere my friend. Every place you go without a metal detector a concealed carrying citizen could be in there and in some cases even with that detector. Until you own a firearm and holster you will not realize that the only permit to carry a firearm is a little piece of plastic attached to a belt. To retreat in the face of violence is what is taught to many people who carry firearms as a citizen. It is to be used in the face of no other choice. I’m sorry that you do not trust yourself to carry and make the right decisions but I carry because I don’t trust other people’s judgment either, I guess it just depends on how you look it.
“Please give one reason why they should be allowed to carry under those circumstances.”
The burden of proof isn’t on me, it’s on the people proposing a ban on what is otherwise legal.
I’m pretty sure that you (and most others here) are inferring things that I’m not saying, but I’m used to that.
There’s legality and then there’s common sense. Introduce a bunch of guns, possibly combined with the consumption of alcohol, into two opposing groups in an already emotional state. Yeah, what could possibly go wrong there? If you are honest, you will have to admit that the ones who carry do so for the intimidation factor.
Govt officials are not royalty entitled to more protection than the rest of us. If we live in a free country, you don’t limit the freedoms of free people just because some politician running for office is nearby. When a bunch of left-wing agitators come to town who are known to ignore the laws, why punish the law abiding by making them defenseless? I’ll never understand liberal thinking.
So you see no irony in that tennis balls & sleeping bags can be banned and guns can’t, okay whatevs……..but then I see emerging out of your comment: there it is, it’s that gun geek comment again, the one I usually see on Yahoo News commentary, the one about how people don’t know the PROPER names. “Don’t you know we don’t have assault weapons?” Well I guess we don’t have to pay any more attention now, they used the wrong name. Game over!!!
No, honestly, I really don’t fucking care what name people give them. I am indeed more frightened of those things that seem to rack up impressive kill numbers in crowded settings rather quickly, yes indeed I am.
Maybe instead of pulling pointless naming rank you could explain why we haplessly uninformed non-gun geeks should not be more afraid of these weapons. Whatever name we should be giving them.
By the way, am I allowed to refer to them as weapons, or is that too inflammatory? Would “constitutionally protected means of personal defense against tyranny” be more acceptable?
Also for that matter can you explain why I can’t use a bazooka, or if I in fact can? Because if I was really going to go for it, I think I’d want a bazooka. I remember the plastic army men with bazookas looked really cool, plus there’s the bubble gum. I think I should be allowed to bring a bazooka to Cleveland, and trust me, I can pass a background check. What do you think?
Reading skills are hopelessly deficient around here. And inaccurate inference arising from irrational fear and hysteria is positively rampant.
Straw man. And wrong inference. I think it’s ludicrously ironic. Work on reading for meaning and not jumping to conclusions.
Because the weapons you are so much more afraid of are not actually more dangerous than hundreds of others that just don’t look as scary to you. That’s why
Now, go take your meds. People in overly-emotional states tend to make poor decisions and high levels of excitement can cause unhealthy spike in blood pressure.
BTW the difference between my Springfield Armory M-1A and the M-14 I was issued in Vietnam is very simple: a selector switch.
Uh-huh. Simple, and it makes all the difference in the world.
You either know that or you shouldn’t have been issued the M-14.
I’m tired of the ridiculous anti-gun hysteria and the way it leads supposedly progressive, anti-authoritarian “liberals” to jump eagerly into bed with the most regressive and repressive forces in our society.
But I also get tired of arguing with people who are uninterested in facts and can argue only from emotion, so, now and then, I take a break.
You totally missed my point. The Orlando shooter really didn’t need a selector switch to murder 49 people and wound many others, did he? But a rifle with a high-capacity magazine really helped him, didn’t it?
I think I missed your point mostly because you didn’t state it.
I assume that a 30-round magazine was at least a bit helpful, although we don’t know enough details of the shooting to be certain.
I would point out, however, that, whatever the capacity of the magazine, shooting a hundred people with a semi-auto, sufficiently accurately that nearly half of them died, in a dim, crowded club consisting of multiple rooms with potential victims hiding wherever possible, behind whatever shielding was available, is far from an instantaneous process. It takes quite a bit of time. Quite likely, enough time that it would have been fairly easy to change lower-capacity magazines and keep right on killing.
My best guess is that magazine capacity probably didn’t make a huge difference in the shooter’s “success” rate.
Given some of the details we do know, I think the most helpful factor (for the killer) was that he engaged three armed officers outside the club and that those officers (according to some reports, following orders) didn’t pursue him into the club — and neither did any other officers, for three hours.
Also, of course, it seems that none of the three hundred or so occupants of the club were able (for what reasons?) to fight back.
Poor Doug, all the others are always missing his points. It couldn’t be him, it’s them.
Poor Vic. He still hasn’t overcome those reading comprehension problems.
Remedial assignment: re-read and identify whose point was allegedly missed in the preceding exchange.
Bask in your unsuccessfully communicated rightness, Doug.
The one point I will agree with you on is the police response, or lack thereof. I wonder how many wounded died of loss of blood before the SWAT team finally took him out three hours later.
Which party will hire the best voting machine hackers?
In any case, it will be interesting to see if protesters show a creative response or not. When protesting is illegal, illegal actions are protests. And the scairdy-cat ethos of the security state creates tremendous opportunity. I mean, if somebody puts a post on 4chan that they poisoned the condiments at the caterer, the delegates go without food. If somebody on the same forum puts up a post they installed darkness-triggered firearms inside the toilets, the delegates had better hold it. Anything is illegal; anything has to be checked out seriously no matter how long it takes; and anything done by people in China and Russia is never going to be tracked down. So I imagine if they feel like it they could have some safe fun trolling the nets.
It would seem that the practical, and possibly more effective alternative would be to scream at a wall closer to home.
The delicate sensibilities of the convention-goers in both parties who can’t stomach seeing or hearing dissent is perfectly in line with that of the Big Money funders who have purchased our “democracy”.
All other sheer idiocy of censorship aside, banning bike locks in a 3.3 square mile area basically means banning all *bikes* from passing through that area, unless the riders have a drone to carry their lock the long way around for them or something. I guess the Republicans can count it as progress in global warming.
I believe the concern arises from activists lining their bikes across a street and then padlocking them together. It would create an instant barrier that would be difficult to breach.
Wouldn’t zip ties be just as effective?