The Future of Protest In Panopticon Nation 566
Hugh Pickens writes "James Fallows writes that you don't have to idealize everything about the Occupy movement to recognize the stoic resolve of the protesters at UC Davis being pepper sprayed as a moral drama that the protesters clearly won. 'The self-control they show, while being assaulted, reminds me of grainy TV footage I saw as a kid, of black civil rights protesters being fire-hosed by Bull Connor's policemen in Alabama. Or of course the Tank Man in Tiananmen Square,' writes Fallows. 'Such images can have tremendous, lasting power.' We can't yet imagine all the effects of the panopticon society we are beginning to live in but one benefit to the modern protest movement is the omnipresence of cameras (video) as police officials, protesters, and nearly all onlookers are recording whatever goes on bringing greater accountability and a reality-test for police claims that they 'had' to use excessive force. 'What's new is that now the perception war occurs simultaneously with the physical struggle. There's almost parity,' writes Andrew Sprung. 'You have a truncheon or gun, I have a camera. You inflict pain, I inflict infamy.'"
This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Insightful)
First Post
"There's almost parity,' writes Andrew Sprung. 'You have a truncheon or gun, I have a camera. You inflict pain, I inflict infamy.'""
haha come on, parity?
Has this guy ever been pepper sprayed or beaten up before?
People shouldnt have to endure this to receive justice
Its a sad day our society thinks this is some kind of achievement or "balance" of power
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Insightful)
People shouldnt have to endure this to receive justice
No, they shouldn't, but this is the way it has always been.
You can read the autobiography of Mohandas Ghandi (a really wonderful book) and see the same patterns. You can read some Henry David Thoreau and understand why he would have preferred to remain in jail instead of having a well-meaning but less-principled individual pay his poll tax for him.
As long as the masses, the majority of people, are largely passive and indifferent to the injustice around them there will always be a need for exceptional individuals to take this kind of abuse to effect any real change. What people like Thoreau and Ghandi realized was the error of violence, the way it makes it so easy for those who control perception and use propaganda to make the violent (however justified) into evil bogeymen who will always be demonized in the popular mind.
I heard this one time and I never forgot it. It is a saying of Ghandi's: "the good that violence appears to do is temporary; the harm that it does is permanent." I suppose there are a lot of low-brow, smarmy types with nothing to contribute so for them maybe I should add "within the context of protest and trying to change society" so the fact that war sometimes is quite necessary is irrelevant. There was a time before it became necessary and that's when peaceful change was possible. I'm tired of that small-minded crowd, so I don't consider it a total waste to deny them the slam-dunk "victory" they so desperately crave.
At any rate, doing it peacefully means you absolutely must maintain the high ground. If you want to expose the establishment for the bunch of power-hungry thugs they tend to be, you cannot use their tactics. It provides no contrast. The unwise, reactionary, direction-less types who tend to attach themselves to any major movement are the biggest problem the Occupiers currently have. Do you not notice how the media reports with glee the rapes, murders, etc. that occur on the Occupied territory? That's exactly what they want -- for you to be no better. If you want to be effective, don't give it to them.
The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly.
The general populace understands that the State is the only entity that has a legitimate right to project force. Whether via the military (hopefully outside the country) or the police (inside the country). I include the CIA / FBI / etc in those categories.
Anyone else using force (particularly outside their social group) is IMMEDIATELY identified as a criminal. A threat to society.
There may be problems in society. And the majority of the population may even AGREE with you about those problems. But they do NOT want to have to deal with non-State violence. They see enough of that (and its effects) from criminals.
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Insightful)
Even from "State Authority" we demand that violence be tempered and that force be fair and proportional to the threat. When a Bull Conner unleashes attack dogs on people quietly walking or a National Guardman shoots an unarmed girl with a high powered rifle standing in protest on a campus lawn or Police assault people up to and including deadly force for no apparent cause, we are rightly dumbstruck and appalled. Because they have the charge of using force, they must be all the more responsible for using it as the last possible way of managing a circumstance, and at that in strict measure according to the threat.
Mayor Bloomberg had terrible force unleashed on the Occupy protestors. He knew this is his last term and he would have to return to Wallstreet after his term was over, so we can all clearly see whose interest he protected and protected savagely. This is exactly the kind of misuse of power, that makes good Americans want to take their government back from from death grip of the 1%. Sadly some are willing to use violence, and sad as that may be, it too is something that is sometimes justifiable.
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sadly some are willing to use violence, and sad as that may be, it too is something that is sometimes justifiable
Justifiable violence is my fear. Passive resistance, civil disobedience, and jury nullification are all wonderful examples of making your point without violence and exposing the tyranny and rationale of those in power.
However, I can fully admit that if it came down to it, I would kill another human being without a seconds thought if it was required to protect me, my friends, or my family. If rational discourse is not possible, and the environment so extreme that conflict resolution requires deadly force, I am going to survive.
I do truly admire those that have the courage to be passive and forgiving even while dying painful deaths at the hands of others. I just don't have it.
Sadly, I think we are heading towards justifiable violence as the only means to take back control of our countries and our lives. Protests and legislative bodies are accomplishing next to nothing and the situation is getting so bad, that my only choice will ultimately be violence or incarceration.
As for leaving the US, just where would I go? Every country seems to be getting progressively worse and worse for their citizens, or is in economic slavery to the 1st world super powers.
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Insightful)
Pepperspray is not the minimal level of force. The minimal level of force would have been to pick the protesters up and move them arrest them whatever. The use of pepper spray was to instil fear into the protesters.
Now if this was one officer getting out of hand then his colleagues should have restrained him on the other hand if that behaviour is state sanctioned then perhaps it is a crisis of democracy.
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Insightful)
Pepperspray is not the minimal level of force. The minimal level of force would have been to pick the protesters up and move them arrest them whatever. The use of pepper spray was to instil fear into the protesters.
Isn't there a term for the act of using violence to instill fear in a group of people?
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Insightful)
You have to put this into context... Students around the country are being priced out of an education, while banks are getting filthy rich enslaving entire generations of young people with crushing debt attempting to chase the American Dream. All this happening while School Chancellors are retiring on multimillion dollar pensions and salaries that are growing astronomically every year. When such a vanishingly few seem to grow wealthy on the backs of those they should be serving how can you honestly say students shouldn't exercise their fair and legal right to protest publicly.
Simply blasting children with pepper spray not only did not solve the problem, but the video of the event so inflamed public opinion that all involved will either lose their jobs or face criminal prosecution. The use of force in this circumstance is completely unwarranted, and people will do hard time for using it. By your logic, we could start macing j-walkers and parking violators. I'm certain you'd only need to be maced once to forever find committing that crime unpalatable. How about children being unruly in the classroom, forget the Ritalin, let's just mace the little buggers, that'll make them behave. Have you ever been pepper sprayed? Do you actually think that is an appropriate response to people quietly sitting down?
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Insightful)
but the video of the event so inflamed public opinion that all involved will either lose their jobs or face criminal prosecution. The use of force in this circumstance is completely unwarranted, and people will do hard time for using it.
Are you talking about the same video? The cop who pepper sprayed the sitting protesters?
Hard time, really? The protesters who were arrested will probably have their charges dropped. The cop is likely to get some sort of discipline applied -- he might even lose his job, depending on how badly they want to scapegoat him. The people who gave the order will receive no official punishment at all. And nobody involved (except maybe the protesters) will be charged with any actual crimes.
This isn't the first time police have used excessive force and it was caught on video. How such cases are handled has been worked out already -- and it only involves criminal charges in the most extreme situations (and this isn't one of them. Nobody was killed or raped or robbed, for example.)
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, there is precedent in case law that pepper-spraying nonviolent protesters is assault.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1332957.html [findlaw.com]
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Insightful)
which reinforces one law for the rulers and one law for the ruled.. i can assure you that if the person the officer sprayed had done that to the officer or even retaliated in the exact same manner (pepper spraying the officer) that person would be doing jail time and there wouldn't be any questions about it.
by not prosecuting the officers and not punishing them for the crime you are giving other officers a very real affirmation that they can get away with the same actions.
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:4, Insightful)
which reinforces one law for the rulers and one law for the ruled.. i can assure you that if the person the officer sprayed had done that to the officer or even retaliated in the exact same manner (pepper spraying the officer) that person would be doing jail time and there wouldn't be any questions about it.
by not prosecuting the officers and not punishing them for the crime you are giving other officers a very real affirmation that they can get away with the same actions.
If it was up to me, officers would indeed be prosecuted for things like this. I'd be inclined to give them some more leeway than normal citizens when they are clearly doing their job -- but that leeway would have limits, and this would have passed it.
But it's not up to me.
Pointing out what is likely to happen and explaining why is not the same as supporting it.
the banks aren't to blame for educations costs (Score:3)
in no shape or form. Big Education is to blame. They simply keep raising their prices to soak up available financing and then market to the same that if you don't have a degree your not going to get the bling. You got part of it right with the chancellors of the school, but its the whole structure of BigEd that is wrong, if not a horrid copy of public ed.
People are kept and paid based on seniority and nothing else, it doesn't matter if you suck or use stand ins all the time. They they lard up with extras li
Re: (Score:3)
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Interesting)
Did you see the video? They were very scary weren't they? Sitting down on the ground like that with their arms pinned and not moving. So scary that the officer felt the need to prance around spraying them while his mates turned their backs to the protesters.
It's a problem because in a first world country, people expect better than to have violence used against them for not running scared when the officers arrive. Police are supposed to work together with people to keep the community together; not come when those in power call them to put the hurt on people who're being difficult.
That's the crisis. What makes it worse is that the officers involved were so relaxed that they don't appear to be worried about the protesters at all; they used pain just because it was easier.
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Informative)
Did you see the video? They were very scary weren't they? Sitting down on the ground like that with their arms pinned and not moving. So scary that the officer felt the need to prance around spraying them while his mates turned their backs to the protesters.
Here [youtube.com] is the video.
He even shows the pepper spray can to everyone (including the cameras), and he goes back and forth along the chain twice as he sprays them. And then he goes around once more and sprays individual people who didn't get the full thing on the first go one by one. Interestingly enough, even though the guys at the other end were already seeing what's coming for them, only one guy tried to move away...
Of course, this was completely and utterly pointless. Pepper spray is a tool given to police to subdue violent people without resorting to lethal force, or to make the crowd back off; it's not there to make their job easier when dealing with non-violent law-breakers. Furthermore, in this case it didn't even make the job easier - if their goal was to move the people aside so that the walkway is no longer blocked, pepper spraying them from all sides while they are sitting is not going to achieve this; what you end up with is a bunch of sitting people vomiting because of pepper spray, only contributing to the mess. Finally, as seen on video, after pepper spraying, the cops just come there and pick them up and drag away one by one - which they could do just as well from the get go.
It is clear that the use of pepper spray was not in any way, shape or form to stop those people from breaking a law, but was an arbitrary extra-judicial punishment imposed by the cop in question on the protesters for ignoring his command to move away. The very theatrical way in which it is delivered only makes it this much more evidenced.
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Insightful)
They may have been, but it's not clear that they were. Students at a University are not breaking the law by being on the grounds. There may be a school rule about erecting tents (though, at the time the pepper-spraying incident occured, all the tents had already been removed), but it's unlikely to be a law.
Is disobeying a police officer's order to surrender your first-amendment right to peacably gather and petition the government for a redress of greviences against the law in Davis, California? I doubt it.
But, even if they were, how come these same people who always pipe up with the claim that the protesters deserve it because they were breaking the law never also point out that the police were breaking the law by using pepper spray on them? California law is quite clear about when an officer can use force: To stop a fleeing suspect who is subject to arrest, and to eliminate a threat.
At the incident in UC Davis, Lt. Pike was neither eliminating a threat (there was quite obviously not threat of violence by anyone other than the police), nor was anybody fleeing.
So how come the approbation over the students who may or may not have been breaking a law, but none over the police who quite definitely were?
Assuming New York's laws are similar to California's, Anthony Bologna was also breaking the law when macing protesters when they were corralled and contained.
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Informative)
If you watch the videos, you see that Lt Pike instructs the students (who are blocking his exit with detainees, i.e obstructing the police - but they were trying to get arrested because they wanted to force the cops to arrest everyone) that if they don't move when the police car which they are bringing gets there, then he will shoot them.
That is not a legal order. He can only say "I will arrest you, and I might hurt you if you resist". He also doesn't keep his word: he pepper spays them instead of shooting them, and he does so before they have an opportunity to move out of the way of for the police car. Moreover, he prevents the other officers from trying to move/detain them.
Regards
-Jeremy
Re:The legitimate projection of force. (Score:5, Informative)
There is now at least 1 person murdered by the police use of brutality against OWS.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/11/22/pregnant-seattle-protester-miscarries-after-being-kicked-pepper-sprayed/
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:4, Informative)
And don't report that the perpetrators were not associated with the OWS protestors?
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Insightful)
You can read some Henry David Thoreau and understand why he would have preferred to remain in jail instead of having a well-meaning but less-principled individual pay his poll tax for him.
Thoreau's essay (search for "Civil Disobedience" online) is excellent and should be required reading of every high school student in America.
(Preferring to remain in jail is a little less impressive when it's only overnight, until Emerson comes to bail him out in the morning. Kinda like how his whole self-reliance theme is a little less powerful when he's squatting on land owned by Emerson. But still, considering the essay that came out of the overnight stay in jail, and its subsequent influence, it was pretty awesome.)
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:4, Interesting)
You can read some Henry David Thoreau and understand why he would have preferred to remain in jail instead of having a well-meaning but less-principled individual pay his poll tax for him.
Thoreau's essay (search for "Civil Disobedience" online) is excellent and should be required reading of every high school student in America.
(Preferring to remain in jail is a little less impressive when it's only overnight, until Emerson comes to bail him out in the morning. Kinda like how his whole self-reliance theme is a little less powerful when he's squatting on land owned by Emerson. But still, considering the essay that came out of the overnight stay in jail, and its subsequent influence, it was pretty awesome.)
I especially loved and appreciated the part about the level of consciousness from which the State's response came. I don't remember the description exactly, but he wrote about the way it was his thoughts, beliefs, principles, and meditations that they found so intolerable, yet they took out their vengence on his body by locking it up. He said they did this just as boys who, unable to get back at their enemy, will abuse his dog. The jailor shut and locked the cell door, imprisoning his body, but his meditations went right through and out the door behind him.
This was not someone you could intimidate by the usual methods and he did not need violence to achieve that status. This is what I admire.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:4, Interesting)
The unwise, reactionary, direction-less types who tend to attach themselves to any major movement are the biggest problem the Occupiers currently have. Do you not notice how the media reports with glee the rapes, murders, etc. that occur on the Occupied territory? That's exactly what they want -- for you to be no better. If you want to be effective, don't give it to them.
Your problem is, and I have this information directly from people who participated in this very same activity in the 1960s, is that the unwise, reactionary, direction-less types, as well as those looking to party, do drugs, and hook-up with the opposite sex, are 99% of your protest numbers. Without them, the true reactionaries would be seen as too small a group to even care about. So they have to invite everybody else in in an attempt to show numbers that they don't truly possess. Running a fine Kitchen and giving out lots of free stuff at the Comfort Tent gave OWS the appearance of numbers far beyond the true reality of the dedicated.
Maybe. (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe. But I think the situation may be a bit different today.
There are probably better places to "do drugs" that a place with, literally, dozens of cops standing around you. Who can come in at any time and knock your tent over.
The same with "hook-up with the opposite sex". Not to mention that the ratio is rather slanted to males. Unless you're a woman looking for a guy ... in a cold tent ... in a public place ... with lots of cops around. And while I'm sure that those women do exist, I think we've wandered into fantasy territory.
The party people, sure. As long as there's a party. But there are other parties out there. In warm places. With a lot lower police presence (because the cops are all at the protest).
Again, maybe. They've claimed that the cops were pushing the homeless and regular vagrants to the protest. So there is at least some people there who would not be called "dedicated" to the general cause.
On the other hand, not many people would choose to live in a cold tent in NYC if they had any other options. So those who aren't "dedicated" are indicative of the overall problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep. Because the 'occupy' movement is quite thoroughly unable or unwilling to deal with them - thoughtful people are asking why. Not so thoughtful people are blaming the media.
Why shouldn't they? That the 'occupy' movement can arrange for
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry to ask you, but what exactly Ghandy achieved? I am not saying that he is not extraordinary man, but, did he actually change anything at all???
Other than India's change from a British colony to a sovereign nation, you mean? Are you serious?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Other than India's change from a British colony to a sovereign nation, you mean? Are you serious?
India was going to become a sovereign nation regardless; the British couldn't afford it and the Indians wanted them gone. Gandhi's main 'success' was in bringing that forward a few years as a chaotic withdrawal where I believe around a million Indians died, instead of a peaceful handover of power.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Informative)
I understand your question. The sad truth is that the world is a strange and chaotic place. How many millions have been slaughtered in the name of the "Prince of Peace". That doesn't make the conversation "Love thy Enemy" any less profound or moving. Gandhi freed nearly a billion people from the oppression of foreign rule. More important he is the father of peaceful revolution. The American civil rights movement owes almost everything to Gandhi. Since then the best of the work of Mandela, Tienanmen Square, and a hundred other peaceful revolution small and large owe their power, dignity and humanity to the road paved by Gandhi.
He literally invented a new way for human beings to determine the future with complete responsibility and complete compassion. I can't remember a larger contribution to the species and it will certainly play a large part in what it about to happen to our government and our collective futures.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:4, Insightful)
"the good that violence appears to do is temporary; the harm that it does is permanent." I suppose there are a lot of low-brow, smarmy types with nothing to contribute so for them maybe I should add "within the context of protest and trying to change society"
You could, but then you would just be making a fool of yourself for no reason at all. What good does violence do in child-rearing? In traffic?
I suspect that you were trying to justify warfare with your statement. So then I ask you, name one war that has not done permanent damage?
There is a time when war is absolutely necessary. People like Hitler and Mussolini couldn't have been reasoned with. How well did appeasement work again? The time for peaceful change within Germany was before he became such a powerful dictator. The fact that war does permanent damage makes it a thing of last resort. It does not mean you are obligated to lay down and allow a tyrant to walk all over you.
Or for a less extreme example, have you ever been physically attacked in a completely unprovoked manner by someone you have harmed in no way? If you counter-attack and knock them out, are you not merely defending yourself against an aggressor? Do you not believe that receiving such a response might make the thug think twice about attacking the next innocent?
But for a peaceful protest? No, there is no excuse for violence. I am sorry if you cannot distinguish the difference and attribute this failure of yours to some kind of foolishness on my part. I do not consider warfare justified when there are other options. Peaceful protest is one such option. So is voting (though not so effective in a two-party system). So is the soap box. There is simply no excuse for protestors to initiate violence. Likewise, there is no excuse for police to use violence against protestors who are peaceful and do not pose a threat.
Re: (Score:3)
So then I ask you, name one war that has not done permanent damage?
The Pig War. [wikipedia.org]
Well, not from the POV of the pig. Great reference, though.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Insightful)
History always repeats itself. Swords and pens have become guns and cameras. The balance between them remains the same.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Informative)
Not to disagree with the outrage expressed, but:
Has this guy ever been pepper sprayed or beaten up before?
Yes, he has. It's part of the training in the use of pepper spray by police forces. He's been sprayed at least once in the face with it.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Insightful)
First Post
"There's almost parity,' writes Andrew Sprung. 'You have a truncheon or gun, I have a camera. You inflict pain, I inflict infamy.'""
haha come on, parity?
Has this guy ever been pepper sprayed or beaten up before?
People shouldnt have to endure this to receive justice
Its a sad day our society thinks this is some kind of achievement or "balance" of power
The balance of power has always been a slow, grinding play of justice against violent acts.
You rob a convenience store, or ten, it profits you in the moment, but spending years behind bars is the price. If a cop beats a protester to death for no apparent reason and it is covered by several independent video cameras, he's a lot more likely to answer for his actions than if it was merely witnessed by 50 protesters who were also being beaten.
Unfortunately the worst penalty the cop is likely to face is either a paid vacation known as "administrative leave" or maybe the loss of his job. This is a serious problem. A free society won't stay that way if the police have some kind of special status above the citizens they are supposed to be serving. Incidentally, a cop who beats someone basically has to also charge them with resisting arrest (or similar) or he's admitting he beat them for no reason, so there is both the assault and the criminal charge that may haunt the person for life.
Even the idea that "assaulting a police officer" carries a higher penalty than assaulting a citizen might sound good but it's completely misguided. The cop is better able to respond to an assault, to have back-up, and carries an assortment of weaponry everywhere he goes. The average citizen is more likely to be unarmed and more likely to hesitate to use any available weapons for fear that a court will not consider it self-defense (we like victimhood and we like to encourage bullies so in many states you are expected to try fleeing first, nevermind this only emboldens the criminals). Even if there were not such an inequality, the cop is our servant, one particularly able to abuse his authority, and granting him equality alone is generous.
You simply can't have "special" or "protected" groups and expect to remain an egalitarian society that cherishes freedoms. It has never happened before and it won't happen again.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Interesting)
The Davis situation has some important differences with other Occupy incidents.
First and foremost, there is a strong presumption (strong enough to stand in any civil court in California) that the individuals involved had a legal right to be where they were. They were not being accused of trespassing, nor were they being accused via any specific form of due process of any crime at all. They were technically "in or near their domicile", the common area around a residential section of their campus. To some degree they have the same rights as you would have, on the sidewalk in front of your California home. Because of this aspect, there are as many Fourth Amendment considerations as there are First Amendment questions.
Next, also somewhat important, is that the officer (Lt. Pike) was acting on his own initiative, contrary to orders to _not_ use force. At least this is according to official statements made today by people speaking for the university. While he may enjoy immunity from any _criminal_ accusations, he may not have _civil_ immunity because he was acting as an individual and not following orders of a law enforcement organization. He was using force against individuals who were not under arrest, not under suspicion of any particular crime, and certainly without any warrant or the will of any judicial magistrate. It remains to be seen if the departmental policy documents this procedure for the use of pepper spray and whether it was consistent with that policy, even if justified.
But it does not matter. It will be a long road for the university officials to defend the premise that an order to vacate that particular area was lawful in the first place, because they cannot show that the individuals had no right to be there, whereas the protestors can show that they did.
Perhaps most important of all, the UC Davis Board of Regents are not stupid enough to allow any civil cases to escalate, since it's easy to see how they could be forced into explaining all of this to the very same Ninth Circuit panel that decided for Lundberg vs. Humboldt. If they allowed it to get to that point, and then if it could be shown that anyone in a position of authority knew or should have known about that standing case law as it applies in California, the door is open to not only unlimited civil damages (think millions per victim) but also to conspiracy charges against the people who made the decision to do this attack.
Smarter armchair lawyers than myself are obviously thinking about this, and are already doing damage control. I notice that soon-to-be-former Lt. Pike is wisely speaking to no-one other than his own lawyer, and that the people who speak for the university are making it clear that Pike was disobeying orders. If they fail to throw Pike under the bus, they have a HUGE problem in that orders were given which are not at all lawful in their jurisdiction. The school's directors are assuredly praying that none of these individuals have rich, well-connected, activist parents.
This may not end as badly for Pike as some of you are obviously hoping. He might turn out to be a pinhead who didn't understand what he was stepping in. Ignorance I can forgive, to an extent. But if he was ordered to do what he did by someone who knew or should have known the things I outline in my post above, then release the hounds.
My bet is that it will end quietly with undisclosed settlements offered to each victim. Like I said, the UC Davis board are not fools, and they know that trying to defend against civil litigation from any of these students will be a losing proposition. The Davis incident is quite unlike any of the other OWS protest violence incidents, primarily because none of those incidents can be construed to have occurred _where the protestors lived_.
I doubt Lt. Pike will be held personally responsible for financial losses to the University but I do not believe he has any sort of total immunity, especially if the University admins are telling the truth about him being ordered not to use force. If they are lying, they are F'd. If they are telling the truth, Pike is F'd. Either way, the institution is F'd, and there are going to be some very happy lawyers getting a piece of the action.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:4, Insightful)
"A policeman is a civilian" - Sam Vimes.
I've long thought that Pratchett should be compulsory reading in every police academy.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Insightful)
It was not unions that ordered the police to use force at the level that they did. And it should not be the officers, even the infamous Lt John Pike from UCDavis who will forever be known as the fat turd who strolled in front of peaceful protestors on their knees and casually sprayed them point-blank in the face with military-grade mace (and whose email address and personal information has been disseminated everywhere).
Some of the photographic mashups of that famous photo are terrific, by the way.
The people who ordered such over-the-top violence, the mayors and chancellors (I love that word, "chancellors") who thought they were being clever by coordinating their actions to neutralize the protests, those are the folks that should pay the price.
But nice try, ShakaUVM, you sad fuck, to make this all a "union" issue or a "marxist" issue, instead of what it is, an issue of the overt militarization of municipal police forces. And an issue of an increasingly antsy elite who are starting to sweat in the cracks in their asses because there are just so many people who aren't rich out there who are starting to get pissed about being misused.
I mean, when exactly did campus police start dressing like extras from an S&M production of The Empire Strikes Back, anyway? The funny thing about when you bring all that para-military drag and hardware into a small force, there are always a few who are just dying to get a chance to use it. And that sad, chubby little thug with the mustache who thought it was just so cool to show those oh-so-superior college students a thing or two about what it means to carry a badge, that little shit who probably never got the time of day from any of the hot coeds he tried to chat up on campus, who saw all those smart-ass college kids who thought they were better than him because they were going to get Masters Degree instead of his associates in criminal justice from a community college. Oh, Lt John Pike was going to show them what's what alright. And ShakaUVM who I'm sure identifies with Lt Pike shakes his fist and says, "Yeah, give it to them hippie bitches".
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Informative)
Here's an interesting article by Norm Stamper, Seattle Police Chief during the WTO protests in 1999 ("Battle in Seattle"). Since then, he has professed great regret for his reaction and has unequivocally apologized for his orders and the actions of the police force. Anyway, he addresses the increasing militarization of the police in the US and explains why it is such a bad idea to stop being part of the community and start being the "them", as in oppressors, at least with respect to solving day to day crimes that actually harm citizens.
http://www.thenation.com/article/164501/paramilitary-policing-seattle-occupy-wall-street [thenation.com]
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:4, Interesting)
I know Lt Wardanian of the UIC police here in Chicago. He's a very good man. Also somewhat uncomfortable about the militarization, but aware of the pressure to "professionalize" the campus police, which means "buy military hardware".
The big military contractors see local police forces as an opportunity - a new profit center. The first municipal PD to get heavy into the military drag was Los Angeles, and there were demonstrated ties (money) passing from the big military contractors to LAPD brass after Rodney King. That disaster of a police chief Darryl Gates was the guy on the take, and no, as chief, he was not a union member.
Can you imagine? The reaction of Gates and the LAPD brass after the Rodney King incident and its aftermath is to give its officers more deadly hardware? Also, to end any efforts to engage in "community policing" or for that matter, any involvement with the communities and their leaders at all. The tenure of Chief Gates is a blot on the history of Los Angeles, and so naturally has been emulated by police chiefs nationwide.
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:4, Insightful)
The rest of what? People use the labels "communist," "hippie," and "socialist" as meaningless insults. Don't like what someone is saying/advocating? Call them one of those three ("pedophile" or "terrorist" might also suffice) names!
Re: (Score:3)
If a cop beats a protester to death for no apparent reason and it is covered by several independent video cameras, he's a lot more likely to answer for his actions than if it was merely witnessed by 50 protesters who were also being beaten.
And just how many OWS protesters have been beaten to death so far by the cops? About zero maybe?
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:5, Informative)
One woman had a miscarriage as a direct result of being kicked in the stomach repeatedly by police. (And, yes, she told be police she was pregnant, and that she was trying to escape to protect her unborn child.)
http://open.salon.com/blog/fingerlakeswanderer/2011/11/22/pregnant_protester_who_was_beaten_miscarries [salon.com]
Is that enough violence for you? Or would you like more before you regard this as despicable?
Re:This guy ever been beaten up before? (Score:4, Informative)
Unfortunately the reverse is also true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Though even then people can claim its shopped
If it's just one or two photos, sure. But when you have three dozen people all filming the same event from three dozen different angles, the claim that all the evidence was fabricated becomes a bit less credible.
Re:Unfortunately the reverse is also true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Which is a good thing. The public being sceptical about what they hear unless shown proof is a huge step forward.
Re:Unfortunately the reverse is also true... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sadly or perhaps frighteningly, there is a growing movement among police departments and the law establishment in general to criminalize filming police under any circumstance including the police committing criminal acts of violence. One of the great dangers we're now encountering is our government indulging in dark and immoral ventures and it can only participate in these ventures if its not being watched. The last administration used our fear and rage to twist our government into something truly unholy. The current administration hasn't seen fit to dismantle what was created and put things right. It is time for the American people to demand from all its leaders that our nation be returned to us the people, and that unfair influence through wealth and power and greedy self interest be mitigated,
In a vital move towards that future, Government must become COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT... I no longer trust my government to act in my best interest (not that I ever did, but now I'm certain they are working against us), and unless I can see both hands all the time, I am deeply concerned that it labors busily, stealing my future and perhaps all our futures.
Re: (Score:3)
It took over a billion dollars for Obama to become president and you're absolutely right, he clearly went to the highest bidder.
The answer is to redesign our political process from the ground up. Starting with education. It should be taught in every school that it is a citizens highest responsibility to serve both by voting and doing his/her civic duties, and by running for office if there is something important they see that needs to be addressed for the greater good of the people.
The next thing that shoul
agents provocateurs (Score:5, Insightful)
Look for more incidents involving agents provocateurs in future protests. It's easier to "justify" whatever actions are taken if they can show footage of a "protester" acting in an "unreasonable" fashion.
The public footage is having a huge impact right now because people are seeing people like themselves at the protests and NOT causing problems ... and hearing the official reports contradicting the footage.
Re: (Score:3)
Look for more incidents involving agents provocateurs in future protests. It's easier to "justify" whatever actions are taken if they can show footage of a "protester" acting in an "unreasonable" fashion.
The public footage is having a huge impact right now because people are seeing people like themselves at the protests and NOT causing problems ... and hearing the official reports contradicting the footage.
This is what bothers me about the average person. If it isn't undeniably smacking them in the face, they have no clue how much and how often their media lies to them on a daily basis.
People need to seriously wake the fuck up and they need to stop waiting for some leader to show them how. It is and has always been an individual realization based on a real love of truth.
Re: (Score:3)
It's actually even more complex than that. Police are now basically being required [hometownstation.com] to do their own recording merely to provide evidence of their own side of the argument, to prevent any 'provocateurs' from rabble-rousing.
This leads to pressure in law enforcement to deploy even more invasive surveillance. We could have officers then being required to keep their own personal cameras running constantly merely to prevent them from self blatantly self censoring footage that is not advantageous to their own p
I don't think you understood that. (Score:5, Informative)
The point of the "agent provocateur" is that he works WITH the authorities while POSING as one of the protesters.
So when the calm protesters are engaged in non-violent protests, the agent provocateur becomes violent. That "violence" is used to "justify" the violence against the non-violent protesters.
And it is that one "violent protester" who is shown in the media as an example of how "unreasonable" the protesters (as a group) are.
They are brave, but there's a difference (Score:4, Interesting)
The blacks and Tank Man couldn't be sure the government wouldn't kill them on purpose. They faced down the very real threat of death for participating in their movements.
For the OWS movement, any deaths caused by the government will be accidental.
Re:They are brave, but there's a difference (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Don't worry their pensions are safe even if its permanent damage.
Re:They are brave, but there's a difference (Score:5, Insightful)
You have far to much faith in the system. As long as this massive inequity exists these protests will continue. As long as these protests continue those in power will become increasingly forceful in suppression of freedom.
There really are Americans publicly saying that they should just roll over these protesters with tanks and shoot all the dirty hippies without any fear.
Re:They are brave, but there's a difference (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Most of the money the government transfers to others for free, doesn't go to dirty long hairs sitting in parks, it goes to clean cut silk ties in Park Ave.
Re: (Score:3)
As noble as your libertarian ideal is, it has been proven to fail. It failed in the 19th century. Our government is not the only power in the world. Corporate interests, plutocrats, foreign nations and states usurping the rights of their own citizens require a strong but ethical federal govornment capable of mitigating the damage done by those entities against the people of the united states of America.
The things you object to me "wanting" in the second paragraph? Someone else happened to want those things.
Re:They are brave, but there's a difference (Score:4, Insightful)
Fuck you, and take your bullshit out the door with you.
Yes, accident (Score:3, Insightful)
No intent to kill.
The Chinese shot them, drove over them with tanks. The Democrat KKK killed civil rights activists with impunity under the tacit approval of local governments, even having victims handed to them by the police (who were often KKK themselves anyway). Khadaffi used snipers and helicopter gunships to kill dozens of people in just one protest. The protesters in Syria know full well their protesting is very likely to be deadly, with thousands dead so far.
An OWS protester has no real fear for his
Re:They are brave, but there's a difference (Score:5, Insightful)
Even that incident is totally different from the UC Davis one. Main point: Those particular individuals were in a place where they had a specific right to be because it was their domicile. Orders to vacate could not be lawfully given in the first place, at least not without specific and valid reasons (they were not trespassing, they were not blocking ingress or egress, or creating any other specific hazard.) They weren't under arrest, and there wasn't a warrant for their arrest or even a judicial process through which their arrest was sought. If the police had authority to make arrests, they could have done so with the handcuffs and 45ACPs. It is exactly _because_ they didn't have this authority that got Pike upset enough to cease being a law enforcement officer and become a vigilante, disobeying orders, ignoring California law and the policies and procedures of his department, and take out his aggressions against these individuals. He treated them as though they were the same people as some group of Oakland rioters or whatever. When the lawsuits inevitably come, the university is going to have to settle them quietly because there are serious risks they face if they have to admit either that they lied about not giving orders to use force, or if they have to admit that Pike disobeyed orders. Either way, ugly.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The blacks and Tank Man couldn't be sure the government wouldn't kill them on purpose. They faced down the very real threat of death for participating in their movements.
Not sure about the blacks, but it's not true with Tankman, even though I understand your general sentiment.
I grew up in China, and was a freshman in college when Tankman emerged, so in a sense I was his contemporary. For better or for worse, the CCP had maintained a very effective propaganda up to that point, that the army and the people were a family, hence the name PLA, or "People's Liberation Army". There was a popular saying and it roughly translates: the relationship between the army and the people i
Explanation of the protest (Score:5, Informative)
Blog explaining the protest:
http://studentactivism.net/2011/11/20/ten-things-you-should-know-about-fridays-uc-davis-police-violence/ [studentactivism.net]
Ooooo, Infamy. (Score:3)
You inflict pain, I inflict infamy.
That's nice. I will never meet or deal with the police officer who maced those protesters. I've already forgotten his name. When 90% of the population sees these things, they think "huh, sucks to be them. glad they're out there fighting the good fight and not me. What's for dinner?" When the sadists and psychopaths see them, they say to themselves "wow, they take the punishment and stay put for more."
Re:Ooooo, Infamy. (Score:5, Insightful)
And then very quietly, a shift happens. They see a cop who seems a touch nervous and somewhere in the back of their mind, they think danger. Then they think they shouldn't have to think "danger" when they see a cop. After a while, they tell their kids to avoid cops entirely, even if they're lost. Slowly but surely, the population comes to think of the police as an enemy. An invading force they don't want in their neighborhood.
Minorities are way ahead of the curve on that one for various good reasons, but the rest of the population is catching up.
Even though I obey the law, the more stuff like this I see, the more I regard the police as a potential enemy.
Re:Ooooo, Infamy. (Score:5, Insightful)
and I hope he has a problematic life for the rest of his life, too. I hope he can't get a job or gets made fun of by 'the other bullies in blue' until he dies.
I do understand that pepper spraying someone without cause is a violent crime, an insanely painful assault with occasional adverse reactions and even rare deaths, but how can you possibly advocate such a punishment?
Our theory of social wrong and our justice system are at least in theory based on reformation: people are punished in hope that they 'go forth and sin no more', to use the biblical phrasing. People are fired for gross misconduct at work and left to seek another job, not ostracized for life. Criminals are prosecuted, punished and then released under appropriate restrictions, not destroyed and left to suffer. If Lt. Pike is both a criminal and a bad employee why is it not sufficient to see him fired, bared from law enforcement, and prosecuted? Why do you want his life to be over? And what kind of sick bastard are you that you'd consider letting him continue working in law enforcement simply so he could endure the mockery of his co-workers? Leave a man who committed a violent crime in a position of physical authority, and then make his life steadily worse? Where do you think that's going to end?
You're asking us to ruin a man's life rather than give him a second chance, to torture him forever rather than rehabilitate and restrict him. Your options are that he endure constant abuse at work or be unable to work at all? Why not just shoot him?
How is this vengeful destruction of this man's dignity and potential any better than than what he's done to the protesters? How can you call yourself American when you advocate vengeance and lifelong suffering in the name of justice?
If 'his type is what is wrong with America' then what are you? Do you believe you're what's right with America?!
Re: (Score:3)
but how can you possibly advocate such a punishment?
cops have the power and ability to instantly end your life or even 'just' make it unlivable if they so choose.
because they wield such high amounts of life-ruining (and life-ending) power, they should be held to a higher standard.
if the thugs in blue would actually have to FEAR something above them (ie, the law) then they'd think twice about tazing, spraying, beating, even shooting. there is far too much cop-initiated violence and it mostly goes unpunished
Re:Ooooo, Infamy. (Score:5, Interesting)
I wish to have mod points to mods to raise the parent post even higher. It is good to see that there are at least some people here who see the difference between justice and revenge.
It is appauling to see to what height of bloodthirstiness people work themselves into. My opinion is that this is a result of very conservative culture and the sheer feer that Americans subject themselves to (Especially since 9/11). They are afraid of their government, corporations, foreign cultures and different religions. From what I read on Slashdot and elsewhere, quite a sizable percentage of the population own and train in the use of firearms because they fear to walk on the streets unarmed due to the perception that criminals are everywhere and house invasions to be commonplace. This gives me the impression that Americans are frightened of even each other.
And the result of all that buildup of fear is disproportional lashing out at any perceived threat. An analogy would be like a person with mild arachnophobia finding a very scary, poisonous-looking spider in the evening in his bedroom. He can try to capture it to release it outside, but he is too frightened of the possibility that it might get back in again. So he would thoroughly kill it just to be able to sleep comfortably.
When you are greatly afraid, why would you trust mental health facilities to rehabilitate the sexual offender, when permanently isolating, driving him to suicide or execution would bring a guaranteed removal of the threat?
Very sadly even much less hideous crimes result in backlashes. Apperently even if you never hurt anyone but get caught in the act of using illicit drugs results in you being sent to prison. I also find it shocking how prisons are not viewed as a place of rehabilitation but as a way to inflict vengence. I base that on the attitude of how prison rape is viewed not a problem, but as a source humour and almost endoursement since it is people who are accused of crimes that are the victums.
Of course everything above is just my personal opinion and how I explain to myself the reason for such harshness of the American justice system. Another explanation I found was in a freely available, easy to read book by Bob Altemeyer called The Authoritarians [members.shaw.ca]. Trouble is that you really can't tell if it is just another biased opinion.
Transparency Ought to Go Further (Score:4, Interesting)
We all know the 1% (or "powers that be," if you prefer) are tracking us now and will continue to expand the scope and depth of how they track us.
But we in the 99% (or "little people/hoi poloi/peasants," if you prefer) have access to most of the same technology at an affordable price point. There is no technical reason we cannot track them as much or more than they can us, especially if we use our vastly superior numbers to crowd-source the most difficult part of tracking: making sense of the deluge of data.
If we repeat what we did with searching for Steve Fossett's plane using Google Earth crossed with FoldIt and SETI@home we can develop a real-time picture of exactly what the 1% are doing, where, and when. That's a tremendous amount of intelligence we can leverage in many ways.
So, for example, if we map radio transponders used by our friendly neighborhood shock troo, er, police then we can equal the spying they're already doing on peaceful protesters (Google "NYPD spying protest groups." What would they do if we knew exactly where they keep their LRAD cannons and pepper spray depots and stage sit-ins at the entrances before they can deploy? What if every single Lt. John Pike gets followed home by the protesters who surround his home, quietly sitting and linking arms?
Or, more to the point, what if we made sure that the puppet masters never have a moment's peace and that they know we all know them exactly for the scum they are?
That, I believe, is what needs to happen next to break the back of this beast.
Video bites are no better than sound bites (Score:5, Insightful)
From the summary:
"'What's new is that now the perception war occurs simultaneously with the physical struggle. There's almost parity,' writes Andrew Sprung. 'You have a truncheon or gun, I have a camera. You inflict pain, I inflict infamy.'"
No, what you inflict is spin - because all you have to is show a carefully focused video showing the police swinging their truncheons or spraying pepper spray, and those who believe video bites represent the entire truth will defend your interpretation, and forward it, and 'like' it, etc... You'll hang 'em in the court of public opinion, but that's much more important than reality.
Re: (Score:3)
You mean that, before the policeman took a while showing the spray can to the people, and spayed them on the eyes, without any display of violence from their part, something important happened that is not displayed on the video?
Would you care to tell what is that important part of the truth that isn't represented on the video? I mean, how can the policeman be threatened if during the entire video there wasn't a single threatening movement from the students?
Re:Video bites are no better than sound bites (Score:4, Insightful)
You make a very important point about how video bites don't always show exactly what happend, and can often appear to support the party who was actually in the wrong. However, this does not apply to this specific case.
Many videos that show the event start well before the actual pepper spraying occurs and continue well afterwards. Additionally, the students who were sprayed were simply sitting down, not resisting arrest. The students should have just been arrested, pepper spraying was totally unneeded.
Father Shot History That Looks More Than Current (Score:5, Interesting)
A year or more ago, I commented that I didn't think the Tea Party would have a long-term affect because they weren't motivated enough to burn down an ROTC building nor were the police scared enough of them to hit them with tear gas.
Agree with them or not. Understand them or not. The Occupy movement is going to leave a mark upon this country because they are willing to have skin in the game.
Cheers, Matt
Re: (Score:3)
It also helps that the protesters are playing an asymmetrical game with reporters who are sympathetic to their cause.
Meaning the various transgressions taking place in the Occupy movement (the rapes, the thefts, the public masturbation, shitting on cop cars, lobbing human waste at street vendors who don't give them freebees, etc) are all being ignored and will be ignored because they don't play into the story of the downtrodden standing up to The Man. But the handful of cops who lose their cool and snap, or
Sheep for Vegetarianism (Score:3)
HEADWATERS FOREST DEFENSE v. COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT (Score:4, Interesting)
Astonished (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Moral equivalence not withstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
because the cop used weak sauce pepper spray and casually doused them
Cops shouldn't be "casually dousing" any group of students assembled in a park, no matter how "weak sauce" the pepper spray is. Perhaps the resulting video was a little melodramatic, but the fact that you think it is okay for police to pepper spray citizens in a park shows you for the fascist that you really are. I hope you enjoy your anonymity, you pig.
Re: (Score:3)
It your expectation that those students should be allowed to set up permanent camps there? Yes or no?
If not, describe your ideal peaceful human relocation protocol.
Re:Moral equivalence not withstanding (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Law enforcement grade pepper spray ranks from 500,000 to 2,000,000 on the Scoville heat scale, meaning that it's detectable by taste in a solution of 1 part pepper spray to 500,000+ parts water. For comparison, your average Habenaro pepper ranks 100,000-350,000 on the same scale. The spiciest Chili ever grown ranks at about 1,200,000 on the scale.
Being a bit of a spice lover, I cook with Habanero peppers on a pretty regular basis. I can say that 4 hours after cooking a dinner, washin
Re: (Score:3)
Gandhi came from a wealth family, too. Their background and (sometimes flawed) methods doesn't change the validity of their complaint.
Re: (Score:3)
I can make it very easy for you to understand. Forget specifics - the general argument is this:
A very small percentage of the population has an inordinate and unfair control of the government, corporations, and the worldwide monetary system. This small percentage then reaps most of the benefits of their good decisions and bears almost none of the consequences of their bad decisions.
Does that make sense?
Re: (Score:3)
They don't like the tuition hike, go to another school
Re:of course, a little less moving... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:of course, a little less moving... (Score:5, Interesting)
You may be thinking of the Cracked.com article: "5 ways we ruined the occupy wall street generation [cracked.com]." Good article, and definitely worth a read.
Re: (Score:3)
the Occupy movement doesn't really have a tangible goal that is achievable in the short term
Pray tell me why taxing Wall St transactions should be an unachievable goal ?
Re:Tiananmen Square not a good example (Score:5, Insightful)
oh, you are so wrong!
one very real thing that got accomplished: the world is seeing a new side of america.
for the last 10+ yrs, america was the brunt of jokes and the poster child for anti-freedom in major world powers. we invaded, we killed, we were mercenaries for oil and big business. to be called 'an american' by someone overseas was getting to be an insult.
things have now changed. or, are in change.
overseas, I sense people are cheering us on. they see that its our LEADERS that are fucking us over. americans are not evil to the core (like many seem to want to believe and label us) but we, like so many other countries, have lost the war of control over our own government. but we are at least trying to get it back.
the world is starting to give us a little tiny bit of credit for that. and they are showing support in their OWN occupy protests! that's proof, right there.
we are [re]spreading freedom. from the bottom-up. and 'they' see that. it won't do a damned thing now; but we are planting seeds. the kids today who see this MAY think twice when its their turn to run things.
I expect zero things to change in my lifetime. I'm old. but I'm somewhat hopeful about the future (for you guys) given this refreshing new spirit I'm seeing.
Re: (Score:3)
Protests like this change nothing , in the big scheme of things. They dont threaten the status quo politically,and they dont threaten it physically.
Replace "damn hippies" with "useless hippies", and it would be more accurate.
There are only two things that really effect change:
1. When "the person in charge" decides to do things differently
2. when a large group of people decide to bring their guns to forcibly change who "the person in charge" is.
Look at all t
Re: (Score:3)
Your quip is bass-ackwards.
Doing M for M
is like
Doing A for Z
You're comparing two like things and saying they're the same as two opposing things. If you're really a UCD student, you need to go talk to your advisor about taking some courses in basic logic.
Re:One UCD Student's view (Score:5, Informative)
Re:One UCD Student's view (Score:4, Funny)
To end on a quip; protesting for the right to protest is like having sex for virginity.
Let me know when you find a better way of making new virgins.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
In what way is OWS not part of the 99%? You're claiming the hippies are the top 1% earners in America?
wut?
Fortunately, since you have to fill out detailed information when you're arrested, and since OWS is basically a crime wave, we've got plenty of data. Turns out they're significantly wealthier, whiter and more educated than the average American. source [dailycaller.com].
Re:One UCD Student's view (Score:5, Informative)
Turns out they're significantly wealthier, whiter and more educated than the average American.
Do you understand percentages? Above average is still included in 99% ...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
[citation needed]
Last I heard nobody is rolling tanks over protestors in Sweden or Denmark, to name two mixed capitalist-socialist countries of the sort most OWS protestors tend to favor as a model for a more equitable society. Stop believing the crap you're hearing in your echo chamber. The rank-and-file OWS protestor is no more a Mao-loving communist than the rank-and-file tea party protestor is a redneck racist.
Re:Wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
They were committing a misdemeanor by blocking a SIDEWALK. You're argument is akin to arguing that it's OK to pepper spray someone for Jaywalking. What the officer did was assault under the color of authority. That he warned them before he indiscriminately sprayed them and the crowd doesn't change the fact that he assaulting individuals who were not a threat. Pepper spray and Tasers have their place, unfortunately, but it's not to spray a bunch of protesters engaged in a non-violent misdemeanor. The purpose of Pepper spray and Tasers is to replace the truncheon and gun in violent situations where the VIOLENT suspect can be subdued rather than shot or beat into restraints.
Unfortunately the effectiveness of these weapons and that they don't generally cause long term damage has caused police to begin using them as payback weapons. Used to inflict pain for disobedience rather than to stop a violent situation where life threatening measures would be called for. What that officer did was nothing short of assault. They could have pulled those people apart by hand, it would have taken time and been tiring but if they wanted them gone that bad they could have done it. Not a single protester threatened those officers with violence and the use of pepper spray only constituted assault. It was used to punish the protesters for refusing to comply.
I'll point out that in 1997 some protesters chained themselves together (with hardened steel pipe to make it even harder to separate them) and the cops selectively( as in not indiscriminately) dabbed their eyes (only the eyelids) with pepper spray swabs, the courts later ruled it was a violation of the 4th amendment. I'll say it one last time, the reason people are outraged is that the cop assaulted under the color of authority every protester there and he should be charged with the upgraded assault charge that carries for every single protester and bystander that got sprayed. Under no circumstance should he ever be allowed to be a peace officer in the state of California again.
Re: (Score:3)
Pepper spray is NOT non-violent law enforcement. it is Non-Lethal, A very big difference.