Thats alot of pepper spray.

[Bill Mattocks]

Say you get pulled over by the police. Say you have a taillight out.

The police run your plate number and it comes back stolen. It's not REALLY stolen; a mistake has been made. Perhaps the cop read the license number to the dispatcher wrong. Perhaps the dispatcher keyed it in wrong. Perhaps it was entered wrong in the stolen car database. All kinds of things could happen. But whatever; the car is not stolen. You know that; the cop does not.

The cop treats you like a common car thief. He has to. He gets on the PA and orders you to drop the car keys out the window. He orders you to open the car door with your right hand reaching outside the car to do it. He orders you to get out of your car and raise your hands over your head and face forward; he has a gun pointed right at you. If you do something stupid that he interprets as a threat, he'll shoot you dead.

Now, some of you numbskulls are going to refuse to comply. I know, because I've dealt with you. You're doing to say "I have done nothing wrong, I refuse to get out of the car." OK, fine, I'm coming in after you. I will break your window and I will drag you out onto the pavement and you will not like it. I will handcuff you and stuff you into the back of my cruiser and when I find out later that the car is NOT stolen, it won't matter; I gave you a lawful order and you refused to obey it. GET IT?

It does not matter if the students do or do not have the lawful right to assemble and block the sidewalk at the time of arrest. That is for the courts to decide, which you seem to not be able to grasp; it's a very simple concept. Regardless if the courts later find that it is or is not legal; the police were ordered to disburse the crowd. They gave a LAWFUL ORDER to do so. They protesters refused, they got arrested IT IS THAT SIMPLE. And totally legal.

Ask any cop; ask any defense attorney. When you get pulled over by the police and they take you out at gunpoint and put you face-down on the pavement, whether you did or did not do anything wrong, you do what you are told, or you are breaking the law. That is a FACT. You do not get the option of sitting down and discussing with the cop whether or not you feel like complying today because after all, you are totally innocent of any crime. You might be totally innocent; or you were until you refused to do as you were told. When I was a cop, people did what I told them to do, or they got arrested. Whether they were guilty or innocent of what I arrested them for did not matter; that's for the courts to decide, not me, and certainly not you.

Do what the cop tells your or get arrested. It has nothing to do with your civil rights being violated; it has to do with the police authority to arrest. If they have the legal grounds to arrest, you have to do what you're told. If you think you don't, go ahead and fight it; in court. If you argue it, you're going to end up face-down on the pavement in handcuffs. And believe me, I've hear plenty of citizens whining about how I've violated their rights while they laid there waiting for transport. Know how often I got in trouble? None. Know how many times I was sued? None. Was I ever wrong? Sure. Didn't change anything. I say put your hands up, you put them up, and I mean now. If you don't, you're going to be arrested. End of discussion. I can't understand how anyone doesn't get that.

 

[ballen0351]

I dont think you can compare what Ghandi did with a bunch of spoiled rich kids going to a school that costs over 78K a year (per the schools own website)

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I dont think you can compare what Ghandi did with a bunch of spoiled rich kids going to a school that costs over 78K a year (per the schools own website)

The point is that civil disobedience works (when it works) because those who are protesting know they are breaking the law, break it anyway (peacefully) and then accept the consequences. Their goal is to a) fight it in court, where they will now have a forum and b) garner public support and sympathy by being shown being roughed up or rousted by the local gendarmes. This is all according to plan by the protesters.

Believe me, the protesters did NOT want to be ignored, or to be told they could block the sidewalk as long as they liked, no problem. They WANTED to be told to disburse - this gave them grounds to be arrested and fight it in court and they WANTED not to comply with police orders so that they would be pepper sprayed or worse; this gave them public sympathy by empty skulls and hand-wringers. They got EVERYTHING they wanted. They would have been bitterly disappointed if the police had not pepper sprayed them.

 

[elder999]

I dont think you can compare what Ghandi did with a bunch of spoiled rich kids going to a school that costs over 78K a year (per the schools own website)

No, the med school doesn't even cost that much.

 

[clfsean]

Say you get pulled over by the police. Say you have a taillight out.

The police run your plate number and it comes back stolen. It's not REALLY stolen; a mistake has been made. Perhaps the cop read the license number to the dispatcher wrong. Perhaps the dispatcher keyed it in wrong. Perhaps it was entered wrong in the stolen car database. All kinds of things could happen. But whatever; the car is not stolen. You know that; the cop does not.

The cop treats you like a common car thief. He has to. He gets on the PA and orders you to drop the car keys out the window. He orders you to open the car door with your right hand reaching outside the car to do it. He orders you to get out of your car and raise your hands over your head and face forward; he has a gun pointed right at you. If you do something stupid that he interprets as a threat, he'll shoot you dead.

Now, some of you numbskulls are going to refuse to comply. I know, because I've dealt with you. You're doing to say "I have done nothing wrong, I refuse to get out of the car." OK, fine, I'm coming in after you. I will break your window and I will drag you out onto the pavement and you will not like it. I will handcuff you and stuff you into the back of my cruiser and when I find out later that the car is NOT stolen, it won't matter; I gave you a lawful order and you refused to obey it. GET IT?

It does not matter if the students do or do not have the lawful right to assemble and block the sidewalk at the time of arrest. That is for the courts to decide, which you seem to not be able to grasp; it's a very simple concept. Regardless if the courts later find that it is or is not legal; the police were ordered to disburse the crowd. They gave a LAWFUL ORDER to do so. They protesters refused, they got arrested IT IS THAT SIMPLE. And totally legal.

Ask any cop; ask any defense attorney. When you get pulled over by the police and they take you out at gunpoint and put you face-down on the pavement, whether you did or did not do anything wrong, you do what you are told, or you are breaking the law. That is a FACT. You do not get the option of sitting down and discussing with the cop whether or not you feel like complying today because after all, you are totally innocent of any crime. You might be totally innocent; or you were until you refused to do as you were told. When I was a cop, people did what I told them to do, or they got arrested. Whether they were guilty or innocent of what I arrested them for did not matter; that's for the courts to decide, not me, and certainly not you.

Do what the cop tells your or get arrested. It has nothing to do with your civil rights being violated; it has to do with the police authority to arrest. If they have the legal grounds to arrest, you have to do what you're told. If you think you don't, go ahead and fight it; in court. If you argue it, you're going to end up face-down on the pavement in handcuffs. And believe me, I've hear plenty of citizens whining about how I've violated their rights while they laid there waiting for transport. Know how often I got in trouble? None. Know how many times I was sued? None. Was I ever wrong? Sure. Didn't change anything. I say put your hands up, you put them up, and I mean now. If you don't, you're going to be arrested. End of discussion. I can't understand how anyone doesn't get that.

That happened to me last year. The only thing that kept me out of handcuffs is when he asked for my registration & it matched me not what his computer showed.

If he'd asked me to exit the truck, I would've been out & asking where he wanted me to stand.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

So, the cop who did the spraying is now being harassed. His address, phone published. His family threatened.

Peaceful protest my left *** cheek.

Remember parents, when your kid plops on the floor, locks arms with the table, that's a peaceful protest, not resistance.
Just let the kid get it out of their system, because anything you do is unnecessary force.
Maybe offer them a cookie or something for being so brave.

Me, I'm reaching for bear mace and a Klingon shock stick. *BZZZZT*

 

[Bill Mattocks]

That happened to me last year. The only thing that kept me out of handcuffs is when he asked for my registration & it matched me not what his computer showed.

If he'd asked me to exit the truck, I would've been out & asking where he wanted me to stand.

Right!

And that is the point. The police are required to enforce the law as they see it that moment; they will stand liable if they make serious mistakes, but you don't get to decide if you will or will not comply with them based on what you think is legal at that time. Cop says "I am placing you under arrest, put your hands behind your back," you do it. If he is making a serious mistake, or even violating your rights, you will have an opportunity to address that issue; that's what lawyers and courts are for. The cop is not a Constitutional scholar; neither are most of us. We don't stand around and debate the issue until we reach a consensus about what the police ought to properly do. If they say do it, you do it. If they're wrong, you may be in line to take some money off their jurisdiction; it happens all the time. But if you resist, you get arrested. If you fight, you get hurt. Whether you are right or wrong in the end, that does not matter at the time of arrest.

 

[granfire]

Now is stupid

But expected?

and no, it depicts the wrong party.

 

[jks9199]

The idea behind civil disobedience is this. First the citizen intentionally misbehaves. Then they get arrested. Then they go to court. That's the whole plan. That's the point.

Not getting arrested is not part of the plan. Any part of this unclear to you?

So no, they are not supposed to go home. That helps nothing for them.

They are supposed to get arrested. That means that when they are ordered to disburse, they refuse. THEN THEY TAKE WHAT HAPPENS NEXT. If that means pepper spray, then that is what it means. That's what civil disobedience is. It is NOT the police ignoring behavior that they've been ordered to stop. It is NOT the protesters going home. It is everybody playing their part. Protesters protest and refuse to leave. Police arrest them. They go to court and we find out who's rights have been violated. Review Gandhi's peaceful protest when he lead a group to make salt; they took the beatings the police gave them; because the beatings, filmed and played back on newsreels around the world is how India gained its independence. Civil disobedience works, but it requires the protesters to take their lumps good and hard, in front of the media, so that people like you can whine and cry about the brutality of it all.

When the police order the protesters to leave, and they refuse, they have no choice left but to arrest them. So they do. And if that involves pepper spray, that is understood to be part of the protest; this is actually DESIRED by the protesters, because it gains them sympathy from people who haven't a clue how the world works.

Yeah, they got pepper sprayed. They wanted that to happen. It happened. They won. That's how civil disobedience works.

As to how they afford it, that is NOT MY PROBLEM. I DO NOT CARE. Not even a little bit.

However, the ACLU will be loving them long time, so no worries. They'll be well-coddled little criminals.

The smart protesters know the game. They simply "resist", get arrested, and sign on the line to come to court. Frequently, the cameras cover the arrest...

That's the idea of protest. Get arrested, create visibility, and make the government react and change the laws. The idea isn't "protest, convince the police, and create a stalemate because nothing has changed, but we're no longer enforcing anything."

Maybe this story will help...

 

[ballen0351]

No, the med school doesn't even cost that much.

Nope your right I looked up UC and UC Berkeley law that popped up not Davis. My mistake.

 

[crushing]

So, the cop who did the spraying is now being harassed. His address, phone published. His family threatened.

The protestors really put the cop (who I highly doubt is a 1%er) in a very difficult situation. If the officer doesn't follow orders, he loses his job. He does follow orders, he is made the scapegoat and put on administrative leave. It really was a no win situation for him. Apparently, the 99% don't give a **** about cops.

 

[granfire]

The protestors really put the cop (who I highly doubt is a 1%er) in a very difficult situation. If the officer doesn't follow orders, he loses his job. He does follow orders, he is made the scapegoat and put on administrative leave. It really was a no win situation for him. Apparently, the 99% don't give a **** about cops.

Now there, proof it was the protestors and not some twit laughing all the way to the bank!

The 1% is certainly counting hits and there fore $$$ on all of this.

And yes, the poor sap is being made the butt of all jokes.

he did what the Dean of the college asked off him.

And it made him look bad.

the 1% does not give a rip about cops either. not unless it suits their purpose.

Gotta say, the dean got it made.

being an **** and not having to stand in the poo flung over it.
Should run for president, I say!

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I'm gonna bow out here. Said my piece, nothing more to add, just go in circles and I stopped doing that when I stopped selling soap.
So I'll take my leave and go back to watching the topless OWS gals protest about jobs being rights. I don't agree, but they are a sure site prettier than the guy pooping on the flag.

 

[jks9199]

And golly, people....read for comprehension:
I am not even blaming the cops for being in the situation.

I am questioning the actions put in motion by the dean of the college.

The dean has the duty to look after the safety and ability to attend classes, use facilities, and the like of everyone on the campus. The dean said "protest all you want -- but no tents." When they were told to take the tents down, they said no. When they were told to leave, they said no. Thus, creating a dangerous situation; what if the next "no" is to something like "don't rob people?"

There is indeed a reason that the Occupy movement has taken hold. There are a lot of people quite legitimately fed up with the status quo. I'm one of them... but I'll work for change in other ways. Until the movement can actually come together around some actual goals, it's going to be little more than a tantrum.

But I find it - not unlike Elder - troublesome that so many just shrug and leave it at that.
Yep, we let it happen, we deserve what's coming to us.

Following orders given without questioning makes us sheeple at best.

I fear that dispersing people - peaceful people - by means of elevated aggression will in turn reduce the peacefulness and elevate the potential for aggression and violence.

They ceased to be "peaceful" when they blocked paths and refused to move. Have you ever been in the middle of a group like that? At first it's exciting -- but it gets scary real fast, because you start to realize that it's one person removed from a riot. One person gets the bright idea to fight over something, and suddenly, it's chaos.

I suppose it's all good, then the naysayers can say 'told you so' while other than pepper spray is rolled out.

As I said -- unlike a lot of the world, our cops have rules. While I think that it's wrong the the UCLA-Davis chief is being thrown under the bus and is on suspension, it does show that cops have to answer for the use of force.

But that's not even the point. Yep, lots of the protesters don't know the "rules" of protest. They don't realize that the arrest and even receiving the use of force is part of the plan. Much of the watching public doesn't either -- because it wouldn't work if they did! The protesters WANT public outcry to motivate the change.

A little bit ago, I almost wrote that protesters are "nice terrorists." I'm going to go with that. Terrorism is the use of force to create political, social, or religious change. It's using highly visible force against highly vulnerable targets so that nobody feels safe until the change that the terrorists desire happens. Well, civil disobedience actually has a similar approach. It's using highly visible acts of disobeying the law to call attention to a problem and motivate change. The idea is that when people see the protesters arrested (or even beaten), they'll make the government respond and change the law or solve the problem.

 

[Big Don]

That happened to me last year. The only thing that kept me out of handcuffs is when he asked for my registration & it matched me not what his computer showed.

If he'd asked me to exit the truck, I would've been out & asking where he wanted me to stand.

I had a different circumstance, but, I always do what people better armed than I tell me to do.
That keeps me from getting my *** kicked. Perhaps the police departments should set up a big screen and show this:

 

[Sukerkin]

Every time I see that vid I chortle greatly - not usually a fan of Chris Rock but that was comedy gold.

 

[MJS]

So.

They were ordered to move.

They refused.

They were ordered to clear the sidewalk.

They refused.

They were ordered to stop -trespassing- and remove their tents.

They refused.

What is the appropriate law enforcement response when someone refuses to obey ---lawful--- orders?

You are outraged. You are upset. Fine.

Present an alternate solution.

"Not this" is NOT an acceptable answer. You must have an actual answer.
"ask again" is also not an acceptable answer.
"ignore them" is also not an acceptable answer.

Some protesting idiots were sitting, blocking an on-ramp to a highway, a day ago, in Hartford, Ct. I saw on the news today, another report on the OC incident. Had to laugh at how the media strikes again, making the students the innocent victims, and the LEOs the bad guys. Given this was Hartford, I'm surprised nobody got killed. What I mean is, given the high violence rate, ie: shootings daily, I'm surprised someone in a vehicle, trying to get onto the highway, didn't say, "Ok *******s, I honked twice, you didn't move....prepare to die!! I'm driving right thru you dumb ****ers! "LOL! That or someone getting out of their car, and blowing a few of them away...lol.

 

[jks9199]

Incidentally, I'm aware of at least 3 "demonstrations" in my area. They stayed within the law, made their point, had their say, and nobody got pepper sprayed.

 

[Josh Oakley]

Alright, so in attempt to be balanced in my opinion on matters I make an effort to understand as much as possible the full view of all sides in a situation.

To that end first I would like to share a couple of articles:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2011/11/19/uc-davis-protest_n_1103039.html

This was written by a college professor at UC Berkeley. The article touches on too many points to summarize very easily, but I do want to highlight a few points:

Six years ago, tuition at UC Davis was around $5000. Currently it is $12000. The protest is surrounding the coming raise in tuition rates for 2015-2016to $22000 (I am assuming this means per year.) Now, granted, that is quite a bit of money. Here in my state (Washington) we are about $2000 a year less than UC Davis, and have steadily increased our tuition rates about $500 average per year for the last 10 years.

Then again... Washington has not had the gnawing financial problems that California has had in the past 10 years. The state of California has had a number of debt crises, even with its $1.9 trillion GDP ( which is the highest GSP in the union, and were it an indepentent country, it would have between the 8th and the 11th highest GDP of any country in the world). But even with all this revenue, the state has been running on a budget deficit in the tens of billions of dollars for at least the last four years. And the budget problems didn't begin with Schwartzeneger. Part of the reason he made it into office was the state's existing and long-standing budget problems at the time.

What that means and has meant for California is fewer services available, more revenue needed. Tuition hikes are inevitable.
This is also the state that has more millionaires than any state in the union (663,000) AND the highest unemployment rate in the country as well. The richest 3% of the state pay 60% of the state's taxes. If there is any place in America where the gap between rich and poor, this is it.

On the police side of the house, many of the current leaders in the state's police force were also experienced or were mentored by who did experience the race riots of the nineties. This very likely would affect in some way or another the training and mentality of those assigned to riot control in these times.

As Tupac said, "only in cali will we riot, not rally".

However, as Bill Mattocks pointed out, of all the methods they could have used to disperse the crowd, pepper spray, for all its issues, likely WAS the method most likely to disperse the crowd with the least hazard of injury to either side.

There is also the issue of peaceable assembly. This is the category most fraught with difficulty. On the one hand, you can see in the millieu of videos covering the UC Davis protests, the attempt was made by both protestors and police to be peaceable. Protestors did start in with chants such as "the Nazis, are here, they came equipped with riot gear" (protesters did not make an attempt to stop this chant), and "from Davis to Greece, f#$% the police" (which protesters successfully quashed as quickly as possible).

And the police made reapeated attempts at dispersing the crowd peacefully. They listed section 409 of the California penal code, tried to talk the protesters into leaving, and sought advice and clearance from their chain of command before proceeding. All officers were armed with less than lethal implements, though outnumbered 7or 8 to 1. That the two officers were suspended is frankly revolting.

As to the legality of the assembly itself, here are the laws pertaining to this issue:

California Penal Code 407: " Whenever two or more persons assemble together to do an unlawful act, or do a lawful act in a violent, boisterous, or tumultuous manner, such assembly is an unlawful assembly."

Violent... No. Boisterous and tumultuous? I would have to say yes, absolutely. Therefore: unlawful assembly.

California Penal Code 409: " Every person remaining present at the place of any riot, rout, or unlawful assembly, after the same has been lawfully warned to disperse, except public officers and persons assisting them in attempting to disperse the same, is guilty of a misdemeanor."

The protestors were told to clear out and did not.

California Penal Code 409.6(c): "Any unauthorized person who willfully and knowingly enters an area closed pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b) and who willfully remains within that area, or any unauthorized person who willfully remains within an area closed pursuant to subdivision (a) or (b), after receiving notice to evacuate or leave from a peace officer named in subdivision (a) or (b), shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. If necessary, a peace officer named in subdivision (a) or (b) may use reasonable force to remove from the closed area any unauthorized person who willfully remains within that area after receiving notice to evacuate or leave."

Having been hit with sticks, bitten by dogs, shot with those stupid rubber paintball round things, and breathed in CS gas, I would prefer the perpper spray.

It is a quagmire, bu I have to side with the cops ultimately.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk

 

[Master Dan]

DO WE REALLY NEED TO MILATERIZE THE POLICE FORCE TO COMMITT VIOLENCE AGAINS PEACFUL UNARMED DEMONSTRATORS THIS IS NOT PROTECT AND SERVE BUT CARRY OUT A RIGHT WING POLITICAL AGENDA. THE FBI STOOD OFF FOR HOW MANY DAYS WITH DAVID K. THEY COULD NOT WAIT HOURS OR DAYS FOR THESE KIDS? OH THATS RIGHT GINGRICH SAYS TAKE A BATH AND GET A JOB? HOW MANY HOT TUB MASSAGE BATHS DOES 1.6 MILLION BUY?



Whom Do You Serve?Posted 2 days ago on Nov. 19, 2011, 12:23 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

This incident took place at UC Davis. See below for video of this incident, as well as more examples of state repression against the 99% movement across the U.S.
*TRIGGER WARNING: Graphic images.

Such incidents are unfortunately common. Brutal repression has long been a daily reality for people of color, trans and queer people, criminalized drug users, sex workers, and other marginalized communities. But now that the 99% and the Occupy movement are standing up for social and economic justice, we all are subject to those same violent tactics of repression. How can the police protect and serve the public, when they repeatedly assault the public in the interest of the 1%? What exactly are the police defending -- our right to free speech and peaceful assembly, or broken financial and government institutions?

Police officers that brutalize people fighting for democracy and against the tyranny of the 1% need to be brought to justice. We call on police to protect and serve by taking direct action to prevent the abuses of power by their fellow officers. More broadly, we call on police to work to end the criminal injustice system that profits from the systematic imprisonment and dehumanization of poor and working class people, queer and trans people, people of color and other marginalized groups. We call on all police officers to disobey illegal orders and follow the example Captain Raymond Lewis and others who stand proudly in solidarity with the 99%.

A few more examples of repression, from Los Angeles and Portland:

616 Comments