Fiom CGL Event: Minister Maroni announced that there is a risk of infiltration by unruly elements (social centers) going to be disastrous for the city. The Board
Fiom CGL replied that the event will take place peacefully, but it is for the Minister to maintain public order.
Beyond the comments on both the possible declaration of the Minister as the non-response the manager FIOM CGL, beyond this contingent event, since this type of situation in postwar Italian history are too often degenerated and no one was able to defend citizens and / or property, for a moment imagining hypothetical scenarios you might ask
- if indeed, as in the case as an example, there is still a risk of infiltration of inflammatory elements in order to create unrest and clashes with acts of vandalism against private property and acts of intimidation or worse, to free citizens, and what is the "weight" of the risk;
- if the risk was very real and heavy as you might infer from public statements and how certain extremes policies have incited the riots, as ever, given the current technologies used to make money with traffic lights, video surveillance is not expected path of the events at risk, in real time, from the beginning to record the onset of disorders and who leads them, while protected and prepared groups consisting of government forces are spread out along the route in advance, so that a common direction and command them to quickly intervene quickly to prevent or at least limit the damage? Also remain records of any clashes as evidence useful to start to ban those demonstrations for which the organizers fail to give security guarantees (I think it is time for everyone to assume their responsibility).
- in the event of a collision with degeneration of violent mobs and government forces to defend the legitimacy, once registered the mob violence against attempts to correct but still the government forces to restore law and prevent the degeneration of violence, intimidation and vandalism, it is now possible to order the government forces who are trained in a firm response to the defense of public order even if not efficient bloody repression of mobs?
If the answer to the last question should be "no" (I'm ignorant on the subject and I'd like to learn more) would be Clearly such a state would not be able to respond with appropriate force against the mafia, against organized crime, against the strong economic powers, against violence in football stadiums and even against groups of provocateurs hired pitches or simple political or violent troublemakers are always ready to lead riots and disturbances, and therefore can not guarantee legitimacy, order, morality and protection of the work and lives of citizens and taxpayers respectful.
Someone will object that a strong state that uses repression becomes a dictatorial state that denies freedom of expression of citizens: the timing of these phrases are now thankfully gone, though some would still like to return them nostalgic, and it is easy to answer that a state becomes dictatorial and violent repressed when law-abiding citizens and law-abiding citizens to defend when not honest and respectful clean the streets by powerful arrogant, more or less organized robbers, hooligans and violent ideologues and mercenaries of terrorism and disorder, whose so-called freedom of expression can not affect every principle of freedom of the abiding citizens requiring at least order and safety.
History also teaches us how in every civilization, with the disappearance of a sense of responsibility for the morality of efficiency and firmness, preponderino the arrogance of power and the fierce bureaucratic petty crimes to an administrative or economic, with scandalous criminal punishment and fines of unarmed citizens who are struggling, work, pay taxes and certainly are not accustomed to go to the streets to take the next barrel, a chop shop windows or set fire to cars.
0 comments:
Post a Comment