EPTUC Davis Protesters Pepper Sprayed - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
mikell
Australia352 Posts
| ||
|
Superiorwolf
United States5509 Posts
The students were trying to protect their tents, which the chancellor had ALLOWED them to have, waiving a section of the campus code to allow them to put up tents. The next day, a note was given around without any name that ordered the tents to be removed for "health and safety reasons." The students did begin to take down their tents when the riot force arrived. A few were being arrested, so the students formed a circle to block the police. The police were not 'ACTUALLY' blocked. Notice how the guy with the pepper spray, Lt. Pike, simply steps over the students to the other side. He sprayed them with military-grade pepper spray. The distance you are allowed to spray at is 15 feet. He sprayed at almost point blank range, 2 or even 3 times. Then police even grabbed people and lifted up their shirts in order to spray in their face, or opened their mouths to spray to their throats. The police were not provoked at all. There was no reason to use such force in this incident. Plus, the students weren't blocking ANYTHING. If someone was trying to get to class there was PLENTY of room to get around. Davis is also a huge campus as well . . . http://boingboing.net/2011/11/20/ucdeyetwitness.html | ||
|
SafeAsCheese
United States4924 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:02 Probulous wrote: Sorry guys, can't watch vods here. Can someone explain what the main nuisance was? In the OP it says they were camping in the main quadrangle. Were they actively disrupting the functioning of the University? Bare in mind Universities normally have some sort of protest on campus at any point in time. Everyday I went to Uni I had to avoid being accosted by people trying to shove pamphlets and other crap in my face. I guess there are health issues with people actually living there but it seems a drastic reaction to call in the police. They were "obstructing a path" Clearly this is a major violation, as it is impossible for people to walk around the protest. I am surprised the police didn't bring out the K9's and sniper rifles. Such a dangerous situation. | ||
|
FirmTofu
United States1956 Posts
On November 21 2011 13:52 FallDownMarigold wrote: 1) College is expensive, and some students rightfully want to go to class. 2) Students protesting on that pathway are blocking students from going to class. 3) Students won't move as requested; students are warned but don't move. Result: Students are sprayed. Notice how the reason for which they were protesting isn't even important? It just matters that they were doing something totally and obviously wrong by loitering in a pathway, and they knew it too in order to prove a point. If they can't take the consequences they should think first. I know the location of exactly where the protest happened you are extremely wrong in your analysis. The quad is big enough for people to simply walk around the protest if they want to. Did you really think that 10 students and a few onlookers can prevent people from going to class? | ||
|
LarJarsE
United States1378 Posts
On November 21 2011 13:40 Sufficiency wrote: I think what the police did was acceptable for removing people violating California Penal Code Section 647. okay laws shmaws.. was it morally right? not at all. its not okay to spray chemicals in the faces of peaceful protesters. | ||
|
iSometric
2221 Posts
| ||
|
shinosai
United States1577 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:05 FirmTofu wrote: I know the location of exactly where the protest happened you are extremely wrong in your analysis. The quad is big enough for people to simply walk around the protest if they want to. Did you really think that 10 students and a few onlookers can prevent people from going to class? Apparently ten nonviolent students are such a huge danger that one needs at least a dozen police officers equipped with pepper spray and batons to disperse them. I mean, really, a single police officer with no weapons could have probably subdued all ten students by himself. Why are we treating peaceful protests like riots? Geez... | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On November 21 2011 13:40 Sufficiency wrote: I think what the police did was acceptable for removing people violating California Penal Code Section 647. Given that the law and the justice system is perfect in every way, what the police did was acceptable!!!... Unfortunately, that's not the case. The videos and pictures depicts dogs (police officers) committing moral crimes against their people - perhaps not according to the law - but the law is a joke. | ||
|
FallDownMarigold
United States3710 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:05 FirmTofu wrote: I know the location of exactly where the protest happened you are extremely wrong in your analysis. The quad is big enough for people to simply walk around the protest if they want to. Did you really think that 10 students and a few onlookers can prevent people from going to class? Dude lol, are you kidding? You're being rational about it? Dealing with regulations about path obstruction and protesting and shit like that is not rational. Deal with it, is all I'm saying, if you insist on protesting -- and remember that just because it doesn't make sense doesn't mean you'll win the argument with the policeman, or judge, or whoever. Do I personally think 10 people can block anyone from anything? NOPE! I'd leap over that shit and get to class. However, regulations are regulations, and bureaucratic BS is bureaucratic BS. If a law says you cannot block a path -- or whatever -- then that's all the cops need. Does not matter if in reality, a "way around" exists. That's exactly why they were sprayed, and my reasoning is perfectly logical. So, instead of simply calling me wrong, why don't you provide an alternative explanation for why they were sprayed if not due to planting themselves in a location in which they were not allowed to plant, because I'm definitely curious. Was it because they were malicious cops seeking to harm youth? Did the university order the spraying? Did a student assault a policeman? Was a weapon found on a kid? Those would all be reasonable explanations too (if validated, of course) | ||
|
FirmTofu
United States1956 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:09 shinosai wrote: Apparently ten nonviolent students are such a huge danger that one needs at least a dozen police officers equipped with pepper spray and batons to disperse them. I mean, really, a single police officer with no weapons could have probably subdued all ten students by himself. Why are we treating peaceful protests like riots? Geez... The sarcasm is strong with you young padawan. | ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:02 Kuja wrote: What did these children think would happen? Im so glad they got what was coming to them. Obviously Steve Jobs/Bill Gates didn't make their fortune circle jerking on the campus. If the kids could do 1/100 of what our rich do for us they would all be loaded; But they cant, they're to stupid. They don't have to work do they? People should work for them and they should get the money right? But in all honestly, i haven't had as good a laugh in a long time as these videos gave me, Thanks. EDIT: Also it was MACE, not pepper spray, which makes it even funnier. You're right, they didn't circle jerk on campus, they left campus all together... Keep in mind that people protest for a reason. In fact protests, particularly student protests, can have significant effects. The anti-vietnam war protests started at universities. Besides most graduate are battling to find said work, that's part of what they are protesting about. The fact that they have to morgage their future on tuition and then have little chance of finding work. Surely universty is supposed to help you find gainful employment. That is why people go to Uni. It's not as simple as lazy protesters. | ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:10 FallDownMarigold wrote: Dude lol, are you kidding? You're being rational about it? Dealing with regulations about path obstruction and protesting and shit like that is not rational. Deal with it, is all I'm saying, if you insist on protesting -- just because it doesn't make sense doesn't mean you'll win the argument with the policeman, or judge, or whoever. Do I personally think 10 people can block anyone from anything? NOPE! I'd leap over that shit and get to class. However, regulations are regulations, and bureaucratic BS is bureaucratic BS. If a law says you cannot block a path -- or whatever -- then that's all the cops need. Does not matter if in reality, a "way around" exists. The point is not so much how the cops reacted as why were they called in the first place. If the protest was having an active disruption of the functioning of the college in a meaningful way, then yes they should be moved. If all they were doing was camping on some grass then calling in the troopers is way over the top. I doubt pepper spray would change the minds of the people protesting. It would be doubtful that they expected this kind of response to a peaceful demonstration. | ||
micronesia
United States24747 Posts
The systematic spraying of students with harmful chemicals... when all the students are doing is sitting on the sidewalk, seems like blatant incompetence of the police to me. | ||
|
Superiorwolf
United States5509 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:10 FallDownMarigold wrote: Dude lol, are you kidding? You're being rational about it? Dealing with regulations about path obstruction and protesting and shit like that is not rational. Deal with it, is all I'm saying, if you insist on protesting -- and remember that just because it doesn't make sense doesn't mean you'll win the argument with the policeman, or judge, or whoever. Do I personally think 10 people can block anyone from anything? NOPE! I'd leap over that shit and get to class. However, regulations are regulations, and bureaucratic BS is bureaucratic BS. If a law says you cannot block a path -- or whatever -- then that's all the cops need. Does not matter if in reality, a "way around" exists. That's exactly why they were sprayed, and my reasoning is perfectly logical. So, instead of simply calling me wrong, why don't you provide an alternative explanation for why they were sprayed if not due to planting themselves in a location in which they were not allowed to plant, because I'm definitely curious. Was it because they were malicious cops seeking to harm youth? Did the university order the spraying? Did a student assault a policeman? Was a weapon found on a kid? Those would all be reasonable explanations too (if validated, of course) The main question here I think is the use of force by the police. Why was the pepper spray needed? It wasn't. It'd be like if someone was caught jaywalking and you tazered them because, well, it's illegal! | ||
|
SafeAsCheese
United States4924 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:18 micronesia wrote: The thing that confuses me is why the police sprayed the protesters. If the police have justification to spray them, they also have justification to arrest them, right? If so, arrest them. Have the spray on hand in case the protesters do something that justifies getting sprayed (like get threatening/violent). In the meantime, start arresting the students on by one for violating the law. The systematic spraying of students with harmful chemicals... when all the students are doing is sitting on the sidewalk, seems like blatant incompetence of the police to me. Yeah. They were arm locked, but for fuck sake, they are grown police officers, they can pry two college students apart and cuff them, but they are so lazy they have to pull out the chemicals =/ | ||
|
Ideas
United States8148 Posts
it's so disheartening to see how many people don't see what's wrong with pepper-spraying 10 people for a nonviolent protest. law enforcement has gotten so fucked up ever since things like pepper-spray and mace were massively distributed to cops. although I guess before that there were firehoses.. :\ | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On November 21 2011 13:58 nohbrows wrote: Do you really have to resort to pepper spraying someone when you are a phsyically fit Police Officer who can probably take on a full grown man any day. perhaps there is a Police officer (active or retired) on Teamliquid that can give some insight into this? What do you suggest they do? I mean, you ask them to not use violence... how else do you move someone who is sitting down and refusing arrest? You're outnumbered 5 to 1, yet YOU are the one expected to not use violence, while still doing your job of arresting the person who is violating the law (yes, that is a blatant violation of the law to sit there). At the same time, you know that if you so much as TOUCH a person who scream, it will be all over the internet in youtube videos and you will be required to go on administrative leave during an investigation where you MIGHT lose your job because of political reasons. And pepper spray is the wrong way to handle it? What do you protestors propose police officers do to move your dumb asses out of the rest of our way? Go protest somewhere that isn't completely disruptive to the rest of us, and you won't have these problems. Believe it or not, there is not outrage amongst the general population for these things. It's just your .5% of your supposed 99% who actually care. | ||
|
nohbrows
United States653 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:04 Superiorwolf wrote: People need to read about all the facts before they make posts defending the police. The students were trying to protect their tents, which the chancellor had ALLOWED them to have, waiving a section of the campus code to allow them to put up tents. The next day, a note was given around without any name that ordered the tents to be removed for "health and safety reasons." The students did begin to take down their tents when the riot force arrived. A few were being arrested, so the students formed a circle to block the police. The police were not 'ACTUALLY' blocked. Notice how the guy with the pepper spray, Lt. Pike, simply steps over the students to the other side. He sprayed them with military-grade pepper spray. The distance you are allowed to spray at is 15 feet. He sprayed at almost point blank range, 2 or even 3 times. Then police even grabbed people and lifted up their shirts in order to spray in their face, or opened their mouths to spray to their throats. The police were not provoked at all. There was no reason to use such force in this incident. Plus, the students weren't blocking ANYTHING. If someone was trying to get to class there was PLENTY of room to get around. Davis is also a huge campus as well . . . http://boingboing.net/2011/11/20/ucdeyetwitness.html "Move or we're going to shoot you," Pike is reported to have yelled at one student right before delivering pepper spray. Then, turning to his fellow officers and brandishing the can in the air, "Don't worry, I'm going to spray these kids down." That quote right there just angered me so so so much. You don't defend people like that. You do not try to justify people like that. I pray that quote is wrong because if that is the people who are on police forces today, it just makes me sick of humanity. | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On November 21 2011 14:21 SafeAsCheese wrote: Yeah. They were arm locked, but for fuck sake, they are grown police officers, they can pry two college students apart and cuff them, but they are so lazy they have to pull out the chemicals =/ and risk a police brutality suit? yeah right, lol..... | ||
|
KhAmun
United States1005 Posts
On November 21 2011 13:58 nohbrows wrote: Well, I mean, physically moving someone is a given. They aren't gonna be asked to get up and leave. But I mean, come on, couldn't they just have just handcuffed all of them at once (they were in a chain), make them stand up and leave. Do you really have to resort to pepper spraying someone when you are a phsyically fit Police Officer who can probably take on a full grown man any day. perhaps there is a Police officer (active or retired) on Teamliquid that can give some insight into this? Are you serious? If they would have tried to just cuff then it would have been worse. You think that the people are just going to get up and stop linking arms because they are asked to? You think that they weren't going to resist that too? It would have been worse if the police had gone straight for handcuffing without letting the protesters know they were willing to do more than talk. | ||
| ||
