Police out of control pepper spray

[✖Ice✖]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...CjN_story.html


Video of a tense standoff between police and Occupy demonstrators at the University of California, Davis shows an officer using pepper spray on a group of protesters who appear to be sitting passively on the ground with their arms interlocked.

[ReluctantPegasister]

I just saw this yesterday. This extended video version of the events: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuWEx6Cfn-I literally makes me sick to my stomach. While I don't really want to get into a debate with certain somebodies who feel that the cops were 'omg so justified', I think we can all agree that the acts perpetrated seem at least a little bit over-the-top when done against students that were, as the article states, "sit[ting] passively with their arms intertwined."

[The Goblins Blade]

One of the many reasons why i hate the police.

[-A-]

1- People have a right to "peaceably" assemble under the first amendment to the US Constitution.

2- When their assembly is NOT peaceful, it is unlawful.

3- The US Supreme court has repeatedly held that blocking traffic, footpaths/sidewalks, business entrances, etc. are NOT considered peaceful, and are therefore unlawful.

4- These protestors were blocking a path.

5- The protestors were warned of the unlawfulness of their actions.

6- The protestors were warned they would be sprayed.

7- The protestors got sprayed.

8- The protesters were warned they would use more force to remove the protesters

9- The protesters were then arrested (You'd think if they were "in soooo much pain" they'd I don't know, get up and walk away instead of resisting arrest.)

[Snufkin]

I don't think sitting down, even if it is on a path, is unpeaceful. But I also think we all know everyone's opinion on police brutality ten times over by now...

[Ibanez]

So fuck the University for not allowing it. The police wouldn't have done anything if the University didn't want them gone. This is one of the rare cases where the Occupy protestors actually have a meaningful cause instead of advertising pointless babble. No one is going to disagree with the fact that tuition fees are unnecessarily high.

[Snufkin]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...age?CMP=twt_gu

Apparently the police caused a protestor to miscarriage.

[-A-]

Originally Posted by Snufkin

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...age?CMP=twt_gu

Apparently the police caused a protestor to miscarriage.

My question is; wtf was she doing in the middle of a protest, pregnant? I mean really? You have a baby inside you and your going to go out in the middle of all that bs?

Edit: There's no conformation if the stories true or not...

[Snufkin]

The best part about that article is the link to the photo of the 84 year old woman who was pepper sprayed. I hadn't seen that before. I'm sure she was being very unpeaceful, waving her handbag around in an incredibly threatening way at lightning speed.

[ReluctantPegasister]

Originally Posted by -A-

My question is; wtf was she doing in the middle of a protest, pregnant? I mean really? You have a baby inside you and your going to go out in the middle of all that bs?

Just to clarify... your first question is 'what was she doing there', and not, 'why did a police officer kick a young, somewhat visibly pregnant woman in the stomach'?

[Lugez]

If you don't listen to the police, you may get your ass kicked, arrested, pepper sprayed, or all of the above. Who would have guessed?

[Acheron]

Originally Posted by -A-

My question is; wtf was she doing in the middle of a protest, pregnant? I mean really? You have a baby inside you and your going to go out in the middle of all that bs?

Well, generally speaking, sitting on the ground isn't all that dangerous. It's only when some power-tripping shitstain decides that his shiny badge gives him the right to batter people that it becomes a problem.

[Revolution]

Non PG-13 Language
"Blocking a path"? Bullshit, you can go around them, I see people blocking a path at my university all of the time, not with protests, but just with large crowds giving free food, or something like that, and if there was a fire, THAT would be dangerous. There was a crowd for a religious movement once, a bunch of Christians singing and junk, they weren't told to move, and I had to take another path because the street was filled. And I bet a lot of protests have "blocked a path" and nobody was sprayed to this extent. There is an obvious discontent with the Occupy movement with the police. It's fucked.

[thebigmole]

Just saying if these people weren't Occupy protesters if they were say, Westboro Baptist Church members, doing the same thing and got the same treatment we would be cheering for the police.

As for the pregnant woman, you'd have to be living under a rock to not know how violent these protests have been getting. She was an idiot for putting herself and her child in harms way. That doesn't excuse the officer, but she was an idiot for being there.

[ReluctantPegasister]

Originally Posted by thebigmole

Just saying if these people weren't Occupy protesters if they were say, Westboro Baptist Church members, doing the same thing and got the same treatment we would be cheering for the police.

If the WBC were intertwining their arms across campus to protest rising tuition like these students were I am pretty sure I would still side with the WBC, much as it would pain me. These people were peacefully assembled on property they (or their parents, or the government through scholarships and) paid for.

[Incompris]

I'll admit, I was laughing pretty hard at the chick screaming the whole time.

Anyway, these occupy protests have gotten way, way too violent and they need to be put to a stop. If they were asked to move, and refused, the police had every right to pepper spray.

[Snufkin]

I just realised that even in Tiananmen Square over 20 years ago, peaceful protest was more accepted than in present day America - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man Try something like that now and you're gonna get pepper sprayed.

[Ibanez]

Originally Posted by Snufkin

I just realised that even in Tiananmen Square over 20 years ago, peaceful protest was more accepted than in present day America - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man Try something like that now and you're gonna go pepper sprayed.

Um, what?

One of the main theories of what happened to the Tank Man is that he was executed. There's a reason why those protests are called the Tienanmen Massacre, you know.

[Snufkin]

That's not even the point. It's known worldwide because a peaceful protestor stood up to what was happening. And it's one of the theories that he died, it's also theorised that nothing happened to him at all, you don't know for certain, no more than I do.

My point was that a lone peaceful protestor stopped a tank, iconically. Now a peaceful protestor in the western developed world will get pepper sprayed, and the images of it will spread around the world, and right thinking people will be disgusted, yet nothing happens about it. Right thinking people, mind you. Since to some the police can do no wrong.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by Incompris

I'll admit, I was laughing pretty hard at the chick screaming the whole time.

Anyway, these occupy protests have gotten way, way too violent and they need to be put to a stop. If they were asked to move, and refused, the police had every right to pepper spray.

The police have gotten way, way too violent and they need to be put to a stop.



Also: They clearly deserve to be pepper-sprayed, beaten and arrested for daring to sit down on a public path.

[Ibanez]

Originally Posted by Snufkin

That's not even the point. It's known worldwide because a peaceful protestor stood up to what was happening. And it's one of the theories that he died, it's also theorised that nothing happened to him at all, you don't know for certain, no more than I do.

My point was that a lone peaceful protestor stopped a tank, iconically. Now a peaceful protestor in the western developed world will get pepper sprayed, and the images of it will spread around the world, and right thinking people will be disgusted, yet nothing happens about it. Right thinking people, mind you. Since to some the police can do no wrong.

I see what you're saying, but comparing the world's response to peaceful protestors being massacred for civil resistance against a communist government, and peaceful protestors being pepper sprayed for standing up against high tuition fees is a tad extreme. There's an investigation, as well as enough protests in response to this, so things are being done. I don't know what people expect, this wasn't exactly Ken State.

I don't think it shows any sort of societal decline in America in regards to police brutality. Hell, look at the LA riots in response to the Rodney King beating. And I'm sure if the internet was widespread in '89 you'd still hear the occasional Austin saying, that asshole shouldn't have been blocking tank traffic.

[dr2005]

Originally Posted by Snufkin

I just realised that even in Tiananmen Square over 20 years ago, peaceful protest was more accepted than in present day America - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man Try something like that now and you're gonna get pepper sprayed.

While I see the point you're trying to make, bearing in mind this incident took place the day after hundreds of protestors were killed both in Beijing and other cities in China it's perhaps not the best example to be using...

Anyway, irrespective of whether this was the result of a University request or otherwise, this kind of action is completely unacceptable and totally disproportionate to the harm being caused by the protest. I expect those involved to be punished to the fullest extent of the law, because police officer or not that is criminal assault.

[wastedtime]

Originally Posted by Incompris

If they were asked to move, and refused, the police had every right to pepper spray.

I agree, but they can do that without being so violent. The way the police are acting is bullshit. Pigs.

[MacGuffin]

This video is disgusting. There is a right to peaceful protest. There is no reason why the police had to be so brutal, and frankly, it makes me sick.

[-A-]

Ok ok.. Let's do this thing I leaned in my economics class called building blocks...

Instead of pepper spraying the protesters, what do you think try should of done to make them disburse, instead?

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by -A-

Ok ok.. Let's do this thing I leaned in my economics class called building blocks...

Instead of pepper spraying the protesters, what do you think try should of done to make them disburse, instead?

Why was the pepper spray necessary to put handcuffs on?

[Baxter]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...tml?prmid=4939

Oh how I would love if she was lying.

Originally Posted by Cosmo

Why was the pepper spray necessary to put handcuffs on?

They had their arms interlocked. And no officer is going to take that chance of injury to physically pry them apart one at a time to be cuffed. Especially when in the middle of a crowd with this many people.

Pepper Spray is pretty SOP for this situation. It was either a nightstick to the ribs or pepper spray.

The entire situation is up as well, about 45 mins long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GdQLu36V3eM#!

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by Baxter

They had their arms interlocked. And no officer is going to take that chance of injury to physically pry them apart one at a time to be cuffed. Especially when in the middle of a crowd with this many people.

Pepper Spray is pretty SOP for this situation. It was either a nightstick to the ribs or pepper spray.

The entire situation is up as well, about 45 mins long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GdQLu36V3eM#!

Sorry, that's not how the law works. An officer cannot pepper spray a row of non-violent people because he thinks that if he tries to handcuff them they might get violent even though there's no evidence to suggest that this is so.

The problem is that police officers are, for some reason, regarded as more important than regular people. This is exemplified but you saying that he was justified because the chance of him, ie. one person, being hurt outweighed all of those 10 or so people being hurt. He's not more important. He doesn't have the right to pepper spray the shit out of anyone he likes.

Also, there's no ground for their arrest in the first place. They can protest peacefully on public property if they want to. The idea that they're 'stopping people getting through' is just an excuse to arrest them and to silence dissent.

[chickenonsteroids]

this movement is just annoying now. The only cover they're getting is when the police do something. It's just an unorganized mess.

People will get bored of this ... the police can only do so much bad that'll make people go crazy

[Baxter]

Originally Posted by Cosmo

Sorry, that's not how the law works. An officer cannot pepper spray a row of non-violent people because he thinks that if he tries to handcuff them they might get violent even though there's no evidence to suggest that this is so.

That is how the law works, they had their arms interlocked and were chanting fuck the police. I don't think it's a leap to assume there would be resistance if they tried to pry someone apart and cuff them. The officers thought there was enough of a threat that violence would occur. Surrounding the officers and chanting "If you let them leave, we will let you go" seems like a potential spark to me.

The problem is that police officers are, for some reason, regarded as more important than regular people. This is exemplified but you saying that he was justified because the chance of him, ie. one person, being hurt outweighed all of those 10 or so people being hurt. He's not more important. He doesn't have the right to pepper spray the shit out of anyone he likes.

In some cases, they have to be. Assault on a police officer is a larger offense than on a civilian, same with murder. The officers thought them being in a massive brawl outweighed a dozen or so people being pepper sprayed, yes. They teach police officers to be safe first and foremost.

Also, there's no ground for their arrest in the first place. They can protest peacefully on public property if they want to. The idea that they're 'stopping people getting through' is just an excuse to arrest them and to silence dissent.

In America, you have a right for public assembly, yes. You can express your rights, as long as they don't infringe on anyone elses. Blocking a path does. Yes, someone doesn't HAVE to walk there, but they have a right to if they want to, it's public property. The protestors didn't have to block it, but they did to make sure police showed up to garner more attention. Civil disobedience is grounds for arrest.

And it has nothing do with with dissent. There are always political protests that the police do not break up, and that is because they do not engage in civil disobedience.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by Baxter

That is how the law works, they had their arms interlocked and were chanting fuck the police. I don't think it's a leap to assume there would be resistance if they tried to pry someone apart and cuff them. The officers thought there was enough of a threat that violence would occur. Surrounding the officers and chanting "If you let them leave, we will let you go" seems like a potential spark to me.

So on the basis that there could be potential violence, this justifies calmly pepper spraying non-violent protesters? That is bullshit. Also, while "If you let them leave, we will let you go" sounds less like a "potential spark", the police put themselves in that position.

Originally Posted by Baxter

In some cases, they have to be. Assault on a police officer is a larger offense than on a civilian, same with murder. The officers thought them being in a massive brawl outweighed a dozen or so people being pepper sprayed, yes. They teach police officers to be safe first and foremost.

"In a massive brawl" there are more protesters than police officers. The police officers, however, are armed to the teeth. They put their own safety before that of the citizens, and that's an issue.

Originally Posted by Baxter

In America, you have a right for public assembly, yes. You can express your rights, as long as they don't infringe on anyone elses. Blocking a path does. Yes, someone doesn't HAVE to walk there, but they have a right to if they want to, it's public property. The protestors didn't have to block it, but they did to make sure police showed up to garner more attention. Civil disobedience is grounds for arrest.

Protip: When something is in your way, go around it. The only reason the cops are enforcing this is because there's too much dissent.

Originally Posted by Baxter

And it has nothing do with with dissent. There are always political protests that the police do not break up, and that is because they do not engage in civil disobedience.

There is nothing wrong with civil disobedience in itself. The Civil Rights Movement often engaged in it.

[Baxter]

Originally Posted by Cosmo

So on the basis that there could be potential violence, this justifies calmly pepper spraying non-violent protesters? That is bullshit. Also, while "If you let them leave, we will let you go" sounds less like a "potential spark", the police put themselves in that position.

Calmly pepper spraying, would you prefer if he did it aggressively? Potential violence, failure to disperse, resisting arrest, and civil disobedience is pretty much grounds for a pepper spraying. They warned them enough times they were going to be sprayed. And that last statement is basically just you stating 'it was their fault' for being surrounded by protestors and not allowed to leave...

"In a massive brawl" there are more protesters than police officers. The police officers, however, are armed to the teeth. They put their own safety before that of the citizens, and that's an issue.

Putting their own safety over the citizens they're trying to arrest, yep.

Protip: When something is in your way, go around it. The only reason the cops are enforcing this is because there's too much dissent.

Infringing on someone else's rights, like I said. And dude, West Borough Baptist Church is allowed to protest with their insane content. I'm sure 'the man' is trying to silence this radical dissent that... college costs too much.

There is nothing wrong with civil disobedience in itself. The Civil Rights Movement often engaged in it.

Of course there isn't anything wrong morally, but then don't bitch when you inevitably get arrested.

[JKmadu619]

I completely agree with it.

Unless you've been there, facing protestors who refused to obey the law, shut the hell up.

Unless you've had to deal with rioters, shut the hell up.

Unless you first-hand witnessed the event, shut the hell up.

They were blocking walkways and traffic which is obstruction the law, and creating chaos. They were asked to move and refused, and they got sprayed. They deserved it.

I don't even see what's worth debating.

- Justin

Edit: Also realize this, pepper spray did not blind anyone for life, nor it did cause any permantant damage. After showering off you could probably go to work the next day. It sucks but really the officers could have shot someone, hit them with a night-stick, tazed ecetera. I see this as the best case scenario.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

I completely agree with it.

Unless you've been there, facing protestors who refused to obey the law, shut the hell up.

Unless you've had to deal with rioters, shut the hell up.

Unless you first-hand witnessed the event, shut the hell up.

If you're going to join in with the debate at least state your opinion in a polite manner. Not to mention that your entire, laughable little rant was nothing more than a trainwreck of logic. One does not need to have experienced something to be able to understand or have an opinion on it. There's dozens of first hand accounts, including video footage, of the incident. That's more than enough to formulate an educated opinion on a topic.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

They were blocking walkways and traffic which is obstruction the law, and creating chaos. They were asked to move and refused, and they got sprayed. They deserved it.

I lol'd. Creating chaos. Man that gave me a good laugh.
There were about 6 of them sat on a footpath with locked arms... if that's creating chaos in your opinion, I don't even know what to say. The only chaos was caused when a police officer decides to calmly walk up and down pepper spraying them in the faces then arresting them for resisting arrest when they tried to cover their faces.

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Also realize this, pepper spray did not blind anyone for life, nor it did cause any permantant damage. After showering off you could probably go to work the next day. It sucks but really the officers could have shot someone, hit them with a night-stick, tazed ecetera. I see this as the best case scenario.

So you'd be cool with me pepper spraying you right? I mean, just wash it off and get back to work, right?
Seriously dude, that entire paragraph shows how naive you are, and how far you're willing to go to defend the police. The fact that you'd be cool with these guys being shot, hit or tazed because they dared to sit on a public footpath shocks me deeply.

[Cabron]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

I completely agree with it.

Unless you've been there, facing protestors who refused to obey the law, shut the hell up.

Unless you've had to deal with rioters, shut the hell up.

Unless you first-hand witnessed the event, shut the hell up.

They were blocking walkways and traffic which is obstruction the law, and creating chaos. They were asked to move and refused, and they got sprayed. They deserved it.

I don't even see what's worth debating.

- Justin

Edit: Also realize this, pepper spray did not blind anyone for life, nor it did cause any permantant damage. After showering off you could probably go to work the next day. It sucks but really the officers could have shot someone, hit them with a night-stick, tazed ecetera. I see this as the best case scenario.

Lets see what happens when you get pepper sprayed for no good reason. And you don't need to have first-hand witnessed the event to know that it's a fucked up way to deal with a peaceful protest.

If you think this is the 'best case scenario', there's something wrong in your head. Pepper spray should be a last resort and used only when someone is actively resisting the police (as opposed to passively resisting, as these protestors were).

There is most certainly a need for debate here.

[JKmadu619]

Cosmo: First of all, if you pepper sprayed me because I was breaking the frickin' law by obstructing the foot path after you warned me of the consequences, and informed me I was breaking the law, then yes I would be okay with it because I was being an ass.

Chaos, mischief, obstruction, regardless they broke the law.

I never said I was okay with them being shot, what I did say is that it could have been worse. If the police had taken a different course of action and hit them with a nightstick everyone here would be bitching about a different type of police brutality. Pepper spray sucks, but by the next day you are completely able to function fully, unlike being beaten/tazed/shot (Be it with rubber bullets or more.) It wasn't a drastic course of action.

I'm fine with defending the police. Unless you have been in that situation, and witnessed that singular event first hand you are talking beyond what you know.
Take this:

"Soldier brutally beats three middle eastern men!"

Without the context or witnessing it first hand this could mean any number of things. If you only saw a tape of a soldier beating the men, it may seems wrong. However if they men had maded a mock threat of blowing up the airport, and were suspected terrorists it would be different.

Without full context it's a pointless arguement.

Maybe in this case the police were just being dicks, but generalizing all police or saying all events of police tasking action are brutality, or claiming to somehow understand the situation fully without being there just looks paranoid, as though you expect some kind of police conspiracy.

If you say this first hand, great. However the media can crop, edit, and omit parts of videos. And they can only report the angle they choose to. No law says they have to report the entire story. This article was obviously seeking to make people further distrust police and therefore only displayed favourable information.

- Justin

[Cabron]

Originally Posted by JKmadu619

Cosmo: First of all, if you pepper sprayed me because I was breaking the frickin' law by obstructing the foot path after you warned me of the consequences, and informed me I was breaking the law, then yes I would be okay with it because I was being an ass.

Chaos, mischief, obstruction, regardless they broke the law.

I never said I was okay with them being shot, what I did say is that it could have been worse. If the police had taken a different course of action and hit them with a nightstick everyone here would be bitching about a different type of police brutality. Pepper spray sucks, but by the next day you are completely able to function fully, unlike being beaten/tazed/shot (Be it with rubber bullets or more.) It wasn't a drastic course of action.

I'm fine with defending the police. Unless you have been in that situation, and witnessed that singular event first hand you are talking beyond what you know.
Take this:

"Soldier brutally beats three middle eastern men!"

Without the context or witnessing it first hand this could mean any number of things. If you only saw a tape of a soldier beating the men, it may seems wrong. However if they men had maded a mock threat of blowing up the airport, and were suspected terrorists it would be different.

Without full context it's a pointless arguement.

Maybe in this case the police were just being dicks, but generalizing all police or saying all events of police tasking action are brutality, or claiming to somehow understand the situation fully without being there just looks paranoid, as though you expect some kind of police conspiracy.

If you say this first hand, great. However the media can crop, edit, and omit parts of videos. And they can only report the angle they choose to. No law says they have to report the entire story. This article was obviously seeking to make people further distrust police and therefore only displayed favourable information.

- Justin

I'm pretty sure that we have all the context we need to make an informed opinion on the protest. There's video, photos, eyewitness testimony not to mention half-assed statements from the police. Nobody's 'generalizing' the police. They're outraged at what was a completely brutal and unnecessary event. You seem to equate 'being there' with the ability to form a real opinion on the event. Just because I wasn't there during the Holocaust doesn't mean I can't form an opinion about that either. As for your comment about the media cropping and editing parts of videos, the original video was from an eyewitness and is ten minutes long, with no visible cropping or editing. The article may have been trying to paint the police as terrible people, but I don't see a way that they could have reported it to make the police seem like they were doing the right thing.

[Baxter]

Originally Posted by Cabron

If you think this is the 'best case scenario', there's something wrong in your head. Pepper spray should be a last resort and used only when someone is actively resisting the police (as opposed to passively resisting, as these protestors were).

There is most certainly a need for debate here.

And that is where I disagree with you. When people are sitting down cross legged with their arms interlocked, there is going to be no possible way to arrest them without using force. The police are in a no-win situation here.

[JKmadu619]

Originally Posted by Cabron

I'm pretty sure that we have all the context we need to make an informed opinion on the protest. There's video, photos, eyewitness testimony not to mention half-assed statements from the police. Nobody's 'generalizing' the police. They're outraged at what was a completely brutal and unnecessary event. You seem to equate 'being there' with the ability to form a real opinion on the event. Just because I wasn't there during the Holocaust doesn't mean I can't form an opinion about that either. As for your comment about the media cropping and editing parts of videos, the original video was from an eyewitness and is ten minutes long, with no visible cropping or editing. The article may have been trying to paint the police as terrible people, but I don't see a way that they could have reported it to make the police seem like they were doing the right thing.

I never said you cannot formulate an opinions without witnessing something, but you cannot say "What the police did was wrong!" without actually being put in that position.

And I do not believe the media should be forced to make it seem as though the police are doing the right thing no matter what, because obviously that is also slander, but at the same time I think the article was biased, or at least emotional.

Also note though, eyewitness testomonies are very unreliable, likely to be fabricated or confused and are less effective mere minutes after an event, just because someone says something and believes it, doesn't mean it's true.

- Justin

[-A-]

http://www.therightscoop.com/uc-davi...pray-incident/

Well we were protesting together and the riot cops came at us and we linked arms and sat down peacefully to protest their presence on our campus. And then at one point they were – we had encircled them and they were trying to leave and they were trying to clear a path. And so we sat down, linked arms and said that if they wanted to clear the path they would have to go through us. But we were on the ground, you know, heads down and all I could see was people telling me to cover my head, protect myself and put my head down. And the next thing I know we were pepper-sprayed.

Video proof of the students encircling the cops, blocking the walk way, and the police warning them if they didn't move they would be subject to use of force.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=MGagKL_tvS8