Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by TBO, Oct 26, 2013.
Something good came from OCing.
But seriously, sounds like the UC system knew they were wrong. And paid up to make this case go away. (And $38,000 is peanuts).
So this subforum is appropriate for posting police civil rights violation questions while not violating the general forum, CopTalk and GTPI rules? Noted! Been wondering where to post that stuff.
This is a fascinating story. Looks like the university won the brute force battle, but lost the war of public opinion. This recent development just makes it seem even more ridiculous. Maybe the best course of action is just to let peaceful protesters... protest... or at least don't initiate violence against peaceful protesters (with the knowledge that it's a losing move in the battle for the public opinion).
On the surface, it does seem outrageous that this police officer could be successful in extracting money from his employer for the stress resulting from initiating violence against peaceful people. This is the kind of stuff that makes good raw material for jokes, or comedy skits. Taken to the extreme, it is just about as funny as if a German soldier who was in charge of gassing Jews sued the German high command over the stress of hearing the screams of people down in the gas chamber\shower.
On a deeper level, there is an upside to this from the Liberty / "don't tread on me" standpoint. The upshot is that the university that ordered or allowed this police officer to take that action suffered penalties (kind of, I'm reaching to see the bright side). The police officer, after all, was "just doing his job" / "just following orders", and there is an entire other entity to be held responsible (the employer). Monetary payouts like this are the kind of things that open eyes and get the 'policy and procedures' manual changed.
How peaceful are they if they surround you and refuse to let you leave?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Copatalk 4
I see where you're going here, & I think it is a turn on to silly street. They were peaceful enough to be caught on camera, all seated with heads down, getting blasted with a bear sized can of pepper spray. Because of this they won the war, even if the university won the battle.
I wear a uniform too. If I had to go on an aid call to somebody who had chest pain or a tummy ache inside the "protest zone", I know exactly how I would get in and out- and I believe it would work even if I was a cop or a faculty member.
Its just a bunch of college kids. Sure they have some civil disobedience tricks up their sleeve, and there's the occasional Agent Provocateur who is planted to make the overall movement look bad; but its ultimately ( at least in this case) just a buncha 19 year olds.
I've seen WTO and Occupy protests first hand, and in my opinion the media coverage made them seem more extreme than they really were.
Just so there's no misunderstanding, the General Forum Rules do still apply.
Since you say you've been up close to mass rallies and protests, then you know just how fluid situations change, and just as quickly your accesses and egresses can disappear. And have you personally been charged at by a wave of hundred or more people? Unforgettable isn't it?
What you're omitting here is MOB MENTALITY. Throw in hundreds of 19 y.o.s and a few professional agitators and you get MOB MENTALITY.
And you also failed to mention professional agitators. Not the agent provocateurs but a cadre of professional demonstrators who travel from protests to protests (Europe to U.S. and back and forth) to incite the crowd. Or are you going to tell me honestly that you've never heard of them until now!
I don't mind the Occupy protests so much as I mind their camps. Out of their encampments will inevitably come police reports of theft, sex abuse, rape, robberies and other force crimes. This is what happens when wide-eyed people (who are well intentioned and there for the "experience") and street smart predators mix and camp together in very close proximity.
Maybe you should ask U.S. Jews if they see their local LE in the same light as they see Nazi SS soldiers responsible for the camps.
And ask the U.S. Jews if they see their gentile neighbors in the same light as the "good Germans" of Nazi Germany.
Just ask them. Really!
This is your only statement that is grounded in reality. Kudos.
Getting charged by hundreds of people sounds like a riot, not a protest. I have never been charged during a riot, or even been in the middle of a riot. I have experienced a "protest" though.
In this video the cop that does the spraying actually steps over the line of protestors before spraying them...
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO4406KJQMc"]UC Davis Pepper Spray Incident, Four Perspectives - YouTube[/ame]
... so he was not being charged by the students, and could come and go as he pleased.
I don't have to ask, I already know. It was never my contention that Jews view American LEO's in the same light as the Nazi's. I did say..."Taken to the extreme..." before my Nazi metaphor. When discussing a police use of force incident on GT any comparison must always come back to the Nazi's. You know this right?
I do realize that many LEO's are good Americans. It's just that I have high expectations of LEO's, and am often disappointed by news like this. I'm 99.9% happy with the local LEO's I get to work with in my 1st in area; but reading nationwide news is often a bummer.
LEO's are in an interesting predicament. Many (most?) are freedom loving Americans who actually have respect for civil rights, etc. But when push comes to shove, as this country continues to circle the drain, they will be required to be the tip of the spear for a twisted and desperate status quo.
"If tyranny comes to America, it will come in uniform". It is an old saw, but very true. At some point LEO's will have a big choice to make. If and when the big choice comes, I hope most choose to side with the people they serve!
Count yourself lucky that the protests you were in did not turn into riots.
Perhaps it was your uniform presence that held them back?
If you already know it's an untruth, why perpetuate the lie?
When the neo-Nazis come to attack your Jewish (or some other ethnic or religious) neighbors, what will you do?
Jump in the fray to defend your neighbors?
Suddenly remember you have something important to finish in your basement?
Or call 9-1-1?
It's an old saw. And until it's proven true, you and your ilk will repeat it just like you'll wrap a well worn blanket around yourselves to make yourselves feel good.
Take care yourself.
I'm curious...how would that infallible ingress/egress plan work?
Well, Ollie did qualify his statement with "I believe it would work..."
I think anytime there's something silly like that, just erect a portable fence around them, with the security strips woven in, so nobody can see through the fence, and then just leave them be. They'll learn to be less disruptive when people stop giving them the attention they want and ignore them.
That's stupid. And also a violation of their 1A rights.
Wouldn't that be detaining them...
It's not perpetuating a lie. It is using an absurd example to demonstrate absurdity.
We don't have a neo-nazi problem in my neighborhood, but if they did show up wanting to make trouble, by God I would jump in to help my neighbors.
Its proven true in the present, and it has been true throughout history. Everyday people in uniform make decisions that decide what the atmosphere will be in their area of influence.
The UC Davis cop made a choice to spray college students with pepper spray. After he made his choice he realized there was blow back. "They" found vital information about him, and made some threats that hit close to home for him and his family. He created that. He created an atmosphere of tyranny for the students who were protesting, and he also set the stage for an atmosphere of tyranny for him and his family.
The ultimate lesson here is that police and their families have to live in the communities that they serve.
I'm not going to talk about my tactics on an open forum like this, for the same reason that Glock talk cops don't want to discuss their tactics on an open forum.
That said, no special tricks or tactics were needed in this instance. In the video I linked to, the cop that sprayed the students was able to step over the protest line without any difficulty. They were that docile.
You are a Professional Firefighter/EMT in Seattle working, as you said, the "south "culturally diverse" side."
First, what is SFD's policy about EMT/Paramedic firefighters entering known hostile environments?
Would you enter into a hostile crowd without police escort?
My son-in-law is a Professional Firefighter/Paramedic/Flight Paramedic. He's worked with large and small departments. He's a Certified Instructor here in the Commonwealth. He and I have talked about this. He's worked on college campuses before. Rule has always been, if the situation is known to be, or is known to be potentially dangerous, let local law enforcement clear the area first. If they are on scene already, request an escort in and out.
Is Seattle different?
You compare the secrecy about your ingress/egress tactic to GT members secrecy about their tactics.
What specific ingress/egress tactic used by law enforcement have LE members here refused to discuss?
Please be specific. I'll do what I can behind the scenes to get them to open up.
You know, I saw a show on TV a few nights ago where a cop shot a drug dealer in an apartment in the projects. He called his partner who called the medics. Now, the guy shot, he was DRT, and the mob outside the apartment wanted somebody to pay for shooting the dirt bag.
So, to fool the crowd, they hooked an IV up to the DB, put the gurney in a seated position, pulled the guy's eyelids open making him look alive, and hauled *** out of the apartment saying they had to get him to the hospital.
Was that something like you had in mind?
I don't work on the south side anymore. I have since promoted and currently I am the useless guy who holds the clipboard on aid calls, in a different area.
As you know, there is always some difference between the SOP's and the way things shake out in the real world. Having said that, our policy is to not send firefighters in until police have "made the scene secure"... Whatever that means on any given day.
A police escort is awesome, but in my experience it doesn't happen all the time, at least in my city. It does tend to happen when it is really needed though. The problem with coordinating with police, or even getting information from them, is that they freelance by default at large incidents. So, the information you get from any specific cop on scene can be dramatically incomplete.
I'm not trying to cop bash here, but the way the police operate in my area is to simply throw individual resources at a problem until the problem is under control. There is no incident command structure until a very high ranking officer arrives on scene, and even then it takes them quite a while to coordinate the resources they have available. To me as a fire officer, this looks like freelancing, but I'm open minded enough to consider that it might actually be better described as "networked solutions".
The bottom line is, usually we will stop our fire apparatus a couple blocks away from something like an assault with weapons incident, until the police can clear the scene and make it safe. But, because police operate using "networked solutions", the individual officer that calls into fire dispatch to declare the scene safe may very well be operating on incomplete information. I have been on two runs so far in which the scene was declared safe by radio, but once we arrived we were met by a frantic police officer who was waving us off because there was danger of gunfire. The only solution I can come up with that applies in all instances, is to keep your head on a swivel and be aware of what is going on at all times.
A while back, I think it was SouthSwede I was in a debate with about disarming concealed carry permit holders. I was busting his chops about disarming people who had just voluntarily declared that they were carrying a weapon, and asked him to disclose his specific tactics. He refused. I think I know why...it's not really because he didn't want to talk about the specific tactic. It's more that he didn't want to have to defend against an onslaught of nitpicking from the Glock talk peanut gallery.
I don't want to get bogged down into a discussion of what exactly I was referring to. The main reason I don't want to bring it up specifically, is because I don't want to have to defend it. Also, let's be honest, I essentially am operating in hostile territory here on Glock talk. Patchman doesn't like me because I used an irreverent tone when discussing a police incident. The fact that you don't like the cut of my jib is no secret. Given these facts, I'm just not ready to let it all hang out on this particular thread.
I love the story you described, using a patient and playing up the drama. There are a couple variations of that strategy that can be useful at times, for sure.
I hope your son in law enjoys a long healthy career.