So Seattle cops can't use CS, beanbags, or less lethal rounds.
Seattle police chief warns council of ban on crowd control tools ahead of weekend
As City Council’s legislation goes into effect, it will create even more dangerous circumstances for our officers to intervene using what they have left – riot shields and riot batons,” Best wrote on the
Seattle Police Blotter. “For these reasons, SPD will have an adjusted deployment in response to any demonstrations this weekend. The Council legislation gives officers no ability to safely intercede to preserve property in the midst of a large, violent crowd.”
This letter went out from the PD saying they basically can't defend property from large violent crowds.
So the question becomes, if a person now defends their property and it goes lethal, are they to be prosecuted? If the cops won't stop lawlessness, what is the recourse? Just let your property be destroyed?
Nobody wants to deal with that question. Remember, we went to professional police forces not to protect citizens from criminals, but to protect criminals from citizens.
I THINK THAT WILLFULLY REFUSING TO CONTROL DISORDER IS A CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION — ESPECIALLY WHEN THAT REFUSAL IS BASED ON RACE, AS IT WAS HERE:
Father of man killed inside Seattle’s CHOP zone files $3 billion in claims against city, county, state.
It’s true that there’s no right of police protection on the part of any individual person, but a wholesale refusal to police — and again, based on racial considerations — is different. But here’s why this is likely to wind up in settlement, rather than at trial:
“Oshan said that he and his client hopes that the discovery process will also uncover who was to blame.”
