Thanks to Howard on his No Talking Heads blog for this link.
The good folks at United for Peace of Pierce County have extensive info on use of pepper spray on nonviolent subjects, specifically in regards to recent Oly events.
Also check out their 'Olympian' hypes 'chaos,' fails to name police violence; officials praise police
Comments
Please remember
that arresting protestors is not always an option. The jails are overcrowded and hauling people off, even just to book and release them, is man power that they may not have. Read the policy I posted above, non-lethal weapons can be used for non-compliant subjects. You are required by law to follow a police officer's order. If you choose not to leave the area, or stay linked in by pvc pipes, city policy says you can be pepper sprayed.
Instead of waiting for arrest, why not help out the court systems by going to the protest and following orders when asked to?
Here is what I picked out of the policy
D. Defensive tactics - Defensive tactics include the use of impact weapons, chemical agents, attack defense (i.e., use of personal weapons to punch/kick) and less lethal weaponry aimed at primary or secondary targets [see 1.3.3(III.A.1-2)].
I would have to beg the question of "defensive". Other than a couple of idiots that rushed the police, I didn't see them needing to defend themselves.
The Anonymous ThurstonBlogger
as far as I know,
I'd like to know where you get the idea that cops can tell people what to do.
In that situation it's easy
Please give me a second grace. Please give me a second face. I've fallen far down, the first time around, now I just sit on the ground in your way.
Nick Drake
Tommy Smothers
If you're standing in the
It's the same old story - Everywhere I go, I get slandered, Libeled, I hear words I never heard in the bible
Tommy Smothers
Pepper Spray Policy of NYPD
The Civilian Complaint Review Board of NYPD studied the use of pepper spray and produced a report in October 2000. You can read the whole report here.
Here is a short version regarding an appropriate policy for use of pepper spray from page 4, 5 and 6 of that report:
The NYPD’s Patrol Guide Procedure Number 212-95 governs the circumstances in
which pepper spray can be used and the proper procedure for using the spray.5 The purpose of Patrol Guide 212-95 is “to inform uniformed members of the service of circumstances under which pepper spray may be intentionally discharged and to record instances where pepper spray has been discharged, intentionally or accidentally.”6 Patrol Guide 212-95 lists five situations in which an officer may use pepper spray. Pepper spray may be used when a police officer “reasonably believes” that it is necessary to: 1) protect himself, or another from unlawful use of force (e.g., assault); 2) effect an arrest, or establish physical control of a subject resisting arrest; 3) establish physical control of a subject attempting to flee from arrest or custody; 4) establish physical control of an emotionally disturbed person (EDP); and 5) control a dangerous animal by deterring an attack, to prevent injury to persons or animals present. The Patrol Guide states that officers should aim and discharge pepper spray into a subject’s eyes, nose, and/or mouth in two short one-second bursts at a minimum of three feet for maximum effectiveness.
7 The Patrol Guide prohibits the use of pepper spray against subjects who passively resist e.g., going limp, offering no active physical resistance). It further cautions that if possible, pepper spray should not be used against persons who appear to be in frail health, young children, women believed to be pregnant, or persons with known respiratory conditions.
In situations where pepper spray is used, the Patrol Guide stipulates several guidelines to ensure the safety of the subject. Officers are required to request the response of the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) once the situation is under control. If tactically feasible, according to the Patrol Guide, the subject should be removed from the contaminated area and exposed to fresh air while awaiting the arrival of EMS or transportation to a hospital or station house. The Patrol Guide warns that the subject should be positioned on his/her side or in a sitting position to
promote free breathing and that he/she should “never be maintained or transported in a face down position.”
8 Additionally, officers should not sit, stand, or kneel on a subject’s chest or back. If water is readily available, officers should flush the contaminated skin area of a subject with profuse amounts of water. Lastly, officers are reminded that subjects should be transported to the emergency room of the nearest hospital if he or she is “demonstrating difficulty breathing, or exhibiting signs of severe stress, hyperventilation, etc.”
9 Upon the subject’s arrival at the station house, desk officers are responsible for ensuring that prisoners who have been pepper-sprayed are properly monitored. A Command Log entry is to be made stating whether the prisoner has had his/her skin flushed with water, been examined by EMS, or been transported to the hospital. Officers are then required to prepare an Online Booking System Arrest Worksheet (PD 244-159) and Medical Treatment of Prisoner (PD 244-150) in arrest situations. In non-arrest situations, an Aided Report Worksheet (PD 304-152b) must be prepared and the box “OC Spray Used” checked. If applicable, the time, doctor’s name, and diagnosis is also noted in the worksheet.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 195
I believe you are correct Merwyn.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 195
Try coming up with one a
Norm
NYPD
Let's hear it for
Not correct
Look here
(1) A person is guilty of failure to disperse if:
(a) He congregates with a group of three or more other persons and there are acts of conduct within that group which create a substantial risk of causing injury to any person, or substantial harm to property; and
(b) He refuses or fails to disperse when ordered to do so by a peace officer or other public servant engaged in enforcing or executing the law.
(2) Failure to disperse is a misdemeanor.
Failure to disperse
Part 1 of the crime of failure to disperse requires that there be a group of 3 or more (that was met at the port this past week) and that there are acts of conduct within that group which create a substantial risk of causing injury to any person or substantial harm to property (that was probably met at times, although if we are talking about harm through deliberate injury by moving vehicles against a crowd, I do think there is a duty on the part of the driver to mitigate, it then becomes incumbent on the police to arrest for trespass, jay-walking, whatever, but the risk of injury to a crowd of demonstrators who are not posing a threat of injury or serious harm to property that comes from the police force itself or drivers who behave irresponsibly would not meet the standard in my opinion.)
As always in law, the facts of the situation are important. Facts about jail crowding, police officer frustration with crowd control are not likely to be compelling at court.
It appears to me that if there is no substantial risk of causing injury or substantial property harm, then there is no lawful order to disperse. Roll the videotape as they say.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 195
How about more?
Pedestrians on roadways.
(1) Where sidewalks are provided it is unlawful for any pedestrian to walk or otherwise move along and upon an adjacent roadway. Where sidewalks are provided but wheelchair access is not available, disabled persons who require such access may walk or otherwise move along and upon an adjacent roadway until they reach an access point in the sidewalk.(2) Where sidewalks are not provided any pedestrian walking or otherwise moving along and upon a highway shall, when practicable, walk or move only on the left side of the roadway or its shoulder facing traffic which may approach from the opposite direction and upon meeting an oncoming vehicle shall move clear of the roadway.
RCW 46.61.240
Crossing at other than crosswalks.
(1) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.(2) Where curb ramps exist at or adjacent to intersections or at marked crosswalks in other locations, disabled persons may enter the roadway from the curb ramps and cross the roadway within or as closely as practicable to the crosswalk. All other pedestrian rights and duties as defined elsewhere in this chapter remain applicable.
(3) Any pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
(4) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
(5) No pedestrian shall cross a roadway intersection diagonally unless authorized by official traffic-control devices; and, when authorized to cross diagonally, pedestrians shall cross only in accordance with the official traffic-control devices pertaining to such crossing movements.
(6) No pedestrian shall cross a roadway at an unmarked crosswalk where an official sign prohibits such crossing.
RCW 9.66.010Public nuisance.
A public nuisance is a crime against the order and economy of the state. Every place(1) Wherein any fighting between people or animals or birds shall be conducted; or,
(2) Wherein any intoxicating liquors are kept for unlawful use, sale or distribution; or,
(3) Where vagrants resort; and
Every act unlawfully done and every omission to perform a duty, which act or omission
(1) Shall annoy, injure or endanger the safety, health, comfort, or repose of any considerable number of persons; or,
(2) Shall offend public decency; or,
(3) Shall unlawfully interfere with, befoul, obstruct, or tend to obstruct, or render dangerous for passage, a lake, navigable river, bay, stream, canal or basin, or a public park, square, street, alley, highway, or municipal transit vehicle or station; or,
(4) Shall in any way render a considerable number of persons insecure in life or the use of property;
Shall be a public nuisance.
That's what I thought too...
I re-read that OPD general order Norm posted and basically if a police officer gives you a "lawful direction" and you don't comply you are subject to the use of force tools. I don't see anywhere where it says an actual arrest is necessary.
I also don't see any definition in the document on what a "lawful direction" is. Before everyone jumps in and says it's just something to be taken literally, please notice there are 26 other clearly defined concepts at the beginning of that document.
Is any direction taken from a police offer a "lawful direction"?
I don't think the logistical challenge of responding
appropriately to a large demonstration involving civil disobedience should justify moving from an appropriate and non-violent response of arrest to the use of pepper spray as a punitive measure. The jail and court crowding are part of the community cost of bad public policy such as the use of the port to move military materials in support of an illegal war and the public health issues regarding depleted uranium contamination in the community.
I think the bottom line is that the police were in the wrong if they used pepper spray against protestors who posed no physical threat to any other person. I am thinking of the picture of the protesters lined up by the fence, someone had spread a plastic tarp under the protestors and a police officer was spraying an individual in the line against the fence. This appears to be premeditated and criminal assault no matter what the police policies have to say about use of pepper spray or what the census is at the local jail.
This is why we need an oversight board now.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 195
Pre-Defensive tactics
they forgot the "c."
Compliance controls - Compliance controls include use of personal weapons to affect pain compliance, hair controls, pressure point and counter-joint techniques, oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray and conducted energy weapons.
according to that...
of arrest to the use of
of arrest to the use of pepper spray as a punitive measure
Not punitive, it's a compliance technique. You are inclined to have your own opinion on the matter, but if a board representing the city of Olympia is put in place, I'm betting most of them will disagree with you Mike.
Excessive force indeed...
What other tool?
Verbal communications were being ignored. Many requests to move had been made. Warnings were given.
What's the next logical step to remove someone who won't move and by law can be moved? Everyone here realizes had the blockades moved we wouldn't be discussing any of this. So I ask what tool should the police have used to allow the trucks to pass?
It doesn't matter...
The next step would be to tell them they are under arrest, zip tie their hands, after they cut them free if their linked, and carrying them to the police wagon. After a police officer tells you that you are under arrest you are required to obey, and can be charged with obstruction or resisting depending on the circumstances.
???
What's your question?
I went and started a new thread
The lack of a specific tool
There's No Lack
I expect to talk about the characterization of pepper spray
OK
We condemn Hussein for using
I prefer it to the violent,
Pepper spraying people who are sitting down on the ground
Arresting those breaking the law makes sense
and I would support it. We can then haggle out in the courts whether the first amendment right to peacably assemble is trumped by a violation such as failing to obey an order to disperse. There are important political and constitutional questions in that process.
If the officers violated the department's own policies by pepper spraying protestors directly in their faces, eyes, nostrils the officers may have committed simple criminal assault and should be subject to criminal prosecution and civil remedies. If the officers violated the department's own policies with the way that they employed pepper spray or any other law enforcement tool, the City should not extend any legal representation or coverage to the violaters. Officers who do not follow the department policies regarding use of force are thugs and criminals. They need to be removed from the force and prosecuted. As a special class of public employee who are authorized to use force, even deadly force, in the community they are subject to a very high standard of conduct.
A lot of folks may not be able to discriminate between the standard of conduct required by this special class of public employee and the conduct of protesters, but there is a significant difference.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 1953
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 195
OPD's use of force continuum
Read it here
III. Use of force model
The use of force model consists of a range of response options (including enforcement electives) that serve as the conceptual framework for the force management system [see Fig. A]. The model is dynamic in nature, recognizing that each situation may require a different path along this "ladder of force." Reasonable use of force includes: the ability to start at any level in the model, based on threat assessment; the ability to move in either direction in the model as a situation evolves; and the ability to bypass levels, if circumstances warrant. The key points in the use of force model are as follows:
A. Cooperative controls - Cooperative controls include command presence (color of authority), dialogue/reasoning, verbal direction or non-verbal direction (e.g., patrol vehicle emergency lights/siren).B. Contact controls - Contact controls include guiding, escorting and other lightly physical means of gaining compliance. C.
Compliance controls - Compliance controls include use of personal weapons to affect pain compliance, hair controls, pressure point and counter-joint techniques, oleoresin capsicum (OC) spray and conducted energy weapons.D. Defensive tactics - Defensive tactics include the use of impact weapons, chemical agents, attack defense (i.e., use of personal weapons to punch/kick) and less lethal weaponry aimed at primary or secondary targets [see 1.3.3(III.A.1-2)].
E. Deadly force - Deadly force includes the use of firearms and less lethal weapons intentionally aimed at tertiary targets [see 1.3.3(III.A.3)].
Sorry for the large text, I can't seem to shrink it
Non-lethal
I see no mention of "how" to use the spray. I have never heard of "not" pointing it in people's eyes. Spraying someone in the eyes is the point. You always aim for the face, this includes cops, citizens, grandmas, whatever. Again, I can't seem to change the font size.
1.3.3 Less/non lethal weapons
I. Policy
A. The Olympia Police Department recognizes that combative, non-compliant, armed or violent subjects cause handling and control problems that require special training and equipment. The Department has a less lethal force philosophy to assist with the de-escalation of these potentially violent confrontations. The intent of this philosophy is to empower officers to utilize specially designed devices to render subjects non-threatening - with a low probability of serious physical injury or death - so that they are not able to continue behavior that is inappropriate or dangerous.
B. The potential for causing serious injury or death with less lethal weaponry is always present, and decisions regarding deployment of the weaponry must be made with that in mind.
Thanks Norm
Holy crap people.People are
Holy crap people.
People are running amok in the city and it's the fault of the police.
If I were working for the Olympia Police Department, I'd seriously put the car in park and sit for the duration of my shift.
You do nothing (literally) one day and the tax-paying public is pissed because the working class can't do anything. You actually go remove people from the street the next and a group of people are chomping at the bit to take your paycheck, if not more for doing the job the majority of the City wants you to do.
One thing I've noticed every single time on this thread is that it's never the fault of everyone breaking the law. Critical Mass? Port protesting? Never!
Soylent green is people
You can watch The Olympian's
You can watch The Olympian's video and witness OPD telling everyone they needed to leave numerous times.
Decisions are being made to break the law and, in my opinion, pepper spray is as non-violent a method as there is. But people are still complaining and are still looking for someone to blame except for themselves.
But it's been great reading this before going to PT, because it motivates me a lot watching these videos and reading these comments.
If a law is being broken,
Maybe you don't understand protest tactics as well as you do military tactics, so let me help. Every single person lined up to block a vehicle or road or whatever, made the decision before hand, probably during a strategy session well before the protest, made the decision to be "arrestable". They went into this expecting that the police would tell them to move, they would refuse in protest, and they would most likely be arrested. The police chose not to arrest people and instead used batons and pepper spray to move them out of the way. How is that response conducive to a peaceful protest. You accuse protesters of blaming the cops, yet you attempt to shift that blame over to the protesters. Things could have been handled better on both sides, TFI. It is the responsibility of the OPD to keep the peace, they should have zip-tied and arrested people, not used violence as step one.
No Offense Rob
but I seriously doubt anything the police would have done in containing the chaos created by the protesters would have been acceptable. Even strapping on a plastic handcuff would have been viewed as brutality.
The protesters were not peaceful. They were not nonviolent. Peaceful and nonviolent to me means standing and protesting like the women in black do. Never in the history of their protests has anything like this past week ever come out of it. Police have never needed to be called and plastic and chemicals have never been used.
These people used the guise of war to wreak havoc in the streets of Olympia knowing what the outcome would be after several warnings and their behavior continued almost as if to entice and engage the police in reacting and now they're crying brutality. I don't buy it, I won't buy it. I commend the police for their restraint and their actions and feel the protesters should be glad worse didn't come out of their shenanigans.
No, I have never been pepper sprayed, batoned or tasered, nor do I ever plan to put myself in a situation to be. I don't know how it feels or what it causes physically but I'm smart enough to know that I would never knowingly go into a situation where this result could be a possible outcome.
"Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be explained by stupidity and incompetence." - Unknown
none taken
Spraying was enough
As a witness, they harassed truckers, took their equipment off their trucks, tried to mess the steering on one of the trucks, stole dumpsters and other property to make up their "barricades". They have glass bottles of urine in them. One of the pilot cars had a bottle thrown into it.
Protesters were harassing the supporters for the troops. This is behavior that should not be tolerated by a "peaceful movement". If it truly was peaceful, then they should have policed themselves. All of this occurred before they used any type of spray. That's what lead up to it and they wrote their own ticket.
To whine about the police is ridiculous. I was there and have video of them giving ample warnings. If they choose to stand in the way then too bad after warnings then too bad, you get what you get. They knew this was going to happen and after seeing the behavior first hand, I have no sympathy for any of them. TJ was the worst. He was justifying why it's OK to put children in front of a truck. He wouldn't do it but he felt it was OK. Those pictures have already been sent to CPS and they are circulated throughout the web. They get what they get and that's just too bad.I just hope they don't run out of spray, time to go to Costco and get the jumbo size.
We've kind of moved past
Was the last sentence something that made you feel better?
lol when did we move past it?
I Agree With Fire Inside
Our police department is damned if they do & damned if they don't.
"Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be explained by stupidity and incompetence." - Unknown
Why fo you think it is a dichotomy?
I suspect that the protesters
would like nothing better than to see the Olympia cruisers part and sit for the duration of the shift instead of donning the riot gear to accommodate an illegal war.
The purpose of civil disobedience is to change public policy. Getting arrested, getting clubbed, getting pepper sprayed is a risk and creates a problem for the social institutions that are supporting the challenged public policy. All of the costs to a system for supporting the challenged public policy are tactical and strategic. In this case, the public policy is the use of the port for transport of war materials coming or going. The opposition to the public policy of port use for transport of war materials includes the legality of the war and the potential that our community is being contaminated with depleted uranium.
I don't think that the protesters, myself included, think of this as our fault, we are taking responsibility to oppose terrible public policy that we believe endangers this community and is in support of an illegal war.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 1953
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 195
A citizen board
should consider whether OPD should have a policy regarding the use of pepper spray against a crowd or individual who is simply refusing to obey an order. That's a different situation from spraying a person who is engaged in an assault. In the assault situation, pepper spray might make sense. In the instance of public civil disobedience the use of pepper spray against a person who poses no imminent threat to another person makes no sense.
Arrest the protesters, fill the jail, fill the court. Let the courts decide if the right to peacably assemble is trumped by violation of a civil order to disperse. Due process can be a beautiful thing. The physical and criminal assault against people engaged in civil disobedience should be challenged.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 1953
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 195
thanks wikipedia!
i don't know if anyone else researched pepper spray and it's application at all but wikipedia has a really good article on it. heres a quote:
"The US Army concluded in a 1993 Aberdeen Proving Ground study that pepper spray could cause "Mutagenic effects, carcinogenic effects, sensitization, cardiovascular and pulmonary toxicity, neurotoxicity, as well as possible human fatalities. There is a risk in using this product on a large and varied population".[9] However, the pepper spray was widely approved in the US despite the reservations of the US military scientists after it passed FBI tests in 1991. As of 1999, it was in use by more than 2000 public safety agencies"
and here's the url (i'm a jerk who doesn't know how to link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepper_spray
as for you guys AFI and JPO, people going to protests know that there will be a response from the police. the last time i checked though, it was still legal to hold a sign and chant from the sidewalk and these are the people getting sprayed most often.
as for those who are civily disobedient, thier motive is to get arrested so they can take thier grievences to the courts. all in all a pretty reasonable way to handle things if you can get over the fact that it was hard to drive for 15 or 20 minutes. when things get out of hand is when the police decide they need to punish people through, what i believe amounts to chemical torture (being shot and sprayed with chemical aents while imobile) for participating in the democratic process.
at no point, throughout this or an other port protest, has a protester attacked a police officer. the worst thats happened is an allegation of spitting. there is a history and commitment to nonviolence on the part of the protesters that should be recognized.
what i believe amounts to
Chemical torture? Everyone who has served in the Armed Forces has had to take part in the "gas chamber."
Does it suck? Yeah, it sucks. Chemical torture? C'mon now.
I know. It sucks putting on a rucksack and marching a few miles afterward, too. And then once you get back to the barracks, you conduct an afternoon PT session (which, in Basic, are all "smoke" sessions.)
Okay so you don't think it's torture
To arrest or to not arrest
It depends on how they are resisting
If a protester escalates a
This is so very rarely the case with these protests that you're bordering on fantasy. One or two punks might show up and throw things, but a hundred people are being peaceful around them.
If a protester escalates a
You don't "escalate with them." You use the amount of force necessary to put an end to the situation.
It's clear that what Olympia needs is armed social workers, not cops.
You are wrong
It's an inappropriate
It's an inappropriate response to pepper spray someone who is standing or sitting being non-threatening.
You are running on opinions Rob. Read the OPD policy manual.
Norm
I highly doubt it
Yes!
So Texas vs California? The
The point of the California case
To clarify
I don't know how much the application method
was part of the deliberation. Not sure if there is a clinical or legal difference between swabbing and spraying within inches of the eyes. The US Supreme Court remanded this case back to ninth circuit court where a jury eventually ruled in favor of the plantifs, but awarded nominal damages. You can many of the legal documents here (a website biased towards the plantiffs).
I'd like to get away from the hyperbole of chaos in the streets and spitting and rock throwing. I'm not arguing about how the police should handle those situations.
So Spitting On Cops And
throwing rocks and trash and sitting in front of moving vehicles and strapping metal rods on your arms to prevent police from acting isn't a physical escalation by the protesters? Seriously?
"Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be explained by stupidity and incompetence." - Unknown
Spitting is assault.
I Don't Get The Whole
Straw Man references you all always make!
I don't believe for one minute the pepper spray was used because of one spitter. I believe it was the actions of many that determined pepper spray was necessary.
"Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be explained by stupidity and incompetence." - Unknown
Okay
No protester this weekend or
I'll just let The Olympian's video speak for itself.
I have a feeling that the vast majority of the local population outside of the TESC community is going to support the police response.
Along with the video TFI is
Along with the video TFI is talking about, I'd like to remind folks of the last protest where folks decided to throw things over the fence at officers. That one I can attest to personally. Good way to escalate the situation.
this is never going to end
Officer safety vs blanket statement
Your scenario
I was actually responding to Rob
The people are joined together with carabiners
The problem being that the
Pain compliance
No
Are you suggesting the police
NO
I Support The Police Response
and I'm not ashamed to admit it and I won't be bullied into thinking or feeling otherwise.
"Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be explained by stupidity and incompetence." - Unknown
Not bullying
I'm talking about a group of
TFI, are you anti-TESC now? You're really going to throw crap like that out there? I'm a bit surprised, you usually don't fall into that kind of dualistic argument. I'm not going to argue with you about Evergreen.
TFI, are you anti-TESC
I've never really been a big fan of TESC. I don't wake up hating the place, but I don't go out of my way to visit the campus.
I've been around Olympia long enough to remember TESC students tearing up the Capitol building to protest the 1991 Gulf War.
There's been a laundry list of stuff in Olympia that has happened between now and then that can be directly attributed to the "TESC mentality."
Rob...
Then I suppose..
they would be resisting arrest and that's a whole new ballgame.
If a police officer told me I was under arrest, and started reading me my rights, I'd comply. I expect that if I resisted, they'd start using some force to make me comply.
So anyone who was there, did the police give some instruction prior to using the pepper spray? Did they just order the crowd to disperse? Or did they declare something like "You are all under arrest, get in the van?"
In some of the photo streams and video I see what looked like the officer in charge making some statements that were being recorded on video.
Can someone fill me in on what those statements were?
Edit* My bad... it was mentioned before the Olympian videos covered some of this, so I'll go over there and watch them.
Arrest?
It's really not an offer of opportunity for arrest. The police can say, hey you are under arrest. Show me your hands. You make your hands available for zip-ties or not, the officer needs to get the zip ties on. Then it's hey, get in the car, wagon, etc. for transport to jail and processing. You get walk to car or you get dragged. For the sake of civility a person being arrested ought to be offered the opportunity to walk to the vehicle before being dragged there, but if you are dealing with a crowd who have locked arms or engaged in other techniques to make the arrest more difficult, then maybe you get dragged for the safe of efficiency. If the police are unnecessarily rough with the transport, they should be subject to scrutiny, dragging people to vehicle and bouncing them on the head off curbs and pavement to deal with your frustration about your job, your political differences with the protesters should open a police officer to some problems including criminal charges and civil remedy.
This isn't rocket science. It's easy to look back at the civil rights demonstrations where water cannons and dogs were turned loose on protesters and realize now that this response was wrong. Removing masks and goggles to spray protesters directly in the face and maximize their injury is the same kind of abuse of authority.
Was that a rhetorical question? and if not, do you understand the answer provided?
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 1953
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." President Dwight D. Eisenhower April 16, 195
refuse how?