Occupy Wall Street

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Except if a candidate ran on a platform of abolishing SS and Medicare, they'd be lucky to win a couple precincts.

Fixed that for you

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Fixed that for you

Haha.

"Wait? What? Are you trying to take my free shit??? OH NO YOU DIDN'T!!!!"

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

Most people that are pepper-sprayed are unarmed.

Well gosh darn it thats quite all right then .... ?

I was concerned for a minute that people might actually try and use sensible force in sensible situations, you know like allowing a non-violent protest to proceed without trying to break it up using violence.

The thing which I find ironic/sad is that if the scenes shown in many of the protests had occurred in the middle east then many people in America/England/OtherOWS countries would be full of pity and remorse, "Those poor people if only they had the right to protest" .....

[flounder]

Next up, Occupy Christmas.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

Well gosh darn it thats quite all right then .... ?

I was concerned for a minute that people might actually try and use sensible force in sensible situations, you know like allowing a non-violent protest to proceed without trying to break it up using violence.

The thing which I find ironic/sad is that if the scenes shown in many of the protests had occurred in the middle east then many people in America/England/OtherOWS countries would be full of pity and remorse, "Those poor people if only they had the right to protest" .....

Do you believe that people should have the right to occupy (i.e., exclude for anyone else), any public property, and any time, for any length of time (and do whatever they want there, including shit, fuck, piss, leave their trash), and harass passer-bys, including children? I often hear people complaining about "free speech zones" and limits on protesting, and there's reasonable arguments as to where are lines are, but it sounds like you're more extreme than most Americans on that.

As for pepper spray - I'd say that's the least violent means possible of breaking up a crowd. It's SO safe that its definitely used too often, but for breaking up a unlawful crowd, what would you rather they use? (I have no idea the context of the pepper spray in the recent case, but people seem too, to have a huge problem with that generally, it's being this semi-iconic symbol of police harassment, which is kind of ironic, since one of the least-lethal law enforcement tools ever created.)

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

Well gosh darn it thats quite all right then .... ?

I was concerned for a minute that people might actually try and use sensible force in sensible situations, you know like allowing a non-violent protest to proceed without trying to break it up using violence.

.

They were given an order to disperse. They chose to ignore that. They were warned what was going to happen if they chose to continue to ignore it. They continued to ignore it. Then....gasp....they were helped to disperse.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

Well gosh darn it thats quite all right then .... ?

I was concerned for a minute that people might actually try and use sensible force in sensible situations, you know like allowing a non-violent protest to proceed without trying to break it up using violence.

The thing which I find ironic/sad is that if the scenes shown in many of the protests had occurred in the middle east then many people in America/England/OtherOWS countries would be full of pity and remorse, "Those poor people if only they had the right to protest" .....

They do have a right to protest. You just don't have the right to protest anywhere you want at anytime.

[Young Drachma]

I'm almost shocked at the defense of the paramilitary police forces of freaking college campuses here. Almost.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

I'm almost shocked at the defense of the paramilitary police forces of freaking college campuses here. Almost.

I don't support that and think some of the responsese have been too much.

However, a lot of these confrontations are manufactured. They want this to be some Civil Rights style protests when it's not. I agree with some of their points, but sitting in a fucking park all day isn't changing anything. Blocking some streets so people can't get home from work is just pissing people off. And when you do block those streets and refuse to move, someone will forcibly remove you. You don't get to do whatever the fuck you want in this country. And then when they do get removed they have to cry about force.

That UC-Davis pepper spray incident was totally over the line. And I'm sure there are others too. Those cops should be fired and arrested. But when you block a street and some cops have to physically move you, don't cry about it. You knew what you were getting into.

[NorvTurnerOverdrive]

i have to imagine that the protocol for dealing with civil disobedience doesn't involve pepper spraying at point blank.

and in the social media age it's pretty dumb to use any sort of aggression towards peaceful protesters.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Except if a candidate ran on a platform of abolishing SS and Medicare, they'd be lucky to win a couple states.

I don't disagree. I agree with you there. I'm just saying that there are quite a few people that would be on board with it. It would still be political suicide because people are too uneducated about SS.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Warhammer

I don't disagree. I agree with you there. I'm just saying that there are quite a few people that would be on board with it. It would still be political suicide because people are too uneducated about SS.

How so? I think it's those that are screaming doom and gloom about SS that are uneducated on the topic.

[molson]

It doesn't really become a protest until you can interfere with something though, and the easiest, laziest way to do that is to try to get an officer to make a mistake. It's not a great reaction, but if you taunt ten thousand cops in a hundred cities, you're going to get a handful of screwups. Which is what the protestors want. Let's not pretend they want to be ignored. If the officers ignore them (which they largely have), the next step is harassing citizens, which has already happened at least in NYC, and probably in smaller numbers elsewhere.

All of that is still in play, fair game, really, if you have a movement that is going to gain momentum into change. But this movement is just gaining momentum into social annoyance.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I don't support that and think some of the responsese have been too much.

However, a lot of these confrontations are manufactured. They want this to be some Civil Rights style protests when it's not.

I agree this isn't the 1960s. And I've thought that for ages now with people trying to maintain old tactics for a world that looks nothing like that one did.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

I agree this isn't the 1960s. And I've thought that for ages now with people trying to maintain old tactics for a world that looks nothing like that one did.

The old tactics bother me because I don't think the particularly work. I think a big protest can bring attention to a cause. A long drawn out thing like this just doesn't seem to work. In the 1960's you had a couple channels, you had your local paper, and that was it. Now I've got 400 channels, video games, the internet, and so on. Most people just don't have the attention span to give a shit about this for long.

You have a lot of young motivated individuals. Why not register people to vote? Why not raise money for a candidate you support? Do they think that some kids getting pepper sprayed is going to bring them universal healthcare?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by molson

It doesn't really become a protest until you can interfere with something though, and the easiest, laziest way to do that is to try to get an officer to make a mistake. It's not a great reaction, but if you taunt ten thousand cops in a hundred cities, you're going to get a handful of screwups. Which is what the protestors want. Let's not pretend they want to be ignored. If the officers ignore them (which they largely have), the next step is harassing citizens, which has already happened at least in NYC, and probably in smaller numbers elsewhere.

All of that is still in play, fair game, really, if you have a movement that is going to gain momentum into change. But this movement is just gaining momentum into social annoyance.

The way I describe it is you're sitting in the backseat of your car with your kid brother. You do that thing where you hold your finger an inch from their face and keep repeating "not touching you, not touching you" over and over. Eventually your brother smacks you across the face and you go crying to Mom that you got hit for no reason.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by NorvTurnerOverdrive

i have to imagine that the protocol for dealing with civil disobedience doesn't involve pepper spraying at point blank.

It would if not using pepper spray increases the risk to officer's carrying out their lawful duties. And even so-called passive resistance to removal increases the risk of injury to an officer.

and in the social media age it's pretty dumb to use any sort of aggression towards peaceful protesters.

It's even dumber to cater to the incredibly low common denominator that makes up these vermin, quite possibly even dumber to cater to the useful idiots that allow social media to distort reality & make a mountain out of a molehill.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

How so? I think it's those that are screaming doom and gloom about SS that are uneducated on the topic.

+1

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by molson

Do you believe that people should have the right to occupy (i.e., exclude for anyone else), any public property, and any time, for any length of time (and do whatever they want there, including shit, fuck, piss, leave their trash), and harass passer-bys, including children? I often hear people complaining about "free speech zones" and limits on protesting, and there's reasonable arguments as to where are lines are, but it sounds like you're more extreme than most Americans on that.

I think there should be sensible limits involved - but the description of the extent of the refuse left by the protestors has varied hugely according to the media source reporting upon it. By and large I believe they've tried to be sensible in this regard with a minority of exceptions which you generally get with any large group.

As for pepper spray - I'd say that's the least violent means possible of breaking up a crowd. It's SO safe that its definitely used too often, but for breaking up a unlawful crowd, what would you rather they use? (I have no idea the context of the pepper spray in the recent case, but people seem too, to have a huge problem with that generally, it's being this semi-iconic symbol of police harassment, which is kind of ironic, since one of the least-lethal law enforcement tools ever created.)

Least violent:

For those with asthma, taking other drugs, or subject to restraining techniques which restrict the breathing passages, there is a risk of death. The Los Angeles Times has reported at least 61 deaths associated with police use of pepper spray since 1990 in the USA.[7] The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) documented 27 people in police custody who died after exposure to pepper spray in California since 1993.[3][8][9] However, the ACLU report counts any death occurring within hours of exposure to pepper spray. In all 27 cases, the coroners' report listed other factors as the primary cause of death, though in some cases the use of pepper spray may have been a contributing factor.[3]
From:
Pepper spray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'd say anything which causes death is fairly violent myself ...

(incidentally use of such a weapon is illegal in the UK by the police or otherwise)

For the record in the case of the students the weapon I'd have used against them would likely have been time (ie. just wait, they'll need the bathroom soon enough - chances are only a few of them are diehards and most would get cold and leave eventually) ... that approach is also easier on the PR front

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

You have a lot of young motivated individuals. Why not register people to vote? Why not raise money for a candidate you support? Do they think that some kids getting pepper sprayed is going to bring them universal healthcare?

I kinda thought the whole point of this protest was about the fact that the political system is broken and that its virtually impossible to get a candidate in who isn't part of the broken system ....

Even if all the protestors clubbed together and raised money then it'd be a small fraction of the amount which big business would pump into backing their candidates, then consider that the media outlets are involved in politics and the 'independent candidate' really doesn't have a chance.

Or to put it another way - look at how OWS is being reported in the mainstream news in America in comparison to those brave freedom fighters of the Tea Party .... (cough) ...

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

How so? I think it's those that are screaming doom and gloom about SS that are uneducated on the topic.

+1

Society works best when its functioning as its intended to - that is the people within it looking out to help each other, that was the entire idea of civilisation ... that people together can achieve more than people alone.

Its being trumpeted as socialist to say it these days and a bad thing - but its what has allowed mankind to get to this stage of advancement imho; no one achieves anything today 'alone' ... heck even if you're self educated and brought yourself up by your bootstraps chances are that education is based on the knowledge of people from generations before ... its not just economic advancement which people help each other with, its social, educational etc.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

It would if not using pepper spray increases the risk to officer's carrying out their lawful duties. And even so-called passive resistance to removal increases the risk of injury to an officer.

And Jon contributes to the continued pussification of America's LEOs.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

For the record in the case of the students the weapon I'd have used against them would likely have been time (ie. just wait, they'll need the bathroom soon enough - chances are only a few of them are diehards and most would get cold and leave eventually) ... that approach is also easier on the PR front

Time is what all of the police departments have used initially, but you didn't really answer the question - if you get to the point when you need them to leave (whatever that treshold is - property damage, sexual assaults, the exclusion of the general public from property the OWS has essentially made private, or the disruption of public transportation, the blocking of public streets, sanitation catastrophes,), what's a better and safer means than pepper spray? Just rush in there and grab 'em all?

[NorvTurnerOverdrive]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

It's even dumber to cater to the incredibly low common denominator that makes up these vermin, quite possibly even dumber to cater to the useful idiots that allow social media to distort reality & make a mountain out of a molehill.

sure, but like it or not the response has become the narrative. which is a failure of leadership. if it were me:

'sir, the hippies are in the park.'
'sigh, goddamit. well, send them some coffee and cupcakes. say we sympathize with their plight. send some uc narcs down there and call our guy at the newspaper to say they're pissing and shitting everywhere and harassing old people and children. they'll peter out in a week.'

you send the riot team down there you're bound for internet stardom.

plus, the overtime and hazard pay for all those officers can't make you happy as a taxpayer.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

It would if not using pepper spray increases the risk to officer's carrying out their lawful duties. And even so-called passive resistance to removal increases the risk of injury to an officer.
.

By linking their arms together, they're now actively resistant under most department's policies.

Originally Posted by cartman

And Jon contributes to the continued pussification of America's LEOs.

Pussification? I can go a couple of routes with this one. First route, why should any officer have to needlessly endanger himself when there's a safer alternative? Second route, the pussification of America's LEOs is due to the ridiculous policies derived from citizens who view every single act of use of force as police brutality. Such as what will undoubtedly come as a result of this.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

That UC-Davis pepper spray incident was totally over the line. And I'm sure there are others too. Those cops should be fired and arrested..

Why?

[molson]

Originally Posted by NorvTurnerOverdrive

'sir, the hippies are in the park.'
'sigh, goddamit. well, send them some coffee and cupcakes. say we sympathize with their plight. send some uc narcs down there and call our guy at the newspaper to say they're pissing and shitting everywhere and harassing old people and children. they'll peter out in a week.'

That was the San Francisco approach. But I think they underestimated the ACTUAL pissing and shitting, and negative impact on local businesses. So now they're offering OWS protesters public buildings to use, and the OWS is "mulling it over."

If even San Francisco is losing its patience with it, I think it's a much bigger city issue then a bunch of hippies in a park. These urban areas just aren't setup for big encampment towns setup in the middle of them.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BARG1M2UJF.DTL

Edit: Also, local businesses are now threatening to sue the city if it doesn't enforce its laws and clear the areas.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

Pussification? I can go a couple of routes with this one. First route, why should any officer have to needlessly endanger himself when there's a safer alternative? Second route, the pussification of America's LEOs is due to the ridiculous policies derived from citizens who view every single act of use of force as police brutality. Such as what will undoubtedly come as a result of this.

Pussification by the act of treating ANY potential interaction in the worst possible light, instead of relying on their training to determine the best possible course of action.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

Second route, the pussification of America's LEOs is due to the ridiculous policies derived from citizens who view every single act of use of force as police brutality. Such as what will undoubtedly come as a result of this.

To expound on this. There's a well-documented incident where an officer was shot and killed on a traffic stop. Obviously no one will ever know what his last thoughts were, but this particular officer had been disciplined several times for being quick to take his gun out of the holster (which intimidates citizens). Is he dead now because he was worried about another complaint for pulling his gun out?

Last month, an officer in my department was in a 7-11 when an armed robbery began. The officer drew his gun, the suspect pointed his gun at the officer, and they had a stand-off before the suspect took off running. Likely, the only reason the suspect didn't shoot was because he didn't have a real gun. Meanwhile, when the officer had to go before PSO (Internal Affairs), he said the reason he didn't pull the trigger was because he didn't want to get sued.

Instead of being able not act like pussies, officers are forced to second guess themselves during life and death situations. And it's not people like Jon that are contributing to that.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by cartman

Pussification by the act of treating ANY potential interaction in the worst possible light, instead of relying on their training to determine the best possible course of action.

You stop treating EVERY situation you encounter as a possible life and death situation, you put not only yourself, but also other citizens and officers in danger. Have you ever watched the West Memphis shooting? Those officers didn't think a teenager was going to jump out of a truck with an assault rifle, and it cost them their life.

And that is OUR training. Every person you encounter is a possible threat to your safety. Regardless of their age, race, size, religion, etc. But I guess until you go through the actual training, and see countless videos of officers getting killed by people who seemingly posed no threat, you won't understand.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

You stop treating EVERY situation you encounter as a possible life and death situation, you put not only yourself, but also other citizens and officers in danger. Have you ever watched the West Memphis shooting? Those officers didn't think a teenager was going to jump out of a truck with an assault rifle, and it cost them their life.

And that is OUR training. Every person you encounter is a possible threat to your safety. Regardless of their age, race, size, religion, etc.

The officers were surprised by some one jumping out of a truck. If you are caught by surprise by a group you have been watching sit on the ground for the past hour, then that is a failure in training.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by cartman

The officers were surprised by some one jumping out of a truck. If you are caught by surprise by a group you have been watching sit on the ground for the past hour, then that is a failure in training.

You go hands-on, and then one of them bites you during the encounter. Again, why put yourself in that position when you can safely OC them?

[cartman]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

You go hands-on, and then one of them bites you during the encounter. Again, why put yourself in that position when you can safely OC them?

So you are saying pepper spray is an appropriate response in any situation, because the subject might do something like that?

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by cartman

So you are saying pepper spray is an appropriate response in any situation, because the subject might do something like that?

In any situation where a person is being actively resistant, yes. As I said before, as soon as this group linked their arms together they were now considered actively resistant under my department's policy.

Again, why do something that endangers you when there is a safer alternative?

[NorvTurnerOverdrive]

holy moly. if it's black block anarchists swinging 2x4's and throwing rocks by all means do what you gotta do.

if it's the political equivalent of a phish concert then you can probably get by massaging their pressure points.

what if someone bites you? seriously?

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by NorvTurnerOverdrive

holy moly. if it's black block anarchists swinging 2x4's and throwing rocks by all means do what you gotta do.

if it's the political equivalent of a phish concert then you can probably get by massaging their pressure points.

what if someone bites you? seriously?

You act like people wouldn't still be crying about "massaging" their pressure points. I'm also going to assume you've never been bitten by an unknown person who may or may not have diseases you'd prefer not to have.

[cartman]

Then you have backup. Someone even moves an open mouth towards an officer trying to move them, then open up with the pepper spray. But in the UC Davis videos, the LEO looks like a gawddang Earl Schieb painter the way he was spraying around.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by cartman

Then you have backup. Someone even moves an open mouth towards an officer trying to move them, then open up with the pepper spray.

I don't think you understand how fast a human bite can happen. Now I'm not saying that any of these protestors would have bitten anyone or even done anything more. But the fact is, you just don't know. It's a complete unknown. So why do something that puts yourself at risk, when you have a much safer alternative?

[illinifan999]

Also, then if someone does bite an officer, you're now at the assaultive level on the use of force continuum which now means someone's going to be hurt much more than just with OC spray.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

I don't think you understand how fast a human bite can happen. Now I'm not saying that any of these protestors would have bitten anyone or even done anything more. But the fact is, you just don't know. It's a complete unknown. So why do something that puts yourself at risk, when you have a much safer alternative?

The thing is, you never know for certain. Your point is to go to the extreme to ensure it doesn't happen, which in most cases is taken as an overreaction. Someone could just as easily (and likely) bite you on a traffic stop.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by cartman

The thing is, you never know for certain. Your point is to go to the extreme to ensure it doesn't happen, which in most cases is taken as an overreaction. Someone could just as easily (and likely) bite you on a traffic stop.

It's not a traffic stop though. They were being arrested. Being arrested leads people to do some rather remarkably stupid things. On a traffic stop, if you tell the person they are under arrest and they choose to ignore you and wrap their arms around the steering wheel, they will either be OC sprayed or ejected from the vehicle in a much more painful method.

[cartman]

So that all goes back to training, and determining the level of risk. If after watching a group peacefully protest for a length of time, you determine that violence will definitely ensue, then that to me points to a failure or breakdown in training.

If it were just a single officer responding to all of this, I would agree with you 100%. But there was a significant LEO presence to control the situation.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by cartman

So that all goes back to training, and determining the level of risk. If after watching a group peacefully protest for a length of time, you determine that violence will definitely ensue, then that to me points to a failure or breakdown in training.

If it were just a single officer responding to all of this, I would agree with you 100%. But there was a significant LEO presence to control the situation.

Again, nothing is ever definite in this job. You prepare for the worst, and hope for the best. Even groups that peacefully protest for hours and hours can become violent when they begin to get arrested.

More than a few times, I've dealt with people who have been completely cooperative for a lengthy period of time become combative and go apeshit when the arrest process begins. Then you add in the mob mentality....

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

I kinda thought the whole point of this protest was about the fact that the political system is broken and that its virtually impossible to get a candidate in who isn't part of the broken system ....

Even if all the protestors clubbed together and raised money then it'd be a small fraction of the amount which big business would pump into backing their candidates, then consider that the media outlets are involved in politics and the 'independent candidate' really doesn't have a chance.

But that's always the excuse when people don't get who they want elected. The system is rigged or the media isn't reporting on us fairly.

Whatever the case though, the system is at where it's at because or what people voted in and what people would put up with. Sitting in a park banging on drums does not change that. I'm not bashing their gripes, I'm bashing how they think camping in a park will change any of that.

The group was able to raise $500k without even trying the first few weeks. I'm certain with an army of volunteers with seemingly unlimited free time, they could easily raise some large money. They could easily run some candidates in particular districts, maybe even go for some Senate seats.

But that's hard and often boring work. It's easier to play activist on LiveStream to show off to your friends then it is to sit in a phone bank for 10 hours cold calling people.

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

Or to put it another way - look at how OWS is being reported in the mainstream news in America in comparison to those brave freedom fighters of the Tea Party .... (cough) ...

Outside of your biased organizations, I think it's been reported on fairly. They are basically the left's version of the tea party.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

Again, nothing is ever definite in this job. You prepare for the worst, and hope for the best. Even groups that peacefully protest for hours and hours can become violent when they begin to get arrested.

More than a few times, I've dealt with people who have been completely cooperative for a lengthy period of time become combative and go apeshit when the arrest process begins. Then you add in the mob mentality....

Nothing is definitive anywhere. I walked into a 7-11 ten minutes ago and the next guy who came in could have pulled out a handgun and shot us all. I shouldn't tackle him the second he reaches into his pocket. There is a level of risk involved in being an officer and if someone can't accept that, they should not become one.

And I'm mainly talking about the UC-Davis incident. Look at the video and tell me you think that cop thought he was threatened. That he thought those kids posed some kind of danger. His demeanor doesn't show that at all.

It's a college campus with a bunch of kids in North Face jackets sitting on a sidewalk playing activist. I'm sorry, but if it requires officers shooting pepper spray in their face to fix that problem, then those officers suck. How about bringing in a SWAT team to break up the next kegger? Not only is it unnecessary, but it makes those officers look like colassal pussies.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

Least violent:

For those with asthma, taking other drugs, or subject to restraining techniques which restrict the breathing passages, there is a risk of death. The Los Angeles Times has reported at least 61 deaths associated with police use of pepper spray since 1990 in the USA.[7] The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) documented 27 people in police custody who died after exposure to pepper spray in California since 1993.[3][8][9] However, the ACLU report counts any death occurring within hours of exposure to pepper spray. In all 27 cases, the coroners' report listed other factors as the primary cause of death, though in some cases the use of pepper spray may have been a contributing factor.[3]
From:
Pepper spray - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'd say anything which causes death is fairly violent myself ...

(incidentally use of such a weapon is illegal in the UK by the police or otherwise)

For the record in the case of the students the weapon I'd have used against them would likely have been time (ie. just wait, they'll need the bathroom soon enough - chances are only a few of them are diehards and most would get cold and leave eventually) ... that approach is also easier on the PR front

While I don't think it should have been used, pepper spray is still relatively as safe as it gets. You're talking just over 60 people in 20+ years throughout the entire country.

Often times it's used to subdue a violent person. So I guess my question would be whether that number would be much higher if officers had to use physical force or even draw their firearm to subdue people. And from what I've read on it, a lot of the deaths that pepper spray was involved had other factors in play such as an individual under the influence of a heavy drug.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Nothing is definitive anywhere. I walked into a 7-11 ten minutes ago and the next guy who came in could have pulled out a handgun and shot us all. I shouldn't tackle him the second he reaches into his pocket. There is a level of risk involved in being an officer and if someone can't accept that, they should not become one.

And I'm mainly talking about the UC-Davis incident. Look at the video and tell me you think that cop thought he was threatened. That he thought those kids posed some kind of danger. His demeanor doesn't show that at all.

It's a college campus with a bunch of kids in North Face jackets sitting on a sidewalk playing activist. I'm sorry, but if it requires officers shooting pepper spray in their face to fix that problem, then those officers suck. How about bringing in a SWAT team to break up the next kegger? Not only is it unnecessary, but it makes those officers look like colassal pussies.

We're talking about two separate things. You're talking about random encounters. I'm talking about effecting an arrest on an actively resistant person.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Whatever the case though, the system is at where it's at because or what people voted in and what people would put up with. Sitting in a park banging on drums does not change that. I'm not bashing their gripes, I'm bashing how they think camping in a park will change any of that.

I see the current system having evolved into place for a similar reason to why people smoke.

People are inherantly bad at recognising 'distant danger' - as animals we're designed for short-term danger detection and avoidance.

(there are some very interesting books on it and how the media, politicians etc. prey upon it)

As such step by step society has subtly been evolved without the masses realising there was any danger because in the short term each change wasn't something which directly affected them in the main.

We're now at the stage where its becoming more and more transparent that the tables are rigged and that society is no longer functioning to look after the people within it, just to generate profits for corporations ...

The question is how long the people within society will tolerate that and what will happen afterwards imho.

(my expectation is that if the corporations & money men have any sense at all they'll back off and stop the current 'crisis' mode within the next couple of years, if they do this then people will accept the status quo - however if they don't then people will eventually call 'enough' and changes will happen .... its like a middle-eastern dictatorship really, they're only in charge because of lethargy - if the masses are stirred up enough then change will happen)

Anyway on a slightly lighter note I came across this video of the 'lass from Fox News' doing her Thanks Giving meal with pepper spray ....

Thanks Giving using that all time favourite condiment Pepper Spray

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Outside of your biased organizations, I think it's been reported on fairly. They are basically the left's version of the tea party.

I disagree with that they are the lefts version of what began as the tea-party perhaps.

But the current tea-party is simply a well finances mouth-piece for politicians and corporations ..... not sure what the left equivalent for that even could be tbh.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

We're talking about two separate things. You're talking about random encounters. I'm talking about effecting an arrest on an actively resistant person.

It's college kids sitting on a sidewalk with their arms linked. They're being arrested for something incredibly minor (you can even argue why bother arresting some kids protesting peacefully on a campus anyway?). They weren't lobbing molatov cocktails. If that is literally the best way to arrest them, then that police department is rather pathetic.