EPTUC Davis Protesters Pepper Sprayed - Page 13
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Seaweed
United States48 Posts
| ||
|
AcuWill
United States281 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:02 rotinegg wrote: You can't use the slippery slope argument here - the officers could either have physically removed the students by grabbing them (which they did at the end) or create an incentive for them to leave on their own accord. They thought the latter was a better choice than grabbing them, and chose what I believe is the least violent way to incentivize the students to leave. Only when that failed, they resorted to physically removing them. It does not escalate "step-by-step" into "live ammunition," you are over-generalizing the case and exaggerating. The escalation argument is used to justify the use of the mace. I am using it to show how stupid it is. You have proven my point. You don't think this type of stuff escalates? You don't think that POLICE cause the escalation? http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/scott-olsen-injured-occupy-oakland-protester-well-see-you-in-our-streets/2011/11/14/gIQATfwILN_blog.html | ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
They were on campus in the main quad that is there for the community of students. It says a lot about what kind of person you are if you think people should have the right to protest policies impacting education, tuition, taxation, economics, etc. while also thinking that those rights to protest are superseded by public bylaws mandating public parks be kept clean. This goes from UC Davis to Zuccotti Park. | ||
|
TheToast
United States4808 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:02 rotinegg wrote: You can't use the slippery slope argument here - the officers could either have physically removed the students by grabbing them (which they did at the end) or create an incentive for them to leave on their own accord. They thought the latter was a better choice than grabbing them, and chose what I believe is the least violent way to incentivize the students to leave. Only when that failed, they resorted to physically removing them. It does not escalate "step-by-step" into "live ammunition," you are over-generalizing the case and exaggerating. I agree. I think the issue here is whether or not they should have removed them or not. Once that decision is made (not saying it was the right or wrong one) pepper spraying the students is I think an appropriate response. If you try to physically remove them, you run the risk of an officer or a student being seriously injured. The beauty of pepper spray is that it HURTS like hell and make people very very uncomfortable; but it's a natural compound that does not leave any lasting physical injuries. In some ways, pepper spraying the students is for their protection and the police involved. It's the same reason cops use it to subdue criminals, so that the suspect can be arrested without getting hurt in a physical altercation with the cops. At the time of the incident, the students had been entirely non-violent (and I believe they at least intended to stay that way), but you have to consider the situation from the viewpoint of the police. They have no idea what these people are going to do, they could start a riot or a fight and you could end up with a lot of injured people. It's so easy to make judgements from your computer chair, but I suspect it's entirely different when you are greatly outnumbered and surrounded by chanting protestors. I think you would also want to choose the option that will resolve the situation without anyone being permanently hurt. Again, I'm not justifying the decision made to remove them in the first place, but the use of pepper spray I think is definetly justified. | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
So what, these people didn't do what the cops told them to do. Did the cops have the right? Did the students NOT have the right to be on the campus THEY paid for? Do they not have the constitutional rights every American citizen has? For the most part, except when safety comes around. Now that we start getting into the pickle jar, WHAT IS SO FUCKING DANGEROUS ABOUT FUCKING SITTING THERE? The cops had NO reason to be scared when the group of students were yelling, "YOU USE YOUR GUNS, WE USE OUR VOICE!" The students had every right to be scared. The ENTIRE staff of UCDavis realizes it was a BAD FUCKING CALL to bring in the police. Now that we understand some points of views FROM THE ADMINISTRATORS WHO BROUGHT IN THE POLICE IN THE FIRST PLACE, we can concluded that what the police did was wrong. They have been punished, maybe justly, maybe not, and that should prove to everyone who thinks the cops did no wrong, that they did wrong. Otherwise, why would you punish someone for doing their job? "A law is a law is a law"... The constitution is the LAW OF THE LAND. | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
| ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:13 TheToast wrote: I agree. I think the issue here is whether or not they should have removed them or not. Once that decision is made (not saying it was the right or wrong one) pepper spraying the students is I think an appropriate response. If you try to physically remove them, you run the risk of an officer or a student being seriously injured. The beauty of pepper spray is that it HURTS like hell and make people very very uncomfortable; but it's a natural compound that does not leave any lasting physical injuries. In some ways, pepper spraying the students is for their protection and the police involved. It's the same reason cops use it to subdue criminals, so that the suspect can be arrested without getting hurt in a physical altercation with the cops. At the time of the incident, the students had been entirely non-violent (and I believe they at least intended to stay that way), but you have to consider the situation from the viewpoint of the police. They have no idea what these people are going to do, they could start a riot or a fight and you could end up with a lot of injured people. It's so easy to make judgements from your computer chair, but I suspect it's entirely different when you are greatly outnumbered and surrounded by chanting protestors. I think you would also want to choose the option that will resolve the situation without anyone being permanently hurt. Again, I'm not justifying the decision made to remove them in the first place, but the use of pepper spray I think is definetly justified. Actually, pepper spray can leave tissue damage and even kill some people. Who knows, maybe someone will have an allergy to the peppers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepper_spray http://www.aclu-sc.org/attach/p/Pepper_Spray_New_Questions.pdf | ||
|
TheToast
United States4808 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:16 DigiGnar wrote: Actually, pepper spray can leave tissue damage and even kill some people. Who knows, maybe someone will have an allergy to the peppers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepper_spray http://www.aclu-sc.org/attach/p/Pepper_Spray_New_Questions.pdf Well anything can run the risk of death. Tasers, tear gas, and physical confrontations can all end up deadly. The difference is physical confrontations are much more likely to cause harm, and in most cases the effects of Pepper Spray dissipate after a few hours. Physical confrontations can also lead to injury of both the police officers and the students, thus doubling the chances of such an occurance. There's no real good way to remove people, but some options are much better than others. | ||
|
slappy
United States1271 Posts
| ||
|
CaptainCrush
United States785 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:13 DigiGnar wrote: To those that think the cops did okay, what do you think of the fact that they were placed on administrative leave? What do you think of the Chancellor making an apology for how things went? The ENTIRE staff of UCDavis realizes it was a BAD FUCKING CALL to bring in the police. No they dont. I'm sure they were placed on administrative leave because UC Davis is doing the politically correct thing and removing them until a thorough investigation is complete. The apology is along the same lines. They have to at least look like they care when millions of ignorant people outcry over use of pepper spray. Pepper spray for god sakes, you know, the non-lethal stuff.... This will come and go and I can almost guarantee that the cops will still have their jobs, they did the right thing. You can bet that there will not be another stupid protest on that campus any time soon either. I'm honestly dumbfounded that so many people are trying to claim police brutality or a violation of rights in this situation. | ||
|
ZeaL.
United States5955 Posts
I know you haven't said whether or not this was justified but we should take a step back. Why was it so necessary for the cops to remove them? Cause they got orders? That argument didn't fly at Nuremburg and it shouldn't fly here. Were the students causing so many problems that it was necessary to cause physical pain to them? I would understand if they were shutting down normal functioning of the University but it doesn't seem like it. Maybe if they were blocking the way to stop some terrorists or something there would be urgency, but why was it deemed so necessary that the students are removed that they had to resort to pepper spray? At any normal university, if the problem was so great that even the thought of pepper-spraying students popped up, the president of the college would be down there negotiating with them cause they know that doing it the violent route is just going to lead to bad publicity. Too bad for UCD. | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:23 TheToast wrote: Well anything can run the risk of death. Tasers, tear gas, and physical confrontations can all end up deadly. The difference is physical confrontations are much more likely to cause harm, and in most cases the effects of Pepper Spray dissipate after a few hours. Physical confrontations can also lead to injury of both the police officers and the students, thus doubling the chances of such an occurance. There's no real good way to remove people, but some options are much better than others. But why do they need to bring it to this point? The students HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE, EVEN IN THE UNIVERSITY. The university preserves that right except in the light of safety. Now, please, for the fucking love of god, WHAT IS SO DANGEROUS ABOUT SITTING? Is handcuffing someone really so much more dangerous than pepper spraying? Shit, had the cops tried to use those FIRST, this video wouldn't have happened. The cops shouldn't have even been there as stated by the UCDAVIS CHANCELLOR. Every bit of the cops being there was wrong. | ||
|
domovoi
United States1478 Posts
Yet another example of the Occupy movement not being about distributive justice, but about fulfilling the leftist, conspiratorial fantasies of rich, white kids. | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
No they dont What do they don't? I'm sure they were placed on administrative leave because UC Davis is doing the politically correct thing and removing them until a thorough investigation is complete. The apology is along the same lines. They have to at least look like they care when millions of ignorant people outcry over use of pepper spray. You're.... sure? It doesn't matter what the staff privately feels on the inside, what matters is their actions. The actions they took was to show that the police being there, and especially what they did, was wrong. Otherwise, there wouldn't have been punishment. Let's take a look at the word: punishment. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punishment Here's one of the definitions: "a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure " Seems like these two officers were penalized for doing their job, I would have to say... Incorrectly. Otherwise, why would they be penalized? Pepper spray for god sakes, you know, the non-lethal stuff I have posted a link that shows deaths from pepper spray, you know, not breathing anymore. | ||
|
CaptainCrush
United States785 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:40 DigiGnar wrote: What do they don't? You're.... sure? It doesn't matter what the staff privately feels on the inside, what matters is their actions. The actions they took was to show that the police being there, and especially what they did, was wrong. Otherwise, there wouldn't have been punishment. Let's take a look at the word: punishment. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/punishment Here's one of the definitions: "a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure " Seems like these two officers were penalized for doing their job, I would have to say... Incorrectly. Otherwise, why would they be penalized? I was saying that Im sure that the "ENTIRE staff of UC Davis" doesnt think that it was a bad call to bring in the cops, just like not everyone here does either. And for all we know, those cops could be on paid leave, which is not really a punishment, its just a way to get them out of the spotlight until the investigation is over. Settle down... Why are you so angry over this? | ||
|
TheToast
United States4808 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:34 DigiGnar wrote: But why do they need to bring it to this point? The students HAVE THE RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE, EVEN IN THE UNIVERSITY. The university preserves that right except in the light of safety. Now, please, for the fucking love of god, WHAT IS SO DANGEROUS ABOUT SITTING? Is handcuffing someone really so much more dangerous than pepper spraying? Shit, had the cops tried to use those FIRST, this video wouldn't have happened. The cops shouldn't have even been there as stated by the UCDAVIS CHANCELLOR. Every bit of the cops being there was wrong. To handcuff someone you first have to get them to unlock their arms. If they choose not to cooperate you have to subdue them and hold them down. It's all messy business. If you are resigned to remove them, what they did was about the best option. It's a messy deal no matter how you slice it. And I'm not going to get into a debate about the morality of following immoral orders, that's another whole can of worms. Should they have done it? Probably not, considering the PR nightmare that has ensued. This obviously ties into 1960s Vietnam Era protests that no one wants to see repeated. However, the question of whether they "should" have done it and whether they were "justified" in doing so are two separate things. Recieving bad PR does not affect the justification of the issue. I'm not going to weigh in on whether it was justified or not, obviously the opinions in this thread are separated along strong ideological lines and no one is going to convince anyone of anything on that topic. | ||
|
GnarlyArbitrage
575 Posts
Actually, we do know that the staff of UCDavis thought that what happened was no good. As that's the reason this investigation is going underway. And yeah, I'm going crazy. Like those crazy whacky inflatable arm men outside of car dealerships. It's so unique how you can sense so much emotion from text over the internet. | ||
|
Fontong
United States6454 Posts
If you really believe what OWS is saying, then the police are part of the 99% too. It just reeks of irony how most all posters in here are ignoring the Chancellor's role in this. Even funnier that the Chancellor's response completely directs responsibility away from herself. I'm sure people at UCD see this, but most people here are off the mark. The Chancellor had the option to allow the protests to continue, but decided to crack down on them. Police would have done nothing if not for her orders that the protesters be removed. Come on people, give the police a break for once and focus on the real criminal. Someone in the upper echelon of society pitting the lower ones against each other? This is the real shame in my opinion. The police were not even particularly brutal in this case. The chancellor cannot even be bothered enough to take responsibility for sending the police out. I hate to say it again, but this situation is just rank with irony. Is the chancellor not supposed to be one of the most enlightened people at the university? That she is the one who ordered and instigated the entire topic of this thread is just unbelievable. | ||
|
slappy
United States1271 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:54 Fontong wrote: Interesting that this thread is aiming all their flak at the police and not the person who called in the police. Obviously if the police are called in to remove non-compliant lawbreakers there will be trouble of some sort. If you really believe what OWS is saying, then the police are part of the 99% too. It just reeks of irony how most all posters in here are ignoring the Chancellor's role in this. Even funnier that the Chancellor's response completely directs responsibility away from herself. I'm sure people at UCD see this, but most people here are off the mark. The Chancellor had the option to allow the protests to continue, but decided to crack down on them. Police would have done nothing if not for her orders that the protesters be removed. Come on people, give the police a break for once and focus on the real criminal. Someone in the upper echelon of society pitting the lower ones against each other? This is the real shame in my opinion. The police were not even particularly brutal in this case. The chancellor cannot even be bothered enough to take responsibility for sending the police out. I hate to say it again, but this situation is just rank with irony. Is the chancellor not supposed to be one of the most enlightened people at the university? That she is the one who ordered and instigated the entire topic of this thread is just unbelievable. indeed! She signed off allowing the protests to happen in the first place.. | ||
|
CaptainCrush
United States785 Posts
On November 22 2011 04:54 DigiGnar wrote: Actually, we do know for a fact that the cops are on administrative leave. As per the plethora of news articles that have come from this single indecent. Actually, we do know that the staff of UCDavis thought that what happened was no good. As that's the reason this investigation is going underway. And yeah, I'm going crazy. Like those crazy whacky inflatable arm men outside of car dealerships. It's so unique how you can sense so much emotion from text over the internet. Right, but typically with administrative leave, they are still paid. Like I said, they are not being punished yet, just relieved of duty until they determine whether or not their actions were appropriate, they may or may not be punished then. And while the article says that the staff of UC Davis found it to be no good, Im sure it's not the "ENTIRE FUCKING staff" that you said it was.... I personally see this as a adult spanking... Some adults were doing something inappropriate, a cop told them to stop as per order of the chancellor, and they continued to anyways so they got sprayed. At the end of the day nothing but feelings were hurt and the protest was over. This was handled about as well as it could be and we still have people going crazy... not just here but nationally. I think that is more sad than anything that happened on campus the other day. | ||
| ||
