Ursa Majoris Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 So your solution is just let them sit and no problem with letting people disobey law enforcement? It was pepper spray!!! Not a baton to the head not incarceration without charge - man you really like to just throw things out there to try and put words into peoples mouths. These people were asked to leave - what is your solution - maybe send them a nice sweet little letter?? Wasn't trying to "put words in your mouth", was just interested in where you would draw a line. Pointless, really, so I'll go and converse with a grown up, the guy quoted below, who I oppose but at least can have a coherent discussion with. And here is my answer. It's not blind support of authority. It's respect for that authority and the rules of law. IMO, It was anything but an automatic pepper spray. My point was simply this. Assemble, peacfully and get your point across. No one is supressing them. They can file for permits and peacfully assemble leagally, but they aren't. Free speech is protected in this country, and I believe they have the right to do so. It took two months for the OWS'ers to get removed from zucotti. That wasn't restraint in the handling of the protesters? You make it sound like the first day they were there they were getting beaten. They got their point across. Now organize and use the proper channels to do what you need to. What good comes from this, enciting violence from the police to get your point across? I saw some other video of the pepper spray incident, there were warnings that it was coming. They stood there and shook the cans for a while. Enough for everyone one in the sitout to cover thier faces and eyes. Wrap themselves up in scarves. It looked as if they were told, get up or we're going to spray you. Repeatedly. If spraying is so bad they had time to get up and leave! Reassemble the next day, and when they come back, do what they ask! Move to a different location! Do it again, and again. You can get the attention that you are seeking, and not get sprayed, or put the police in a position that makes them forcibly remove people from a park at which they were not supposed to be. IMo, the police didn't want to do this, but they were sent to do the job of upholding the laws and rules in place. I think if you resist the police, in a confrontational manner, you should expect to have them return in kind. I think we should defend those who defend us, police and rescue personel much like we do soldiers (or at least some of us, not aimed at you Ursa) . You want to say that sitting there is not confrontational, and undeserving of pepper spray, that is your right. I see people who are specifically ignoring the rules and laws of our country, ignoring those that enforce it, causing the police to elevate their tactics to do their jobs. By your argument, Where should the protesters stop? Is it ok, to flip a news van, since we need to go up against the man? Should they bring clubs to ward off the evil supressors? Maybe guns knives and molotov cocktails?? Perhaps a civil war over the fact that they don't want to pay student loans back? Where does the protesters responsibility for their actions begin? To equate this to the civil rights movement is disrespectful of what that was. I hope that sheds some light on my positon. Well, yes it does. I take issue with your second to last sentence. Although this protest is nowhere near as focused as the Civil Rights movement, nor does it have the overtly obvious injustices that were prevalent back then, it does have at it's root the question of democracy / republic versus oligarchy and monied special interest. I find that cause to be extraordinarily important for the long term well being of the United States. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 So, none then? Or you don't honestly know the answer? Given your constant display of ignorance I'll guess that you simply don't know the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Bingo. I also think the media is taking the public for a ride with the "coverage" of these events. Much like the tea party, the movement is being misrepresented by the press and cast in a light that does not reflect the general character of participants. "Nothing to see here, just some fringe whackos..." At its core, OWS - much like the Tea Party - is in imperfect messenger for a legitimate message. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boilerduff Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Although this protest is nowhere near as focused as the Civil Rights movement, nor does it have the overtly obvious injustices that were prevalent back then, it does have at it's root the question of democracy / republic versus oligarchy and monied special interest. I find that cause to be extraordinarily important for the long term well being of the United States. I don't think anyone here likes our politicians, and the way they treat us. We can vote them out, which I intend to do this year. We absolutly need to change the rules in congress for term limits and special interest moneys, for both sides. On that we agree. We can do that without crapping on cop cars, or starting riots. Maybe we need a third party or more things like Americans elect. I think fighting the injustices, I mean basic rights that were fought for back in those days, is severely different than protesting the need to pay back student loans, income inequality, and the current meandering needs of OWS. I think we should work for everyone to have a similar starting line, where you finsh, man, that is up to you... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Wasn't trying to "put words in your mouth", was just interested in where you would draw a line. Pointless, really, so I'll go and converse with a grown up, the guy quoted below, who I oppose but at least can have a coherent discussion with. Well, yes it does. I take issue with your second to last sentence. Although this protest is nowhere near as focused as the Civil Rights movement, nor does it have the overtly obvious injustices that were prevalent back then, it does have at it's root the question of democracy / republic versus oligarchy and monied special interest. I find that cause to be extraordinarily important for the long term well being of the United States. So I don't see what your solution would have been? Seriously - what should the police have done? Like it was said - the police warned them - they gave them time to leave - what should have been the next step? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 So, none then? Or you don't honestly know the answer? Given your constant display of ignorance I'll guess that you simply don't know the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 (edited) So I don't see what your solution would have been? Seriously - what should the police have done? Like it was said - the police warned them - they gave them time to leave - what should have been the next step? I'm a big fan of people that are breaking the law going through some sort of legal process and being punished if they are found to be guilty. I'm not a big fan of justice being handed out on the spot by police officers as they see fit. So you feel that pepper spray is ok to use but a baton or stun gun is not. Well the next guy may feel that pepper spray and a baton are ok to use but not the stun gun. The next guy may feel that all 3 are ok, and the next guy after that may also be willing to call in the dogs. I'd rather just arrest the person. If they resist arrest then use the means necessary. Edited November 22, 2011 by SayItAintSoJoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otis29 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 So I don't see what your solution would have been? Seriously - what should the police have done? Like it was said - the police warned them - they gave them time to leave - what should have been the next step? There's an interesting analysis of the use of pepper spray here (sorry if it was linked and I missed it): http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/11/22/uc-dav...e-pepper-spray/ I tend to agree with this statement: But what type of situation would spark an escalation in the amount of force needed? “Pepper spray should only be used when there’s a clear threat to officers or severe-enough resistance — essentially, when the only alternative is more extreme force,” says Dr. John MacDonald, professor of criminology at the University of Pennsylvania. “But if the only threat is time, then the best weapon to exercise is patience.” Those police officers were under no threat of physical harm whatsoever, and my personal opinion is that should be the criteria applied to use this kind of force. The officer doing the spraying looked no more concerned over the process than if he was watering the rose bushes in his backyard. The end result is the decision to use pepper spray on this group just made the situation worse for everyone. Can we at least agree on that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 There's an interesting analysis of the use of pepper spray here (sorry if it was linked and I missed it): http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/11/22/uc-dav...e-pepper-spray/ I tend to agree with this statement: Those police officers were under no threat of physical harm whatsoever, and my personal opinion is that should be the criteria applied to use this kind of force. The officer doing the spraying looked no more concerned over the process than if he was watering the rose bushes in his backyard. The end result is the decision to use pepper spray on this group just made the situation worse for everyone. Can we at least agree on that? Rose bushes are cleaner and better looking than the protestors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 You wouldn't be so pro pepper spray if you realized just how much damage it did in terms of the general public's opinion is that it was simply uncalled for, and a terrible PR blunder. Just like you guys want to pick out those chitting on cop cars as a general example of a typical OWS protester, that sword is double edged and Mr Pepper Spray Cop is going to cut deeply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 There's an interesting analysis of the use of pepper spray here (sorry if it was linked and I missed it): http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/11/22/uc-dav...e-pepper-spray/ I tend to agree with this statement: Those police officers were under no threat of physical harm whatsoever, and my personal opinion is that should be the criteria applied to use this kind of force. The officer doing the spraying looked no more concerned over the process than if he was watering the rose bushes in his backyard. The end result is the decision to use pepper spray on this group just made the situation worse for everyone. Can we at least agree on that? Patience? So the officers tell these people to leave and they not just say no they lock arms and sit down - so let's just let these people sit here for days/weeks/months?? I think these people absolutely knew that pepper spray was the consequence if they did not disperse and they defiantly CHOSE not to disperse. Like someone else said and I agree that if one cop uses pepper spray but the next cop uses pepper spray and a baton it could keep getting worse depending on the cop - in this case it did not and if it did I would change my opinion - my opinion is that I don't think it was wrong to use pepper spray on this specific occasion. Also - like I mentioned before - was the pepper spray diluted? I heard that but can't confirm?? The people sure did not look to be in pain after they were sprayed??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otis29 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Rose bushes are cleaner and better looking than the protestors. My bad - I didn't realize you were looking for a wall to bounce jokes off of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 You wouldn't be so pro pepper spray if you realized just how much damage it did in terms of the general public's opinion is that it was simply uncalled for, and a terrible PR blunder. Just like you guys want to pick out those chitting on cop cars as a general example of a typical OWS protester, that sword is double edged and Mr Pepper Spray Cop is going to cut deeply. You could be correct but I am just speaking from my own opinion - and I can say that if they pepper spray some aholes from some tea party rally for the same thing I would also be on the side of law enforcement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 My bad - I didn't realize you were looking for a wall to bounce jokes off of. Just trying to lighten it up. even the dirt is cleaner than most of those protestors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 You wouldn't be so pro pepper spray if you realized just how much damage it did in terms of the general public's opinion is that it was simply uncalled for, and a terrible PR blunder. Just like you guys want to pick out those chitting on cop cars as a general example of a typical OWS protester, that sword is double edged and Mr Pepper Spray Cop is going to cut deeply. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 chitting on cop cars against the law. Mr Pepper Spray Cop the result of not following the law. pretty simple ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Do you think that every answer makes you look more or less intelligent? I'll gve you a hint. It's not more. I still don't expect you to be able to figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 You wouldn't be so pro pepper spray if you realized just how much damage it did in terms of the general public's opinion is that it was simply uncalled for, and a terrible PR blunder. Just like you guys want to pick out those chitting on cop cars as a general example of a typical OWS protester, that sword is double edged and Mr Pepper Spray Cop is going to cut deeply. I guess I don't really care about the general public's opinion? Why should the publics opinion matter to MY opinion on the use of pepper spray. These people were told to disperse and warned they would be sprayed - I don't think it was wrong to spray them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 I still don't expect you to be able to figure it out. Yes, your perspective on things overwhelms the feeble minded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boilerduff Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 I'm a big fan of people that are breaking the law going through some sort of legal process and being punished if they are found to be guilty. I'm not a big fan of justice being handed out on the spot by police officers as they see fit. So you feel that pepper spray is ok to use but a baton or stun gun is not. Well the next guy may feel that pepper spray and a baton are ok to use but not the stun gun. The next guy may feel that all 3 are ok, and the next guy after that may also be willing to call in the dogs. I'd rather just arrest the person. If they resist arrest then use the means necessary. I agree with you here, but I don't think they were punishing, just trying to arrest. I saw one video of a cop walking up to the line, trying to pick up someone, assuming to arrest them, they pulled back and stayed seated. Somehow, that nugget isn;t on the news. Pepper spray away IMO. We need to back the police, where approriate, and we need to rein them in where nessisary. This time I thnk they did what the situation called for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otis29 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 I guess I don't really care about the general public's opinion? Why should the publics opinion matter to MY opinion on the use of pepper spray. These people were told to disperse and warned they would be sprayed - I don't think it was wrong to spray them. These people were told to disperse and warned they would be beaten - I don't think it was wrong to beat them. These people were told to disperse and warned they would be tasered - I don't think it was wrong to taser them. These people were told to disperse and warned they would be shot - I don't think it was wrong to shoot them. Now, these items are not comparable on a level of force scale obviously - but I'm curious if you feel that ignoring a warning from the police is sufficient cause to use increasing levels of force against peaceful protestors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 These people were told to disperse and warned they would be beaten - I don't think it was wrong to beat them.These people were told to disperse and warned they would be tasered - I don't think it was wrong to taser them. These people were told to disperse and warned they would be shot - I don't think it was wrong to shoot them. Now, these items are not comparable on a level of force scale obviously - but I'm curious if you feel that ignoring a warning from the police is sufficient cause to use increasing levels of force against peaceful protestors? Go back and read!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otis29 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 I agree with you here, but I don't think they were punishing, just trying to arrest. I saw one video of a cop walking up to the line, trying to pick up someone, assuming to arrest them, they pulled back and stayed seated. Somehow, that nugget isn;t on the news. Pepper spray away IMO. We need to back the police, where approriate, and we need to rein them in where nessisary. This time I thnk they did what the situation called for. One of my best friends is a CHP officer who has been called out to Oakland a few times to assist in the downtown protests, so I tend to agree with the idea that these guys should be allowed to protect themselves when necessary. However, the UC Davis protestors didn't appear to be a physical threat to the officers, so I don't agree with the use of force administered here. Heck, it's winter. Wait 'em out, earn your overtime or doubletime and let the weather sort 'em out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otis29 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 Go back and read!!! My bad, I have skimmed over the thread since it's so damn long, but it's probably a fair complaint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted November 22, 2011 Share Posted November 22, 2011 My bad, I have skimmed over the thread since it's so damn long, but it's probably a fair complaint. No problem. Can tell you won't change your opinion (and I don't blame you) and I won't change mine. People need to be accountable and accept the consequences - especially if they know what the consequence is going to be and still make the choice they made. - again - just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.