0
Kennedy

So Tell Me Again About "Peaceful" Protests

Recommended Posts

That's all the anti-sprayers were saying. The point is that we think that there should've been a couple of steps between the warning and the use of pepper spray.



It appears to me, after listening to the audio and watching the vids, that these people got what they wanted.

The reasons are obvious

Just how it looks to me
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


OWS protesters strike me as the type that are very quick with the term "police violence", that doesn't mean that actual police violence against them can be ignored.


2 problems I see (and these are both based on opinion):

If the police physically separated protesters, we'd see widespread reports of physical injuries to protesters, photos of ugly bruises, claims of dislocated joints and other various joint injuries. And all of it would be believable, because that's the shit that happens when you use force to separate two people who are actively resisting said separation.

Also, in any type of situation like this, anything an officer does that does not bring the situation under more control, contributes to his inability to ultimately gain control of the situation. Giving the protesters power by leaving the circle without the one they arrested would ultimately escalate the situation and increase the chance of an escalated response from the protesters during the next confrontation.



yeah yeah... there might have been a couple of other options before the spraying, but when the officer asks each protester if they want to be sprayed, and tells them he will if they don't let go, and then he sprays them, I don't see a problem.
--
Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If the police physically separated protesters, we'd see widespread reports of physical injuries to protesters, photos of ugly bruises, claims of dislocated joints and other various joint injuries. And all of it would be believable, because that's the shit that happens when you use force to separate two people who are actively resisting said separation.


You say that as if it's a given. I disagree.




Quote

Also, in any type of situation like this, anything an officer does that does not bring the situation under more control, ...


Hmmmm...under more control. You say that like the protesters were out of control.
Maybe what you mean is that the protesters were not under direct control of the cops (read: cuffed and stuffed).

You say "more". I don't understand what you mean by that unless it means cuffed and stuffed.



contributes to his inability to ultimately gain control of the situation
. Giving the protesters power by leaving the circle without the one they arrested would ultimately escalate the situation and increase the chance of an escalated response from the protesters during the next confrontation.



yeah yeah... there might have been a couple of other options before the spraying, but when the officer asks each protester if they want to be sprayed, and tells them he will if they don't let go, and then he sprays them, I don't see a problem.


My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

If the police physically separated protesters, we'd see widespread reports of physical injuries to protesters, photos of ugly bruises, claims of dislocated joints and other various joint injuries. And all of it would be believable, because that's the shit that happens when you use force to separate two people who are actively resisting said separation.


You say that as if it's a given. I disagree.



I don't.

"Push youngest/oldest to the front lines….This is a battle over images, not just over the park.

- Charles Lenchner, Occupy Wall Street activist, Oct. 13, 2011

If the police overreact (as they are likely to) and we take the blows, and it is recorded, it will go worldwide and further tremendously galvanize the movement.

- Tarak Kauff, Veterans for Peace organizer, Oct. 13, 2011"
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It appears to me, after listening to the audio and watching the vids, that these people got what they wanted.



Even if they consent to being pepper sprayed the cops aren't allowed to ignore the protocol or whatever for the use of pepper spray. (I've to add that I don't know what the protocol for Californian cops is)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

It appears to me, after listening to the audio and watching the vids, that these people got what they wanted.



Even if they consent to being pepper sprayed the cops aren't allowed to ignore the protocol or whatever for the use of pepper spray. (I've to add that I don't know what the protocol for Californian cops is)



I dont know either

But either way, they had a goal in mind. I thing the goal was to get sprayed and have it taped

So they got what they wanted
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

It appears to me, after listening to the audio and watching the vids, that these people got what they wanted.



Even if they consent to being pepper sprayed the cops aren't allowed to ignore the protocol or whatever for the use of pepper spray. (I've to add that I don't know what the protocol for Californian cops is)



I dont know either

But either way, they had a goal in mind. I thing the goal was to get sprayed and have it taped

So they got what they wanted



They get to apply for martyrdom from the bleeding hearts...

What part of "Cop tells you to do X, fucking well do it." is difficult to comprehend?

And to circle around Cops to cut off their egress route is simply asking for confrontation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What part of "Cop tells you to do X, fucking well do it." is difficult to comprehend?

And to circle around Cops to cut off their egress route is simply asking for confrontation.



Agreed

And again, I think they got what they were after
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

If the police physically separated protesters, we'd see widespread reports of physical injuries to protesters, photos of ugly bruises, claims of dislocated joints and other various joint injuries. And all of it would be believable, because that's the shit that happens when you use force to separate two people who are actively resisting said separation.


You say that as if it's a given. I disagree.



I don't.

"Push youngest/oldest to the front lines….This is a battle over images, not just over the park.

- Charles Lenchner, Occupy Wall Street activist, Oct. 13, 2011

If the police overreact (as they are likely to) and we take the blows, and it is recorded, it will go worldwide and further tremendously galvanize the movement.

- Tarak Kauff, Veterans for Peace organizer, Oct. 13, 2011"



Two ships passing in the dark....

Ii was responding to:
"If the police physically separated protesters, we'd see... widespread reports of physical injuries to protesters, photos of ugly bruises, claims of dislocated joints and other various joint injuries. And all of it would be believable, because that's the shit that happens when you use force to separate two people who are actively resisting said separation."

...and again, no it's NOT a given that those events would follow the police physically separating protesters.

I see that you are saying that because the protesters planned the operation to gain more exposure that the planning negates the responsibility of to act properly in a non-violent situation.

I disagree with that.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


What part of "Cop tells you to do X, fucking well do it." is difficult to comprehend?



Not difficult.
The German populace of pre-WWII understood that perfectly. The Jewish community even practiced it.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

...and again, no it's NOT a given that those events would follow the police physically separating protesters.



And yet, their quotes state that they would do exactly that if injuries occurred.

Quote

I see that you are saying that because the protesters planned the operation to gain more exposure that the planning negates the responsibility of to act properly in a non-violent situation.



Best get your glasses checked - I said nothing of the sort.
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

...and again, no it's NOT a given that those events would follow the police physically separating protesters.



And yet, their quotes state that they would do exactly that if injuries occurred.



I tried but I could not read that into the quotes your cited.

My glasses are fine. As a matter of fact, I just got new ones two days ago. What I'm having trouble with is figuring out just what you are saying. Can you put it to-the-point form as opposed to beating around the bush?

Or, maybe point to the post that does that already?
Just askin'.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

...and again, no it's NOT a given that those events would follow the police physically separating protesters.



And yet, their quotes state that they would do exactly that if injuries occurred.



I tried but I could not read that into the quotes your cited.



"This is a battle over images, not just the park"
"If we take the blows, and it is recorded, it will go worldwide and tremendously galvanize the movement"

Maybe you should have tried English.

Quote

What I'm having trouble with is figuring out just what you are saying. Can you put it to-the-point form as opposed to beating around the bush?



That there wouldn't be widespread reports of any injuries is bullshit - or do you not recall the dude that got beaned by his own side and was texting before mysteriously being in critical condition?
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going to try one more time with you. This was a good thread, maybe we can salvage something out of it.

I don't know if I wasn't clear or if you misunderstood, but I never claimed that all officers across the globe use pepper spray immediately after verbal commands. What I was trying to get across is that in first world countries the use of pepper spray after verbal commands is legal and allowed by policy. That does not mean it is required or that all officers are going to use it. I'm sure you can find plenty of examples of officers not using pepper spray when they could have. The fact that they didn't use it does not mean they were not allowed to use it.

As for sources, as I said, that is direct from the horses mouth. If you don't want to accept personal experience and conversation from reliable sources, then that's not my problem. I don't have written policies from all the departments I listed, but I've spoken with officers from each of them. Some of them were even trainers in relevant fields (defensive tactics, use of force, subject control and arrest techniques, empty hand combat, etc). If you don't like that many departments do not openly share their internal policy, then take it up with them. I've tried to get several of them and some of my requests were denied, ignored, or answered with huge blanks. Since I can't substantiate these facts without disclosing personal and private professional information, I'm not going to.

The "whiny backstabbing bastards" bit was not in reference to people that disagree with me. Plenty of posters disagree with me but would readily acknowledge that I've never called them anything like that. It was in reference to phillykev. He's a former poster here and THE poster child for not sharing personal information.

Quote

I remember it was you that claimed "about every police force" using the same system. And I think the anti-sprayers were actually the ones bringing alternatives to the table. Of course there are different methods, but that wasn't the issue there. The issue is that some methods are more questionable then others.



No, the issue is that you think the methods are more questionable and are unwilling to listen to anyone's explenation.

Quote

Quote

None of that changes the fact that pepper spray is used in many places around the world as an acceptable option before using "hard hands" methods.



You claimed that it almost universally used after a verbal warning. And I don't know if the term "soft hand" methods exist, but I'm sure you understand where I'm getting at. They should at least have tried to remove the protesters in a non-violent way.



Actually, they did. There is video out there showing two officers grabbed a protester on the sidwalk and tried to move him. The protesters held on to each other (that linking arms I addressed earlier). Also, officers are not required to try using lesser force when it is clearly inapplicable. That is the "not required to hit every step in the continuum" I addressed earlier. The easy example is that officers are not requried to use pepper spray, or batons, or even verbal commands, when they are being attacked with a deadly weapon - they can go straight to firearms. That applies here because when you have a group that has sat down, linked arms, and refused to leave, there is no point is trying to use a soft open hand to guide them away, or even to try pushing or pulling them. The officers at UC Davis went above and beyond by trying to move the protesters.

Quote

Quote

Do you understand that there is a difference between things like blocking streets buildings railroads etc and surrounding a group of officers and refusing to let them leave? Do you think the Polizei would have used the same tactics if their officers had been surrounded while making an arrest and protesters surrounded them?



You tell me, you claimed specifically they do use pepper spray in the same situation.



I said they can, not that they always will or always have to. See above.

Quote

OWS protesters strike me as the type that are very quick with the term "police violence", that doesn't mean that actual police violence against them can be ignored.



I agree completely and utterly with you on that statement. The problem is what you consider police violence. Try watching this video through and seeing if it changes your mind at all about the officers using pepper spray. Get it out of your mind that officers were simply spraying people for blocking a sidewalk. This group was set on blocking officers from leaving and preventing them from leaving the area with an arrestee.

Alternate View of UC Davis Pepper Spraying

If it doesn't, then you are simply too far out of step on what pepper spray is and how it is used. In that case, your anger should be aimed at law makers, judges, civil officials, and law enforcement administrators. They are the ones that teach and train officers and tell them how to do the job without being fired and/or arrested.

Also, to other posters who stated that tents had been taken down before the first arrests were made, this video shows you are mistaken. Damn, ain't it a shame when facts get in the way of a good story? Just like the alleged brain injury, just like so many other OWS lies.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for that.

It would appear the college idiots are lucky the National Guard wasn't called out to remove the threat on the cops.
What sort of moronic thought process (or complete lack of) thinks you can get away with interfering with a lawful arrest, surrounding cops, or threatening them???
I'm safe to assume UC Davis doesn't teach law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow!

Thanks for posting

It appears to me that extreme restraint was used by the officers.

And as I stated earlier in this thread

They got exactly what they were after

(edited) footage to try and make a case for police

being the bad guys.


Unfortunately for them

There were other cameras there

I wonder if the ows types will try and ban cameras

other than their own from now on
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

If the police physically separated protesters, we'd see widespread reports of physical injuries to protesters, photos of ugly bruises, claims of dislocated joints and other various joint injuries. And all of it would be believable, because that's the shit that happens when you use force to separate two people who are actively resisting said separation.



You say that as if it's a given. I disagree.



It may not be a given, but it is far more likely. Watch the video in my post above this one. You'll see officers doing a lot of the things you suggest. They just don't work because protesters don't want lesser steps to work.

The use of pepper spray (and TASERs, believe it or not) have both resulted in fewer injuries to officers and to suspects. There have been deaths after pepper spray and deaths after TASER use*, but the number of deaths after use of force incidents have not gone up. What that means is that yes, some people will die after fighting with the police, and yes, they may still die if officers use OC or TASER, but that both officers and suspects are less likely to be injured with those two options, and no one is any more likely to die.

That's right. There is no increase in the likelihood of death, and a statistically significant reduction in the number of officer AND suspect injures.

http://www.nij.gov/journals/267/use-of-force.htm
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/195739.pdf

note: death after use does not equal death caused by. Most of the deaths after use of OC or TASER are related to positional asphyxiation (inability to breath due to body position/restriction). Most states now train officer to avoid this by not using a "hog tie" position after arrest, not letting arrestees lie on their chest, watching for difficulty breathing, calling EMS after exposure, or other steps.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Maybe you should have tried English.

Quote


Maybe you should have read the response. Nothing you quoted is relevant to what "would have happened".

Not a given.


Quote

That there wouldn't be widespread reports of any injuries is bullshit -



Preach it oh wise reader of the future. Preach it!
You missed your comet.

Put your talent to good use and tell us of stock futures.
:S
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It may not be a given, but it is far more likely.


Yes, not a given.

Quote

The use of pepper spray (and TASERs, believe it or not) have both resulted in fewer injuries to officers and to suspects.


Why, obviously, of course! It's kinda hard to fight when you're squirming on the ground after being sprayed or TASERed.

I assume that you don't consider being sprayed as being injured.
:S

And...since you stated it, I'll ask. "Fewer injuries than what?"


It's really, really simple. In these situations, do the least violent first. Respond to the response in kind or better.

For the life of me, I don't understand how you can argue against that.

You guys can go beat up anybody and everybody. Have fun with it. '68 Chicago PD were your heroes, I guess.

As for the bozos planning stuff....the cops played right into their hands. Who would have been smiling had the cops simply removed them instead of spraying them? The cops. As it is, some of the cops are not smiling now, are they?
Bozos: "Ooooops, the plan didn't work."
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0