On November 21 2011 14:45 gayfius173 wrote: Funny all the kids crying in this thread about 'police brutality'. Obviously you kids have never heard about tienaman square in china when they protested, the chinese government just brought out tanks and rolled them the fuck over. Which, with how fucking stupid some of these protestors are, might not be a bad idea for our government to do that either.
When that happens you can cry about brutality.
Any brutality is bad brutality. We cried out about Tianamen. We are crying out about here. See, its the principle of the matter. Whatever happend to free speech? Whatever happened to peaceful assembly? This is America, the land of democracy! It's downright hypocritical how we can criticize Egypt, Syria, Burma, China and all those other "non-democratic nations" for excercing these rights and then we turn around and do the same to our own citizens, just because of some redtape or regulation requiring that we have permits to exercise a constitutional right. I;m pretty sure that the Egyptians, Syrians, and Burmans had no right to protest. In fact what they were doing was downright illegal in those countries. So why employ the legal argument against our own citizens and not to them? it is mind boggling. In addition, relatively, yeah, this isn't as bad. Relatively. But that doesn't make it any less wrong. You can employ this kind of argument against anything. It still would never make sense. Not in a context like this. And why would you even suggest that our government do the same.
Sigh, I don't understand how people can say they got what they deserved. They are peacefully protesting through civil disobedience and it is the only way to get your voice out without violence. Would people rather the protesters just start rioting? Because after peaceful civil disobedience that's all that is left.
Whatever, I'm all for rioting. IMO, it's the only way that real change will ever happen. I've thought from the beginning that this whole movement would end that way. The way the Police/Government keep instigating it. It's going to happen. It reminds me of the London riots a few months ago. There was an interview with one of the rioters and it pretty much summed up my belief. Basically what he said was. "When we were doing this peacefully nobody listened and the media never showed up. Now that we are burning **** down you all run down here to see what's wrong and call us thugs." Biggest QFT ever.
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.
#2 is just wrong. I go to UC Davis and you don't need to walk through the quad to go to class. Saying that they were blocking students from going to class is not true.
I just want to reiterate, that the quad is its own block on school and there are no classes on it. And it was 4 pm on a Friday, 2% of students may have been in class at that time.
Right, if you so much as touch someone they'll scream. So you better use pepper spray, that's definitely a lot more mild! In fact, maybe we should shoot people who are sitting there! That's the best way to move them!
Is a protest actually THAT disruptive to your way of life, btw? I'm just wondering . . . lol
1. Have you ever attempted to take someone into custody who is resisting? Just curious, since you seem to know soooo much about this... It's not as easy to do it without injuring someone as you might think.
2. Yes, it's disruptive to my life. And you're not convincing people to join you by crying about police brutality. This isn't some dictatorship where the police are some rogue oppressors. In the US, they are just normal people doing their job and everyone else knows that. You guys aren't even protesting anything related to the police. Crying wolf just looks stupid to the rest of us.
How exactly was this disruptive? No-one seems to be able to explain why the police were needed in the first place. Protest are a continuous presence on University campus. The only problem seems to be that students might have had to deal with the inconvenience of taking a different route to class. Is that worth pepper-spray?
Yes, the police are normal people doing their job, but they are supposed to be trained to deal with these situations in a reasonable manner. This is not reasonable. The goals of the protest has nothing to do with the way the police responded.
I'm comfortable with protesters who listen to police. I have no sympathy for those who ignore them. None at all.
And yes, it's disruptive when you guys block off our banks or other buildings in the name of "the 99%".
Trust me I am a long way from your banks...
Besides this wasn't at a bank. Please explain to me why this needed to be dealt with by the police? I just don't understand why the chancellor would take the risk. Seems stupid to me. Even if the police removed them peacefully, they gain attention. Just ignore them. Calling the cops only makes sense if they are causing a major disruption which does not seem to be the case.
First off, you asked me when the protests disrupted me personally, iirc. Second, I don't disagree that questioning the need to remove them is healthy. However, that does not give the protestors the right to resist arrest and then cry about it when they are dealt with. They are worse than floppers, and it's annoying to have to listen to your tears.
So this particular protest does not in fact disrupt you. Could it be that this was in fact a well run, peaceful and minimally disruptive protest?
I agree that if the protesters were actively resisting arrest then they would need to be dealt with harshly. I don't agree that this is the case. As micronesia pointed out, there were options available to the police and simply washing the protesters in pepper spray was not necessary.
On November 21 2011 14:45 gayfius173 wrote: Funny all the kids crying in this thread about 'police brutality'. Obviously you kids have never heard about tienaman square in china when they protested, the chinese government just brought out tanks and rolled them the fuck over. Which, with how fucking stupid some of these protestors are, might not be a bad idea for our government to do that either.
Any brutality is bad brutality. We cried out about Tianamen. We are crying out about here. See, its the principle of the matter. Whatever happend to free speech? Whatever happened to peaceful assembly? This is America, the land of democracy! It's downright hypocritical how we can criticize Egypt, Syria, Burma, China and all those other "non-democratic nations" for excercing these rights and then we turn around and do the same to our own citizens, just because of some redtape or regulation requiring that we have permits to exercise a constitutional right. I;m pretty sure that the Egyptians, Syrians, and Burmans had no right to protest. In fact what they were doing was downright illegal in those countries. So why employ the legal argument against our own citizens and not to them? it is mind boggling. In addition, relatively, yeah, this isn't as bad. Relatively. But that doesn't make it any less wrong. You can employ this kind of argument against anything. It still would never make sense. Not in a context like this. And why would you even suggest that our government do the same.
The same people crying about people's right to protest are the same people crying in other threads about how people shouldn't be able to say anything verbally offensive to someone else. That's as hypocritical as it gets.
Well, so the students broke the law, if only a misdemeanor, but the police are justified in removing the students, although what they did look a little forceful.
That said, though, it was perhaps imprudent of the Chancellor to remove (mostly?) peaceful(?) students. This can only lead to an escalation of protests.
On November 21 2011 14:57 Chargelot wrote: The lack of moderation in this thread is almost disturbing. Random "fuck you"'s and picture-only posts are usually not very well tolerated here.
When outrage is justified, moderation is censorship.
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.
I'm sorry, but when did pepperspray, riot shields, and batons become acceptable methods of removing people who are peacefully sitting down. Pepper spray was meant as a detterent for someone being violent or threathening to you. Riot shields are for protection against blunt force and projectiles. And batons are bashing people on the head. Where is the moral justifications of using any of these on people sitting down. Police brutality is getting out of hand.
At least this isn't like the 60s where National Guardsmen fired upon students with lethal force (Kent State Massacare). That doesn't make this any better though.
How else would you go about moving dozens of people who arn't willing to cooperate or listen to your demands? Peper spray them till they move or physically start dragging people away. Just because it's done peacefully doesn't mean force can't be used against them.
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.
I'm sorry, but when did pepperspray, riot shields, and batons become acceptable methods of removing people who are peacefully sitting down. Pepper spray was meant as a detterent for someone being violent or threathening to you. Riot shields are for protection against blunt force and projectiles. And batons are bashing people on the head. Where is the moral justifications of using any of these on people sitting down. Police brutality is getting out of hand.
At least this isn't like the 60s where National Guardsmen fired upon students with lethal force (Kent State Massacare). That doesn't make this any better though.
How else would you go about moving dozens of people who arn't willing to cooperate or listen to your demands? Peper spray them till they move or physically start dragging people away. Just because it's done peacefully doesn't mean force can't be used against them.
Physically drag one person away at a time. It's far superior to spraying the whole group.
The guys aren't suspended they're on "paid administrative leave" Its the same as a paid vacation and it's a knee jerk reaction for any and all incidents that happen. If someone has to fire their gun in the line of duty they get put on pal. Frankly its a union job and that guy has had so much seniority built up no one can touch him. People flame the police departments too much and the departments have hardened up to these things.
Cali cops will close ranks to protect their own. After the introduction of drugs and gangs into the major metropolitan areas the police fought and died to regain the streets. That guy might have even been apart of those times and lost friends to the violence people yelling for him to step down means nothing to him, He probably can't even feel it anymore.
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.
I'm sorry, but when did pepperspray, riot shields, and batons become acceptable methods of removing people who are peacefully sitting down. Pepper spray was meant as a detterent for someone being violent or threathening to you. Riot shields are for protection against blunt force and projectiles. And batons are bashing people on the head. Where is the moral justifications of using any of these on people sitting down. Police brutality is getting out of hand.
At least this isn't like the 60s where National Guardsmen fired upon students with lethal force (Kent State Massacare). That doesn't make this any better though.
How else would you go about moving dozens of people who arn't willing to cooperate or listen to your demands? Peper spray them till they move or physically start dragging people away. Just because it's done peacefully doesn't mean force can't be used against them.
Physically drag one person away at a time. It's far superior to spraying the whole group.
I totally agree with you but they couldn't drag people away or do what you said. An angry mob surrounded them and I doubt that they would just stand there while their friends where dragged away. Point blank pepper spraying people sitting down is a brain-dead move that I don't even understand the logic of. By trying to drag off a member of the chain you could make the case of them resisting arrest and then pepper spray them. but just blatantly going though the line just isn't something they should have done.
Right, if you so much as touch someone they'll scream. So you better use pepper spray, that's definitely a lot more mild! In fact, maybe we should shoot people who are sitting there! That's the best way to move them!
Is a protest actually THAT disruptive to your way of life, btw? I'm just wondering . . . lol
1. Have you ever attempted to take someone into custody who is resisting? Just curious, since you seem to know soooo much about this... It's not as easy to do it without injuring someone as you might think.
2. Yes, it's disruptive to my life. And you're not convincing people to join you by crying about police brutality. This isn't some dictatorship where the police are some rogue oppressors. In the US, they are just normal people doing their job and everyone else knows that. You guys aren't even protesting anything related to the police. Crying wolf just looks stupid to the rest of us.
How exactly was this disruptive? No-one seems to be able to explain why the police were needed in the first place. Protest are a continuous presence on University campus. The only problem seems to be that students might have had to deal with the inconvenience of taking a different route to class. Is that worth pepper-spray?
Yes, the police are normal people doing their job, but they are supposed to be trained to deal with these situations in a reasonable manner. This is not reasonable. The goals of the protest has nothing to do with the way the police responded.
I'm comfortable with protesters who listen to police. I have no sympathy for those who ignore them. None at all.
And yes, it's disruptive when you guys block off our banks or other buildings in the name of "the 99%".
I hate to beat a dead horse but you seriously need to READ THE ARTICLES before posting. And you should also probably read the constitution. What if the police tried to arrest you for something that's not a crime? I'm sure you'd bend over and take it, right?
Yes, you bend over and take it. Then you let the judge decide if you were arrested lawfully or not. If you were, then the cop did his job, if you werent, you would be compensated and the cop will by reprimanded. Everyone wins in the end. Better to get arrested for something thats not a crime and get everything cleared out later instead of being arrested thats not a crime and making it worse for yourself for resisting and keep piling on more charges.
On November 21 2011 14:45 Meta wrote: I hate to beat a dead horse but you seriously need to READ THE ARTICLES before posting. And you should also probably read the constitution. What if the police tried to arrest you for something that's not a crime? I'm sure you'd bend over and take it, right?
Ummmm..... first off, they violated a law as noted in the OP. Second, police have the authority to arrest you and move you. I understand the constitution can be confusing at times, but no need to disseminate misinformation.
I understand Wikipedia is an open source, but I assure you that their general statement on this matter is 100% correct:
"The privilege of habeas corpus is not a right against unlawful arrest, but rather a right to be released from imprisonment after such arrest. If one believes the arrest is without legal merit and subsequently refuses to come willingly, he still may be guilty of resisting arrest, which can sometimes be a crime in and of itself (even if the initial arrest itself was illegal) depending on the state."
On November 21 2011 14:45 gayfius173 wrote: Funny all the kids crying in this thread about 'police brutality'. Obviously you kids have never heard about tienaman square in china when they protested, the chinese government just brought out tanks and rolled them the fuck over. Which, with how fucking stupid some of these protestors are, might not be a bad idea for our government to do that either.
When that happens you can cry about brutality.
That is a very nice strawman you have produced for us. Please explain, what exactly this has to do with with UC? In your opinion should the protesters be thankful they were met with pepper spray and not tanks? China and its government have sweet fuck all to do with protests at a US university.
By your own logic, you're listed as Austrailia so what does your opinion have to do with the US either why bother posting here?
But, I'll elaborate for you since you have such a hard time understanding, its quite simple. The word 'brutality' is being thrown around and overused to such a ridiculous level. A bit of pepperspray? Lol who gives a fuck. Doesn't even cause serious harm, ive been pepper sprayed before. Kids in this thread don't even know what brutality is. When cops start busting peoples faces in, or shooting them, then you can scream brutality. Till then, shut the fuck up about a bit of pepper spray.
A bit of peppers pray? You should try some. The apathetic argument is as pointless as those made about water boarding. Try it before you call it insignificant.
On November 21 2011 14:45 gayfius173 wrote: Funny all the kids crying in this thread about 'police brutality'. Obviously you kids have never heard about tienaman square in china when they protested, the chinese government just brought out tanks and rolled them the fuck over. Which, with how fucking stupid some of these protestors are, might not be a bad idea for our government to do that either.
When that happens you can cry about brutality.
That is a very nice strawman you have produced for us. Please explain, what exactly this has to do with with UC? In your opinion should the protesters be thankful they were met with pepper spray and not tanks? China and its government have sweet fuck all to do with protests at a US university.
By your own logic, you're listed as Austrailia so what does your opinion have to do with the US either why bother posting here?
But, I'll elaborate for you since you have such a hard time understanding, its quite simple. The word 'brutality' is being thrown around and overused to such a ridiculous level. A bit of pepperspray? Lol who gives a fuck. Doesn't even cause serious harm, ive been pepper sprayed before. Kids in this thread don't even know what brutality is. When cops start busting peoples faces in, or shooting them, then you can scream brutality. Till then, shut the fuck up about a bit of pepper spray.
A bit of peppers pray? You should try some. The apathetic argument is as pointless as those made about water boarding. Try it before you call it insignificant.
To add, not commercial pepper spray either. iirc, that's military grade pepper spray. I think I saw it on a product catalog for Cold Steel knives once. The advert, iirc, said that the thing was illegal in a bunch of states cuz it was just too strong.
On November 21 2011 14:45 gayfius173 wrote: Funny all the kids crying in this thread about 'police brutality'. Obviously you kids have never heard about tienaman square in china when they protested, the chinese government just brought out tanks and rolled them the fuck over. Which, with how fucking stupid some of these protestors are, might not be a bad idea for our government to do that either.
When that happens you can cry about brutality.
That is a very nice strawman you have produced for us. Please explain, what exactly this has to do with with UC? In your opinion should the protesters be thankful they were met with pepper spray and not tanks? China and its government have sweet fuck all to do with protests at a US university.
By your own logic, you're listed as Austrailia so what does your opinion have to do with the US either why bother posting here?
But, I'll elaborate for you since you have such a hard time understanding, its quite simple. The word 'brutality' is being thrown around and overused to such a ridiculous level. A bit of pepperspray? Lol who gives a fuck. Doesn't even cause serious harm, ive been pepper sprayed before. Kids in this thread don't even know what brutality is. When cops start busting peoples faces in, or shooting them, then you can scream brutality. Till then, shut the fuck up about a bit of pepper spray.
So I am not allowed to be informed because I am in Australia? What the hell is that shit? I simply pointed out that your post about China has nothing to do with UC.
Police are supposed to serve and protect. What exactly were they protecting here? Just because pepperspray is not a tank does not mean that it should be used. Where do you draw the line between reasonable force and brutality if it is just a difference in degree? It is my understanding that police should refrain from hurting people unless it is absolutely necessary.
Finally why are you so aggressive? Swearing at me is not going to change my mind, in fact I am less inclined to listen to you.
My question to all the people who agree with this kind of treatment to protester is how fucken hard is it to simple pulling people off from the pack one by one and arresting them. Those people are not going anyway and god know the have enough officer there to gang up on the student one by one and separate them. Retarded action like this is nothing more than extreme aggression in hoping that it will deter future action from taking place. The stupidity in this is that the action taken here is no where extreme enough or was it justifiable to scare people. All this really does is pissed people off even more and painted a giant target on people take participate or allowed this brutality to take place.
They deserved it. They surrounded the police before getting pepper sprayed. The police was acting in self-defense. The students DID deserve it... This video gives the timeline to the events as they occurred. The students were the ones surrounding the police before the police were forced to remove them by pepper spraying them...
around 1:08 you see clearly the police force being surrounded by the students.
EPT
