yes.
Thats alot of pepper spray.
- Thread starter ballen0351
- Start date
- Status
yes.
Remember some time back I posted a clip of a LEO take down? It involved the cop kneeling on the neck area? Look that discussion up for some intel on take downs. I do a few seminars that are mostly LEOs. I've grilled em. I ask the 'clueless civi' questions. I get a lot of feedback. I've annoyed a number of LEOs on here with my posts. I know it. I've heard it. So, you have to realize, if I see a bad-cop issue, I'm not afraid to push it.
I don't see this as anything wrong on the part of the cops.
In this case.
Tony Balony was different.
I don't see this as anything wrong on the part of the cops.
In this case.
Tony Balony was different.
The officers gave verbal commands. They were ignored.
In order to handcuff the protesters, their hands needed to be accessible. As they were locked, they were not. Control over the suspects hands needed to be obtained.
Locks were not an option due to placement.
Takedowns were equally not an option due to suspect placement, and risk of injury to all involved.
Suspects were not struck, punched nor kicked to avoid injury.
Wrestling was done after moving to pepper spray to encourage protesters to release their holds in order to safely cuff them.
Baton use was limited to prying hands apart in order to handcuff.
At all levels resistance continued.
Once physical resistance begins, non-violence ends.
Hard strikes, taser, deadly force were avoided.
I repeat, what options did they have to obtain compliance and removal?
WC_lun
Senior Master
This isn't an issue of whether the pepper spray was an adequete use of force or not. In my opinion, it had to be expected. My point is this movement is not going away. Every time those in authority use the police to try and silence it, OWS will become stronger. There are only two ways for this movement to be silenced, ignore them until they realize nothing will change and thier voices will not be heard, or address the issues that have merit. Yes, some of thier issues have merit that even most of the right can agree with, like too much money in politics. Until one of those two outcomes happen, I am afraid that things will continue to escelate. As mentioned, this is not even close to a Kent State, but Kent State was not the beginning of that movement, nor was it a stand alone event happening in a vaccumn.
If the pepper spray does not dissuade the protestors from returning, then what? What level of violence are you comfortable with in dispursing protestors you do not agree with? I personally am okay with the MEASURED use of pepper spray and physical removal of people practicing civil disobedience. I am not comfortable with the use of billy clubs and rubber bullets. It is my sincere hope that Americans do not start viewing these people as anything other than Americans practicing thier rights. If that happens, violence on the level that none of us want will occur. I hope that none of us would be comfortable with fire hoses, beatings, or bullets. Thinking that would not happen ignores the lessons history has taught us.
As far as the spell check, no worries
I try, but spelling has never been a strong suite of mine. Hopefully it isn't so bad that the message is lost.
If the pepper spray does not dissuade the protestors from returning, then what? What level of violence are you comfortable with in dispursing protestors you do not agree with? I personally am okay with the MEASURED use of pepper spray and physical removal of people practicing civil disobedience. I am not comfortable with the use of billy clubs and rubber bullets. It is my sincere hope that Americans do not start viewing these people as anything other than Americans practicing thier rights. If that happens, violence on the level that none of us want will occur. I hope that none of us would be comfortable with fire hoses, beatings, or bullets. Thinking that would not happen ignores the lessons history has taught us.
As far as the spell check, no worries
I try, but spelling has never been a strong suite of mine. Hopefully it isn't so bad that the message is lost.
ok, let me rephrase that:
As martial artist (yes, digging deep) is it ethical to attack an opponent who is not actively engaging you?
maybe this gets closer to the point.
(it is actually amazing how far the country has come in just a shade of over 200 years...yes, I am poking fun, since civil disobedience is at the heart of the nations foundation)
*is drumming her fingers waiting for a Tienanmen Square-like incident to wake everyone's *** up as to what's going on right now*
[yt]6inWKFKv9UA[/yt]
[yt]6inWKFKv9UA[/yt]
Absolutely. Waiting to get hit before defending yourself is foolish, risky, and unnecessary even in the laws of self-defense.
But more to the point. A police officer is not required, as most of us are, to only use violence in self-defense. They can also use it in enforcement of the law. Example; I arrest a DUI driver. They stand there, frozen, refusing to put their hands behind their back, refusing to submit to a pat-down search, but otherwise offering no physical attack. They are passively resisting me arresting them. Am I then supposed to walk away from them and choose not to arrest them, since they are not attacking me? No, they get arrested anyway. If I have to apply a wristlock with pain compliance to get them in handcuffs, or taser them, or kick the back of their knees to drop them onto their knees, I am going to do that. This is not police brutality, this is the police doing their job. They are required to arrest suspected DUI drivers, even when (surprise) those drivers do not want to be arrested, and even when those drivers do not offer active resistance but still refuse to be handcuffed. This is no different. The police ordered them to disperse, they failed to do so. At which point the police applied force in the form of non-lethal pepper spray to remove them. End of story.
Not everyone will wake up and the people that do wake up will be marginalized. Recall the responses to the Ruby Ridge and Waco incidents.
you fail to get the point.
Also, a person not engaging you...how is there a threat of being struck?
I am not arguing the police action itself. So far the 'following orders' covers them neatly. (also a DUI case is poor substitution for a protestor sitting on the pavement: driving a ton of steel down the road while only marginally capable is a danger. Some lump on the sidewalk can be bypassed)
The issues are growing and the approach to them has to evolve with them.
or we might very well end up with a Tienanmen Square situation....or Kent....
So far all things are quiet, but let the frustration rise a bit more....
And it's not like it's rocket science either. So far almost all major expressions of civil discord have been met at some point with violence and escalated from there. I can only name one that stayed peaceful through out until it's resolution: East Germany's protests that ultimately ended in the fall of the Berlin Wall.
In these days of instant dissimination of uncontrolled information, the police must always be cognisant of optics. I watched the entire video, and the actions do not appear to be excessive.
BUT, the majority of the world will not watch a 8 minute video, all they will see is a still photo of a cop pepper spraying people who are sitting down.
BUT, the majority of the world will not watch a 8 minute video, all they will see is a still photo of a cop pepper spraying people who are sitting down.
Not at all the same comparison -- but yes, it is, if they are preparing to attack you.
There's no ethical issue here. These protesters were given a chance to exercise their rights. When their time was up, they refused to comply. They moved from protesting to law breaking.
But... if, over time, enough people get arrested rather than stop their protest, that sends a message. In the 60s -- that led to changes in the laws. If the Occupy Wherever protesters can get their act together to focus their energy -- they can create changes, too. But that change will come with a price...
One note... The difference between the cops here and the Chinese military in Tiananmen Square is simple. We have limits on the force we can use. If, instead of pepper spray, the cops here had rolled out with a steam roller, and turned the protesters into new pavement -- the cops would be going to jail. Police are held to using REASONABLE force to enforce the law.
yes, the price to pay.
Like I said. I don't think the police acted wrong, nor do I pity the protesters.
The administration of the University? now we can argue that.
(but since we also lost a lot of our civil liberties in the 8 years of the previous administration, I think we are at a toss up more or less)
RandomPhantom700
Master of Arts
Pretty much this.
Let me ask everyone a question. And for the moment, forget about the content of what they're protesting. Could be tuition rates, could be political corruption, could be the color of the walls of their dorm rooms. Just forget about the content or subject of their protests and just focus on the fact that they're protesting.
They linked hands on public property. No violence; no disruption to passerbys, no fists connecting with noses. They sat in solidarity at a public location on a school campus. According to most of you on this thread, that's enough to justify pepper-spraying them. Or apparently bulldozing them, because pepper spray doesn't have enough gore for billicihak.
This illustrates something for me very clearly: none of you actually give two craps about the First Amendment. ANY form of protest is apparently justification for cops to use force. Note: these students weren't the OWS crowd; they weren't stinking the place up, they weren't obstructing traffic, they were just protesting.
Elder says he's a little ashamed. Personally, I'm disgusted.
of course you have to protest where you will be seen...
otherwise you might as well march around your livingroom....
it's a 'DUH' moment right there.
(and omg they covered their faces. Shows you that the young people of today have some brains left: After all, you gotta be really stupid to not cover when you know what's coming!)
Enlightening blog?
well, it makes a bit more sense than what billi usually drags forth.
but sadly, it too is focused on the event with tunnel vision.
That just confirms my previous comments that they had been given more than 1 chance to comply.
Your right to protest ends at my right to move.
In -this- case, no 1'st Amendment rights were violated.
People are sobbing "kent state" and "china".
These aren't all quite, polite, peaceful protesters.
Cops are being hit with water balloons full of chemicals.
They are being cut by the same weapons hijackers used to cause 9/11. (there, a little emotional tug back)
Rocks are being thrown.
Molotov cocktails readied.
Protesters are carrying a range of weapons from knives, to bats, to AK47's.
They are bullying and assaulting merchants.
That is not peaceful protest. That is a riot 1 step short of going off.
What would you have the police do?
Stay home? Join them?
Power to the people my ***. When you break the law, when you become violent, when you deface property, issue threats, assault, rape, and so forth, you have moved past what the US Constitution allows, into the area of insurrection, which the US Constitution allows to be put down at sword point.
If some protester is run over by a tank, it will be because the sorry son of a ***** stood there and let it happen.
Like this
Not like this
Your right to protest ends at my right to move.
In -this- case, no 1'st Amendment rights were violated.
People are sobbing "kent state" and "china".
These aren't all quite, polite, peaceful protesters.
Cops are being hit with water balloons full of chemicals.
They are being cut by the same weapons hijackers used to cause 9/11. (there, a little emotional tug back)
Rocks are being thrown.
Molotov cocktails readied.
Protesters are carrying a range of weapons from knives, to bats, to AK47's.
They are bullying and assaulting merchants.
That is not peaceful protest. That is a riot 1 step short of going off.
What would you have the police do?
Stay home? Join them?
Power to the people my ***. When you break the law, when you become violent, when you deface property, issue threats, assault, rape, and so forth, you have moved past what the US Constitution allows, into the area of insurrection, which the US Constitution allows to be put down at sword point.
If some protester is run over by a tank, it will be because the sorry son of a ***** stood there and let it happen.
Like this
Not like this
Last edited by a moderator:
I suppose they got to do their thing.
Nope, not Kent State - yet.
No, in a crowd not everybody is peaceful and polite. On either side.
On the Campus of UC Davis?
Really?
action and reaction.
Frustration is a powerful fuel for anger and thus aggression.
Riots are often also fueled by it.
As stated, they did what they were called upon to do.
However, did they need to be called? Who was bothered by the protests on the UC Davis campus? merchants?
silly non-argument
Was any of this actually happening on that Campus?
What happens in NYC does not have any bearing on the action on the other side of the continent.
I think it should read if you become violent and break the law.
So far we have a bunch of people sitting on the sidewalk with linked arms.
No molotov cocktails, no weapons, no assaults no rapes, no?
No intend to engage in assaults.
yes, linking arms..it's threatening, because united people are stronger than a single person.
take this as a trickle down effect:
could this have been handled differently from the top down?
Again, don't pity the protesters.
But don't make excuses for the administration of the college either.
(and yeah, the cops are everybody's favorite whipping boy. They don't make policy they just get to swallow the rocks thrown at them...at least the guy in Ca didn't have that satisfied smirk on his face like the dude from the historical photo)
again, the idiots pepper sprayed were actively resisting arrest.
The cops actions were warranted, and acceptable in this case.
My reply was aimed at the movement as a whole.
But ok.
How about this.
For the next week, -all- cops will go home. If it involves these peaceful protesters (you know, the ones peacefully throwing cash registers, smashing windows and threatening hot dog vendors), the cops will stand down and allow them to do their thing. They can sit in the middle of I90 at the peak of rush hour and do their thing, with no cops hassling them at all.
I give it an hour before some civilian takes a coal shovel to someones head.
Non-violently of course.
I feel for the cops, who are doing their jobs, only to have mayors and governors and pompous councilmen cut their balls out from under them and throw them under bus anfter bus after bus.
I feel for the cops who are trying to keep the streets safe for 100% of us, not the 2% claiming to be 99% who think a protest is an excuse for a drum circle and free stolen food.
So, let them protest. Let them express their 'rights', with the chemical throwing, pooping, raping, destruction of property, traffic blocks and all that other peaceful stuff.
You boys in blue, go get a coffee.
The cops actions were warranted, and acceptable in this case.
My reply was aimed at the movement as a whole.
But ok.
How about this.
For the next week, -all- cops will go home. If it involves these peaceful protesters (you know, the ones peacefully throwing cash registers, smashing windows and threatening hot dog vendors), the cops will stand down and allow them to do their thing. They can sit in the middle of I90 at the peak of rush hour and do their thing, with no cops hassling them at all.
I give it an hour before some civilian takes a coal shovel to someones head.
Non-violently of course.
I feel for the cops, who are doing their jobs, only to have mayors and governors and pompous councilmen cut their balls out from under them and throw them under bus anfter bus after bus.
I feel for the cops who are trying to keep the streets safe for 100% of us, not the 2% claiming to be 99% who think a protest is an excuse for a drum circle and free stolen food.
So, let them protest. Let them express their 'rights', with the chemical throwing, pooping, raping, destruction of property, traffic blocks and all that other peaceful stuff.
You boys in blue, go get a coffee.
So ... our constitutional rights have an expiration date? Perhaps a good catalyst might be for citizens to be informed of this formally.
I am currently watching the entire thing. I just paused it at 6:48 where a police car is driving on the sidewalk of the campus directly towards the group of seated students. So no, so far it hasn't changed my perspective much. I'll let you know if watching every second of the video does, however.
- Status
