Hypocrisy at it's finest. America is in a sad state, especially when it's own citizen's defend the unjust actions of the justice system against their neighbors.
As opposed to someone on the scene at the time, making a deliberate judgement that this person just resisted an attempted arrest, thus justifying the use of violence. This is different from someone looking for any after-the-fact excuse to justify abusive behavior. In other words, was "resisting arrest" actually a factor or was it just an excuse?Of course his opinion is rendererd after the fact. So would the opinion of any court case. After the fact is irrelevant.
How do you know? Maybe she was cute and he was hitting on her. "Ever done it in the back of a paddy wagon baby? Come with me and I'll show you how to really work a baton."If the police grabbed one of their arms to pull them away, it was not so they could start dancing...or catch a movie.
Since this was posted pages ago, yet is still being debated, here's a bump.http://www.nyc.gov/html/ccrb/pdf/pepperreport.pdf
The spray is designed for use as less-than-lethal force, adequate for incapacitating dangerous or violently resisting suspects.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 presentNYC, I know, but I doubt that the rules differ that greatly for Davis.......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.
I understood him to be talking about the rest of the requirements and explanations, beyond the five specific justifications:Only if you ignore the "resisting arrest" part...oh, and pretend there is an AND in there when there is NOT an and. Why do you keep doing that?
Bowfinger keeps saying that no one is saying what you are saying. I give him the benefit of not knowing you were saying it. So why do you keep saying AND?
At that exact moment in time. You do realize that time started before that clip was cut out and posted online, right?
The spray is designed for use as less-than-lethal force, adequate for incapacitating dangerous or violently resisting suspects.
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.
Since this was posted pages ago, yet is still being debated, here's a bump.
The whole pepper spray thing was blown way out of proportion. It wasn't smart to use from a PR perspective, but I have absolutely no problem with the police using it to force compliance with the law. Not just walk up and start spraying, but after people have been told they're violating the law, and that the must disperse or further actions will be taken, as far as I'm concerned pepper spray is fine.
The 15 minutes for this stuff appears to finally be over, no news coverage over the past few days of it at all here on the news.
As opposed to someone on the scene at the time, making a deliberate judgement that this person just resisted an attempted arrest, thus justifying the use of violence. This is different from someone looking for any after-the-fact excuse to justify abusive behavior. In other words, was "resisting arrest" actually a factor or was it just an excuse?
How do you know? Maybe she was cute and he was hitting on her. "Ever done it in the back of a paddy wagon baby? Come with me and I'll show you how to really work a baton."
In all seriousness, if the claim of one woman pulling away her arm is true -- and I've not seen proof it is -- you cannot assume the officer was trying to arrest her. That's the point I've tried to make before. There's no evidence the UC Davis police were trying to arrest anyone yet. They were (as far as I can tell) just trying to disperse them. Those are two very different things.
Don't forget CNN, NBC, ABC, and CBS as well. The only REAL news source is The Daily Show!
No way.. CNN, NBC, ABC, and CBS all at least STRIVE to be objective. They sensationalize, but they are not shilling..
With Fox and MSNBC, its the complete opposite. They STRIVE to infuse bias into every single topic. It really is as if they are contractually obligated to.
I don't think that's true at all. It's one thing for police to use tear gas to disperse a large unruly crowd, but that's not what happened, at all. With small groups, like the protesters sitting on the sidewalk, the correct method is to pick 'em up and arrest them, haul 'em away to jail. Really.
Anybody who thinks pepper spray isn't a form of violence has never experienced the stuff. It's important for police to not initiate violence in such situations when they clearly have non-violent alternatives, which they obviously did.
Agreed 100%. I caught pepper spray from about 40 feet downwind and it brought me to my knees.
Unless it is being used to subdue someone who poses a direct threat, then it should not be used. Using it because someone is told they are breaking a law is stupid. The police are there to apprehend someone, the court system decides if a punishment is needed. Again, barring a direct threat, using pepper spray is punishment.
OWS sucks.. its been a complete failure, especially since anybody who knows shit about the people who work on Wall St knows they are heartless scum. The absolute last people on this planet who would give two shits about another human being's misfortune.
People should be pissed off.. but OWS is a ragtag group of dummies.. nibbling at the edges of stale ideas. A hodgepodge of random ideas ranging from anarchist to marxist.
If only we could get massive amounts of people to protest the likes of FOX NEWS and MSNBC. These are the two biggest misinformation machines, contributing to the political divide in this country more than anything else.. but FOX is worse, since at least liberals will write off MSNBC for following in Fox's footsteps, while conservatives tend to embrace FOX and even defend the network against allegations of bias.
Failure? It's just getting started. Main street is staying home ATM because everyone thinks that they can manage to somehow "get theirs" while "someone else" will take the hit.
I'm sorry to tell y'all that it isn't going to work out like that.
Everyone is gonna be fucked. Seniors, federal retirees, state workers, regular workers, police officers laying the beat downs - everyone but the fraudsters and the politicians who look the other way.
As far as dummies Bill Black isnt a dummy. He put 1000 fraudsters in jail during S&L crisis and claims he can put 10,000 in jail today. He was there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_AuvLTJNh0&feature=player_embedded#!
This sign pretty much sums up what most perceive as "OWS' message"...
FTFYThis sign pretty much sums up what most Fox Nation-ers perceive is "OWS' message"...
FTFY too!Yes, it shows how effectively the corrupt elite use propaganda to manipulate weak minds.
The whole pepper spray thing was blown way out of proportion.
I have absolutely no problem with the police using it to force compliance with the law.
The 15 minutes for this stuff appears to finally be over, no news coverage over the past few days of it at all here on the news.
FTFY