What is the proper method of dealing with crowd control ...

[Cuyo]

Move the police away from the protests?

In other words, do not allow the police to enforce the law?


Then who is going to enforce the law?

Who is going to clear the thoroughfares so that emergency vehicles can get through? Who is going to unblock public pathways so that they are still wheelchair accessible? Who is going to clean the areas so that infectious diseases and parasites aren't spread? ...

So would it then be safe to say that you have an authoritarian personality?

It takes an authoritarian personality to think that roads should be clear in case someone needs an ambulance?

I did not know that.

The premise that you hold this opinion for any reason except that you perceive them as liberals is both predictable and laughable.

 

[Ringel05]

There are no events "leading up to" OWS protestors being sprayed that could mitigate what the cops did. We've seen enough to know that.

Praised be to SAT2! He sees all and knows all!!! His word is law! All bow down and worship in his presence.

 

[SAT2]

There are no events "leading up to" OWS protestors being sprayed that could mitigate what the cops did. We've seen enough to know that.

Praised be to SAT2! He sees all and knows all!!! His word is law! All bow down and worship in his presence.

You're reminding me of some folks after the acquittal of the cops who beat Rodney King. They claimed that there must have been "powerful evidence" that the rest of us had not seen. As if there was some legal justification for beating a minor offender who is down on the ground and subdued already.

The cop walks up to people seated on the ground, and sprays them repeatedly with chemicals. There is no lead up that would justify that. Pepper spray is supposed to be a non-lethal method of getting a situation under control. The protestors were under control. There is no justification for the cop's actions.

 

[BDBoop]

Ringel is starting to remind me of my dad. He was beaten unconscious when he was five. He figures he did something to deserve it. He didn't believe me when I told him there was nothing a five year-old is capable of doing that would render that beating logical.

 

[Ringel05]

There are no events "leading up to" OWS protestors being sprayed that could mitigate what the cops did. We've seen enough to know that.

Praised be to SAT2! He sees all and knows all!!! His word is law! All bow down and worship in his presence.

You're reminding me of some folks after the acquittal of the cops who beat Rodney King. They claimed that there must have been "powerful evidence" that the rest of us had not seen. As if there was some legal justification for beating a minor offender who is down on the ground and subdued already.

The cop walks up to people seated on the ground, and sprays them repeatedly with chemicals. There is no lead up that would justify that. Pepper spray is supposed to be a non-lethal method of getting a situation under control. The protestors were under control. There is no justification for the cop's actions.

You're an expert in police procedures, protester tactics and crowd dynamics, you were there and are intimately aware of every minute detail that may or may not have contributed to the incident in question........
Sure thing there Skippy.

 

[Ringel05]

Ringel is starting to remind me of my dad. He was beaten unconscious when he was five. He figures he did something to deserve it. He didn't believe me when I told him there was nothing a five year-old is capable of doing that would render that beating logical.

That was a stupid analogy as was his. But whatchagonnado?

 

[Immanuel]

Governments have a responsibility to uphold the law.

Don't you agree with that?

If the protestors were protesting legally, there would not be a problem. When they are violating the law, there is a problem.

There are many many many legal public venues (and times) for protest. These protestors are making their point and garnering the attention they crave BY breaking the law and you want the government to abdicate its responsibility to the rest of its citizens by letting the law breaking go on.



I just don't understand.

At all.

Since when did peaceful protests become illegal?

Immie

Peaceful protests, never. Other issues that may be associated with those protests....... it depends on local laws and whether they're being violated or not.

That is true, but I believe this thread has basically been about the students who were pepper sprayed and to my knowledge those students had not broken any other laws. I may be wrong on that, but too the point that required pepper spray?

Note: reply meant for both Ropey and Amelia.

Immie

 

[Ringel05]

Since when did peaceful protests become illegal?

Immie

Peaceful protests, never. Other issues that may be associated with those protests....... it depends on local laws and whether they're being violated or not.

That is true, but I believe this thread has basically been about the students who were pepper sprayed and to my knowledge those students had not broken any other laws. I may be wrong on that, but too the point that required pepper spray?

Note: reply meant for both Ropey and Amelia.

Immie

See post number #198 but does that justify it? I don't know I wasn't there so you're asking the wrong person.

 

[Immanuel]

The police could have simply used bodily force to get through the standing people, and left the protesters protesting, and they wouldn't have to be violent about it either. They're big men, they would have just kept walking and bodies would have either moved willingly or not so willingly.

I think the police have gone stupid, for the most part. It's like their sacs are overruling their brains whenever there's a confrontation.

I would say "bodily force" is a euphemism for violence. You are speaking about the police moving into the middle of the protest and forcefully moving people aside to clear a path, right? So, it seems to me that you are arguing for non-violence yet promoting violence in the same breath.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

UC Davis' embattled chancellor said campus police officers defied her orders when they used pepper spray on peaceful Occupy protesters last week.

Very interesting. Don't suppose that changes anybody's perception of said event.

UC Davis chancellor: Police defied my orders by using pepper spray - latimes.com

In an interview with the Sacramento Bee, Katehi said her office told the school's police department that officers needed to be peaceful when removing protesters.

"We told the police to remove the tents or the equipment," she told the paper. "We told them very specifically to do it peacefully, and if there were too many of them, not to do it, if the students were aggressive, not to do it. And then we told them we also do not want to have another Berkeley."

In a telephone interview from New York, Bratton said he hoped to meet Yudof's request for "an outside, independent investigation and try to ascertain exactly what happened." He said his experiences in Los Angeles, where he was police chief for seven years until 2009, provided "no shortage of controversial incidents."

No, it doesn't change my mind on the subject. It reads like "CYA".

Immie

 

[OODA_Loop]

UC Davis' embattled chancellor said campus police officers defied her orders when they used pepper spray on peaceful Occupy protesters last week.

Very interesting. Don't suppose that changes anybody's perception of said event.

UC Davis chancellor: Police defied my orders by using pepper spray - latimes.com

In an interview with the Sacramento Bee, Katehi said her office told the school's police department that officers needed to be peaceful when removing protesters.

"We told the police to remove the tents or the equipment," she told the paper. "We told them very specifically to do it peacefully, and if there were too many of them, not to do it, if the students were aggressive, not to do it. And then we told them we also do not want to have another Berkeley."

In a telephone interview from New York, Bratton said he hoped to meet Yudof's request for "an outside, independent investigation and try to ascertain exactly what happened." He said his experiences in Los Angeles, where he was police chief for seven years until 2009, provided "no shortage of controversial incidents."

No, it doesn't change my mind on the subject. It reads like "CYA".

Immie

yes how dare they enforce the laws the rest of us have to abide by

 

[Immanuel]

Peaceful protests, never. Other issues that may be associated with those protests....... it depends on local laws and whether they're being violated or not.

That is true, but I believe this thread has basically been about the students who were pepper sprayed and to my knowledge those students had not broken any other laws. I may be wrong on that, but too the point that required pepper spray?

Note: reply meant for both Ropey and Amelia.

Immie

See post number #198 but does that justify it? I don't know I wasn't there so you're asking the wrong person.

Reading through the remainder of the thread now and have watched the video.

I don't think it was justified force, but as you said, I was not there. From the reports I have seen, it appears that the police went overboard.

Y'all know that police officers don't take kindly to us peons not asking "How high?" when they tell us to jump, don't you?

Immie

 

[OODA_Loop]

Y'all know that police officers don't take kindly to us peons not asking "How high?" when they tell us to jump, don't you?

Immie

yes the law is irrelevant

certainly if your cause is "just"

 

[Immanuel]

Very interesting. Don't suppose that changes anybody's perception of said event.

UC Davis chancellor: Police defied my orders by using pepper spray - latimes.com

No, it doesn't change my mind on the subject. It reads like "CYA".

Immie

yes how dare they enforce the laws the rest of us have to abide by

You make a decent point, but I wasn't taking about the police. I was talking about the Administrator who was whining that she was sorry for what happened and that she didn't authorize it.

I can agree with your point that there were laws being broken. I ask though, did that justify the use of pepper spray?

You and I may have differing answers to that. I'm cool with that.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Y'all know that police officers don't take kindly to us peons not asking "How high?" when they tell us to jump, don't you?

Immie

yes the law is irrelevant

certainly if your cause is "just"

FYI: It is not my cause. I think the vast majority of these protestors are morons. However, I haven't seen any justification for the use of force that was displayed.

Immie

 

[OODA_Loop]

You make a decent point, but I wasn't taking about the police. I was talking about the Administrator who was whining that she was sorry for what happened and that she didn't authorize it.

I can agree with your point that that there were laws being broken. I ask though, did that justify the use of pepper spray?

You and I may have differing answers to that. I'm cool with that.

Immie

if we are to retain the freedom to protest and express oursleves we must view wanton breaking of laws and taunting of the authority by anyone in a protest situation as a severe violation

those students were told to protest but no camping

they set up camp...because the night before they were ran off of UC Berekley by the law

so they were going to show the authority

set up camp

asked not to and given a time to tear down camp

came back

tents still up ....defiant protesters

told to take down or face arrest

nope

form circle around camp and lock arms

asked repeatedly to comply

nope

locked arms.... active resistance

warned

nope

spray tan and hooked up

legal and warranted less than lethal force

watch

 

[SAT2]

Praised be to SAT2! He sees all and knows all!!! His word is law! All bow down and worship in his presence.

You're reminding me of some folks after the acquittal of the cops who beat Rodney King. They claimed that there must have been "powerful evidence" that the rest of us had not seen. As if there was some legal justification for beating a minor offender who is down on the ground and subdued already.

The cop walks up to people seated on the ground, and sprays them repeatedly with chemicals. There is no lead up that would justify that. Pepper spray is supposed to be a non-lethal method of getting a situation under control. The protestors were under control. There is no justification for the cop's actions.

You're an expert in police procedures, protester tactics and crowd dynamics, you were there and are intimately aware of every minute detail that may or may not have contributed to the incident in question........
Sure thing there Skippy.

And of course, all of that matters in a situation where people are seated passively and being sprayed. We cannot form an opinion without being police officers, there on the scene. A classic conservative defense.

If there were a chaotic scene, you absolutely would have a point.

There wasn't, you don't.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Unlike you, Immanuel, I think the vast majority of the OWS protestors are decent, law-abiding, sincere citizens who are fed up. People are tired of being misrepresented, abused, and dismissed as a mere statistic, young, unemployed*, A minority are immature morons.

Nonetheless, the police action at UC Davis was overkill. The hate directed toward OWS protestors is off base.

 

[OODA_Loop]

And of course, all of that matters in a situation where people are seated passively and being sprayed. We cannot form an opinion without being police officers, there on the scene. A classic conservative defense.

besides illegal camping and resisting arrest what other laws should they be able to break with immunity ?

 

[Ringel05]

That is true, but I believe this thread has basically been about the students who were pepper sprayed and to my knowledge those students had not broken any other laws. I may be wrong on that, but too the point that required pepper spray?

Note: reply meant for both Ropey and Amelia.

Immie

See post number #198 but does that justify it? I don't know I wasn't there so you're asking the wrong person.

Reading through the remainder of the thread now and have watched the video.

I don't think it was justified force, but as you said, I was not there. From the reports I have seen, it appears that the police went overboard.

Y'all know that police officers don't take kindly to us peons not asking "How high?" when they tell us to jump, don't you?

Immie

Personally I believe the problem (here) is associative experience. Other than myself I doubt anyone here has ever been in the shoes of the officers in that situation. What most people don't see is even in "passive resistant" scenarios frequently there is an undertone of seething anger directed towards the the authority figures who are present and being in the middle of that you never know if or when that anger will explode into action so you do what you have been trained to do and that is attempt to take control of the situation to protect yourself and your fellow officers.
If the officers had tried to extricate themselves by physically breaking the interlocked human chain they would have had to deploy physical measures possibly resulting in serious physical injury to one or more of the protesters not to mention the protestors might have seen this as an violent attack and struck back, potentially causing a riot, it's happened before. Think of the propaganda value the protesters would have had then.
These are all possible scenarios that could have been going on in the cops heads, I don't know, I'm simply speculating based on my knowledge and experience of dealing with strikes and protests and my knowledge of mob dynamics.