Where to draw the line between police brutality and people just needing to shut up...

[Against Miik!]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfISlq1gzK8

What do you guys think of this video? While the cop went a bit far, I'm gonna have to take his side over the protester's. I mean, I woulda done the same thing.

[Linkinbassist]

are you retarded? that was way out of line by the cops.

[pppoe]

are you retarded? that was way out of line by the cops.

^^^

[t-rex]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfISlq1gzK8

What do you guys think of this video? While the cop went a bit far, I'm gonna have to take his side over the protester's. I mean, I woulda done the same thing.

i didnt even really see what the protester was doing wrong. the video didnt show much except the cop hitting her. so i guess i'm on the girls side

[Mr. Ron]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfISlq1gzK8

What do you guys think of this video? While the cop went a bit far, I'm gonna have to take his side over the protester's. I mean, I woulda done the same thing.

...hurt someone thats demonstrating some of their 1st amendment rights?

[Against Miik!]

Um I'm fine with the first amendment rights, obviously. But I do have a probably with people who are just asking to get taken away in handcuffs so they can scream "first amendment first amendment first amendment!!!!" at the top of their lungs.

Just because something isn't illegal doesn't necessarily mean its right. This woman was obviously disobeying what seemed like a pretty straightforward request, which was, stay away from this vehicle. Then she baited the cop by daring him to "****ing do it again". So he did.

[Already_Taken]

Just because something isn't illegal doesn't necessarily mean its right.

That is not what this country was founded on.

[Against Miik!]

That is not what this country was founded on.

Actually yes it is. We as free citizens are, in theory, granted the responsibility of choosing for ourselves what is right and wrong (more so than more authoritarian states) rather than having laws dictate every little part of our lives. Perhaps that is not the case anymore, but it certainly was the intent.

[Already_Taken]

ok but you can't arrest someone when they haven't broken any laws. if you did it would go against any government in the first place. it would render laws useless.

we're looking at it from separate points of view

[SkaRobotArmy]

ya but protests tend to be run by a different set of rules than regular life. it happens all the time... i can't watch the video though, youtube is blocked at work.

[Iscariot]

that cop was out of line no question about it

you'd have to be facist scum to side with someone like that

and something i don't understand is why when the cops pull a stunt like this the rest of the protesters don't start swinging

if a cop smacked one of my friends to the ground i'd fight him until i was maced and beaten to a pulp

[Smokey D]

Um I'm fine with the first amendment rights, obviously. But I do have a probably with people who are just asking to get taken away in handcuffs so they can scream "first amendment first amendment first amendment!!!!" at the top of their lungs.

Er, a person being annoying isn't a reason for a cop to hit them. Especially if they're in handcuffs.


Just because something isn't illegal doesn't necessarily mean its right. This woman was obviously disobeying what seemed like a pretty straightforward request, which was, stay away from this vehicle. Then she baited the cop by daring him to "****ing do it again". So he did.

Which is totally and unequivocally illegal and morally outrageous.

[Hababi]

More DNC thuggery:
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/27/video-cops-shove-choke-arrest-abc-reporter-taping-democratic-senators-meeting-with-top-donors/

[gregulus]

This always happens. When a group of people act in such a way that the authorities deem inappropriate, those who represent the authority respond the only way they seem to know how--with violence.

[stevensonmat2]

Someone should have started tossing pipe bombs into the cop crowd.

[ringworm]

i dont think any opinion can be made with such an incomplete video

who knows how many times he ordered her or how she treated him

[Already_Taken]

yeah dude that seemed staged almost. the cop is an idiot, but the chick was asking for it.

[Light Fantastic]

what she did is pretty irrelevant

theres a standard of conduct for people on the taxpayers payroll, they're (supposed to be) trained so they dont react to situations like this

but i'd love to hear the explanation of how she was 'asking for it' anyway

[Surtr]

She disobeyed a direct order from him. You can be arrested for not follow an officers orders. Maybe they can't give you jail time, or a fine, I'm not sure on that part, but you can be detained for up to 24-48 hours. Maybe he did overreact, well actually, **** yeah he did overreact, but she was disobeying his orders and technically could have been a potential threat.

[pppoe]

It doesn't look like she's close to the vehicle so I don't know how she was disobeying orders.

[Already_Taken]

why else would they have a camera out there? they're looking to make a big deal.

[Light Fantastic]

She disobeyed a direct order from him. You can be arrested for not follow an officers orders. Maybe they can't give you jail time, or a fine, I'm not sure on that part, but you can be detained for up to 24-48 hours. Maybe he did overreact, well actually, **** yeah he did overreact, but she was disobeying his orders and technically could have been a potential threat.
oh yeah i remember now officers of the law are allowed to dish out beatings when people disobey them

no wait

why else would they have a camera out there? they're looking to make a big deal.um

yeah its the people who had the camera's fault for recording the errant police officer

[Already_Taken]

dude obviously not, but it's okay to not feel sorry for the girl for being an idiot. do you know what code pink is? are you part of it?

[Light Fantastic]

i dont really care what it is its entirely irrelevant to her rights

[stevensonmat2]

I have to laugh at her and her friends though, if they let themselves get pwnd like that without retaliating then I say let them be put down.

[spitfirejunky]

i dont think any opinion can be made with such an incomplete video

who knows how many times he ordered her or how she treated him

The first attack was completely unprovoked.

[Mr. Ron]

Um I'm fine with the first amendment rights, obviously. But I do have a probably with people who are just asking to get taken away in handcuffs so they can scream "first amendment first amendment first amendment!!!!" at the top of their lungs.

Just because something isn't illegal doesn't necessarily mean its right. This woman was obviously disobeying what seemed like a pretty straightforward request, which was, stay away from this vehicle. Then she baited the cop by daring him to "****ing do it again". So he did.

Yeah but she wasn't doing anything wrong.


Oh and "baiting a cop" is a pretty childish excuse for a cop to body check a defenseless woman onto the ground. Was she being annoying? Probably. Was he justified in his violence? Nope.

[Akira]

More DNC thuggery:
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/27/video-cops-shove-choke-arrest-abc-reporter-taping-democratic-senators-meeting-with-top-donors/

Wait.

The Denver police are DNC thugs?

[Mr. Ron]

I wouldn't lose a wink of sleep if someone shot at those cops.

[Avalanche.]

lady:****ing do it again

Officer:BACK IT UP!
*WHAM*
Lady:OooOoo

You guys are nuts, that video was hilarious

[pppoe]

Police brutality is not funny.

[Avalanche.]

that was almost as funny as the "don't tase me, bro" video

bitch asked for it, she got it

[Smokey D]

She disobeyed a direct order from him. You can be arrested for not follow an officers orders. Maybe they can't give you jail time, or a fine, I'm not sure on that part, but you can be detained for up to 24-48 hours. Maybe he did overreact, well actually, **** yeah he did overreact, but she was disobeying his orders and technically could have been a potential threat.

Disobeying a policeman's orders is not grounds for the officer to use violence. Police can only use such force as is necessary to effect the arrest.

[pppoe]

why else would they have a camera out there? they're looking to make a big deal.

Are you stupid?

[Mr. Ron]

that was almost as funny as the "don't tase me, bro" video

bitch asked for it, she got it
no she didn't

[Iscariot]

that was almost as funny as the "don't tase me, bro" video

bitch asked for it, she got it

heil hitler

[Avalanche.]

no she didn't

"****ing do it again"

[Iscariot]

"Do it again"

who cares so she said "do it again"

how exactly does that justify abuse of power and attacking an unarmed civilian

oh right it doesn't because the police are supposed to be professional enough to ignore verbal attacks and carry out their duties

and by the way those duties don't involve attacking women in a crowd of protesters

[Avalanche.]

heil hitler

oh please

[Mr. Ron]

"****ing do it again"

That doesn't give the policeman the right to hurt her.

[Iscariot]

i call them like i see them

if you approve of police brutality then you are a fascist

if you don't like the label then don't fit the bill

[Avalanche.]

who cares so she said "do it again"

how exactly does that justify abuse of power and attacking an unarmed civilian

oh right it doesn't

its impossible to know the exact situation due to the length and pretenses of the video, im not going to make any real judgment on it

[Iscariot]

you already made a judgment on it when you said she deserved it

[Avalanche.]

dude its the web, im not taking it seriously and you shouldnt take anything I say seriously

i also liked how the codepink photographer was right there with cam in hand taking shots instead of helping her downed comrade

[Iscariot]

when you have the camera it's your job to film

there were how many other protester there? any one of them could have helped

[Avalanche.]

you're absolutely right, you win

i will go burn my posters of the fuhrer

[Iscariot]

good i'm glad i could change your life perspective

[Already_Taken]

Are you stupid?

even if i was, i'm still educated. do you know what codepink is and their objective? look it up, then stick up for that dumbass girl

[Mr. Ron]

Wait how does her agenda justify the police acting like idiots?

[Already_Taken]

okay it doesn't. i don't agree with what the cop did, he's an idiot. but i don't feel sorry for her, she's an idiot too.

[pppoe]

even if i was, i'm still educated. do you know what codepink is and their objective? look it up, then stick up for that dumbass girl

okay it doesn't. i don't agree with what the cop did, he's an idiot. but i don't feel sorry for her, she's an idiot too.

You are very stupid!

[ringworm]

The first attack was completely unprovoked.

i agree he was pretty violent, but without more footage, we cant really condem either

[Give me Beer]

Eh, riot police always do **** like that, and saying that they were 'in line' for doing it makes you fascist scum. I've seen enough cops over here beating protesters without provocation.

Although they aren't being as bad as these ****s:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TyKYze9V7LM

[PerpetualBurn]

She disobeyed a direct order from him. You can be arrested for not follow an officers orders. Maybe they can't give you jail time, or a fine, I'm not sure on that part, but you can be detained for up to 24-48 hours. Maybe he did overreact, well actually, **** yeah he did overreact, but she was disobeying his orders and technically could have been a potential threat.

Police offers are there to serve the public. Not to give out whatever orders they wish.

[RG560M]

She said to ****ing do it again.

So he did.

Big deal?

[Mr. Ron]

She said to ****ing do it again.

So he did.

Big deal?

So if a person yells at the police to shoot him they should?

[RG560M]

Well obviously they want it to happen. If it happens why complain? They literally asked for it.

[Light Fantastic]

what is sarcasm and other such functions of language in emotionally charged situations

[Mr. Ron]

Well obviously they want it to happen. If it happens why complain? They literally asked for it.

http://i38.tinypic.com/or4a5y.jpg

[Smokey D]

She said to ****ing do it again.

So he did.

Big deal?

It's illegal.

[RG560M]

So is underaged drinking.

But find me a group of 10 undergrad 20- college students and bet me half or more don't drink.

[Smokey D]

What does that have to do with anything.

[Zebra]

i also liked how the codepink photographer was right there with cam in hand taking shots instead of helping her downed comrade

haha i noticed that also.

i suppose she provoked the cop but he should have just ignored it.

[Aaron]

Bad acting, the framing was alright but I think it was rushed. Is it an independent film?

[BillyBonebrake]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfISlq1gzK8

What do you guys think of this video? While the cop went a bit far, I'm gonna have to take his side over the protester's. I mean, I woulda done the same thing.
nothing wrong with that imo. the girl fell on the ground from a little shove. big whoop she should not stand in the street confronting cops wearing riot gear they aren't there to please her

duh!

[Smokey D]

They're not there to illegally beat protesters either.

[BillyBonebrake]

yes but i didn't see anyone get beat. she got pushed. she is small so she fell. perhaps she won't be in ANYONES face (much less a cops) screaming her head off so readily next time. i mean that is incitement of some kind in that situation i am sure

its fine and everything...if thats what she wants to do. but she seemed to be instigating something and was probably warned to back off

i'm all for free speech and freedom of movement, protests, etc. but i'm also for law and order. Rodney King...that was a beating. last year at some May Day protests out here in Los Angeles....some people got beat

but in this case that little hippie on the video was not beat. she fell down

like in basketball when someone "flops" no harm, no foul...

[Iscariot]

it's hilarious how many of you think it's perfectly acceptable for a police officer to assault a civilian if she was "asking for it" but if the same thing had happened to you you'd likely be filing protests to the police department for months afterwards

of course this post will probably be followed by "ah no i'd deserve it man i'd totally accept the punishment" regardless of the fact that you're lying

[Give me Beer]

People who think it's perfectly acceptable for police officers to pull crap like that scare me. Same type of people who let the state do a lot more BS to secure 'law & order'.

[PerpetualBurn]

they aren't there to please her


Well they are there to protect and serve her.

[siva_chair]

Lol Code Pink.

[BillyBonebrake]

it's hilarious how many of you think it's perfectly acceptable for a police officer to assault a civilian if she was "asking for it" but if the same thing had happened to you you'd likely be filing protests to the police department for months afterwards

of course this post will probably be followed by "ah no i'd deserve it man i'd totally accept the punishment" regardless of the fact that you're lying
no...it was "reasonable force"

the police are allowed to use that in such situations. what else do they have? guns, tasers, billy clubs? he pushed her. the crowd was aggressive. not so aggressive afterward. the point is to maintain control so things don't get too far out of control.

it wasn't an "assault" or a "beating." police are outnumbered and have a job to do in that situation. so far as i know no reports of beatings from the convention came in. but sometimes police have to be aggressive.

what is a beating? you know it when you see it. imagine if something like is seen on that vid were considered "police brutality?" wtf would you expect them to do to control crowds? have tea with them?

the point is to know when police have gone too far and when they haven't. in this case they haven't. it was one cop and one citizen. she came up on a cop and she got pushed. if i were the cop i would have done the same

it really is no harm no foul. thats the job of the police and he felt threatened by her and her actions. he had every right to push her

look at the video. she takes two steps toward him and says something like " fuc.kin do it again." so he does. then all her aSSwipe friends start screaming "wtf is wrong with you!" etc...

its crowd control, they are trained to do it, and no one was beat. it pays to know the difference.

[siva_chair]

One time I saw a security guard crack a guy over the head with a Maglite at a concert it was awesome.

[RG560M]

I'll just go ahead and say I support police brutality, since getting shoved over is brutal.

It'll be the next big thing at screamo shows.

[siva_chair]

Lol people go to screamo shows?

[RG560M]

Yeah.

All the scene kids.

Right now they "throw down" and dance "hardcore" because it's "****in' brootal yo"

Next is to be seen in the video.

[siva_chair]

Oic.

Lol stupid kids.

[RG560M]

Ja, here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMS3Q-HuaAk

[pppoe]

Yeah.

All the scene kids.

Right now they "throw down" and dance "hardcore" because it's "****in' brootal yo"

Next is to be seen in the video.

That's not screamo but nice try anyway.

[siva_chair]

Who cares its all pretty lame tbh.

[pppoe]

I wouldn't have responded if I didn't care.

And no, it's not.

[siva_chair]

Lol.

[Avalanche.]

yeah being outnumbered by aggressive (nonviolent, apparently) protesters has to have some effect on your judgment - tensions are high and you're on the defensive so perhaps you're going to assess some situations differently and more assertively when you feel threatened

[pppoe]

People who cannot make the right decision in situations like that shouldn't be police officers.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

Cops aren't supposed to push or strike people who aren't posing any sort of danger. From what the video shows, she was standing there being an obnoxious b*tch, but that's her right.

[Reaganista]

we should kill cops who do stuff like this in hopes of making other cops less aggressive

good logic right

[PerpetualBurn]

At least let their victim kick them square in the balls a few times. Just to remind them who they work for.

[pppoe]

Can you make a citizens arrest on a police officer?

[Already_Taken]

we should kill cops who do stuff like this in hopes of making other cops less aggressive

good logic right

gahahaha

[BillyBonebrake]

Cops aren't supposed to push or strike people who aren't posing any sort of danger. From what the video shows, she was standing there being an obnoxious b*tch, but that's her right.
you see, this is where me and the liberals and whoever else part ways. its not an issue of her "rights." she has every right. but if she gets in the face of an authority in that situation while they are DEMANDING then to stand back as a vehicle is going through, she is going to get pushed

its not "too aggressive" is what i'm saying. in that situation. not at all.

you know if you give ground, you will get taken a mile. if the cop gives ground, other protesters rise up and do the same. not to protest, but to argue and fight with cops. who are there to control a potential mob or disperse. its not a matter of rights, its public safety. if the protesters want to riot about it, they should show the courage of conviction and do so. like they used to do when they had a cause. i never saw MLK jump up in the face of a cop. but some will. and they know the consequences

at least i would think thats how it works. as a citizen i want that cop to maintain that crowd. and i don't want hippies in the street to think the fight is going to be easy.

but i've seen cops hit fleeing and crawling people. people covering up, on the ground, defenseless. that is over the line. that is "brutality." this is not brutality. this is peer pressure on little punks. it says "we are in control." because someone has to be. now people say "well thats disorderly thats not control." but it is control. its just disorderly because it doesn't favor you and your cause. but sometimes i think half the protesters cause is just fighting the cops. its meh

and what of the causes? animal rights groups? goddamn anti science freaks. fanatics, radical environmentalist. religious nuts. hey we know the issues, fuc.k nuts. we're doing all we can. leave our cops alone they have crime to fight. and stay out of MY street you lazy hippies :angry:

no but srsly this ain't the 60's, dude. and if i were a cop all i'm sayin' is i'd bop you one if you got in my face. not because of me, but because thats most likely what i was trained to do. personally and under authority, i would be defending myself. i am also entitled to that. i have a gun on my side and can be easily over taken by a crowd which greatly out numbers my own. so i would smack anyone down in an instant. i think that is called "reasonable force"

plus this country is pretty sweet wtf. go home and have some cookies you ingrates :\

[Give me Beer]

See, logic like the above is why I don't feel pitty for police officers that get the **** beaten out of them in the banlieu. :)

[BillyBonebrake]

so plz correct my logic

its reasonable


EDIT: well....if you're reasonable

[Give me Beer]

Police authority does not mean you get to be aggressive and 'play boss'. You are there to PROTECT and SERVE the people, not to order them around. If the protesters are not threatening public safety you have no right what-so-ever to use force. Words are not stones.

Also, the fact that you say something like 'this isn't the 60s' just makes it worse. You think we are halfway there yet? Hah, we're screwed more than we were in the '60s, don't kid yourself.

P.S. You don't know **** about the 'causes'. There are more people out there than the most radical ones.

P.P.S. One of the reasons I don't want to go to the USA is the fact that your obedience to 'authority' scares the **** out of me. So do your security forces.

Land of the free my ***.

P.P.P.S. Generalising, I know. I like a lot of you and all that, but uhm, Bilbo said it best in that going away speech, rite.

[pate]

Hah, we're screwed more than we were in the '60s, don't kid yourself.


I'm sure you were around in the 60s.

[BillyBonebrake]

Police authority does not mean you get to be aggressive and 'play boss'. You are there to PROTECT and SERVE the people, not to order them around. If the protesters are not threatening public safety you have no right what-so-ever to use force. Words are not stones.

Also, the fact that you say something like 'this isn't the 60s' just makes it worse. You think we are halfway there yet? Hah, we're screwed more than we were in the '60s, don't kid yourself.

P.S. You don't know **** about the 'causes'. There are more people out there than the most radical ones.

P.P.S. One of the reasons I don't want to go to the USA is the fact that your obedience to 'authority' scares the **** out of me. So do your security forces.

Land of the free my ***.

P.P.P.S. Generalising, I know. I like a lot of you and all that, but uhm, Bilbo said it best in that going away speech, rite.

its not like that beer you should come on down

we'd go pick on some cops :)

[Reaganista]

youre a euro and our obedience to authority scares u lol lmao

[BillyBonebrake]

i saw a youtube vid of some cops beating the crap out of some hippies in denmark. even they do it

cops beat folks the world round lets face it

but THIS was not a beating. thats all i'm saying

[sLarkin20]

Didn't that stupid bitch taunt the police officer right before he shoved her by yelling "****ing do it again!"?

He did exactly what she asked for...what's the issue here? She got what she deserved

:]

I agree with the TS, too.

[Independent_CA]

that cop was out of line no question about it

you'd have to be facist scum to side with someone like that

and something i don't understand is why when the cops pull a stunt like this the rest of the protesters don't start swinging

if a cop smacked one of my friends to the ground i'd fight him until i was maced and beaten to a pulp

Well the reason being is because most of these type of people are pacifist cowards.

I happen to be liberal who believes in violence, a rare breed from what I've experienced.

[Shadows Within]

P.P.S. One of the reasons I don't want to go to the USA is the fact that your obedience to 'authority' scares the **** out of me. So do your security forces

its more common sense and logic than obedience....

[Light Fantastic]

um

explain what obeying without question has to do with logic

[Independent_CA]

um

explain what obeying without question has to do with logic

Um...who exactly is obeying without question again?

[Shadows Within]

um

explain what obeying without question has to do with logic

because you have to be an idiot to disobey for no reason? and since when was it obeying without question?

[cobert]

The cop was way out of line. As said before, the idea is to protect and serve, not to order and control. A police officer should only use force in a demonstration when they feel that somebody is going to get hurt, and if they weren't so authoritarian then the cops wouldn't have to worry about being hurt themselves. A protest only moves from peaceful to violent when violence actually occurs.

[peeted]

The vid doesnt seem to be up anymore but i have leftwing leanings so yea, **** the pigs, shoot them all.

[Illmatic]

The vid doesnt seem to be up anymore but i have leftwing leanings so yea, **** the pigs, shoot them all.

there's no point, most cops are already dead on the inside

[Light Fantastic]

because you have to be an idiot to disobey for no reason?well that is obviously a logical conclusion well done i am convinced

Um...who exactly is obeying without question again?
and since when was it obeying without question?
um all the authoritarian measures imposed on the day to day life of americans are taken and accepted without question or care really by the vast vast majority which is quite normal for anywhere really, but i think its a shame that you say people who 'disobey' police officers/tsa/whoever are asking for it when after all a police officer is what? just another citizen, your peer with a badge, so why do you think they are somehow elevated to a position where they can decide to smack someone because they are flustered or annoyed

[sLarkin20]

The cop was way out of line. As said before, the idea is to protect and serve, not to order and control. A police officer should only use force in a demonstration when they feel that somebody is going to get hurt, and if they weren't so authoritarian then the cops wouldn't have to worry about being hurt themselves. A protest only moves from peaceful to violent when violence actually occurs.

Or how about when someone isn't obeying their orders? It was pretty obvious in the video that everyone was being asked to back away from that vehicle, and that woman wasn't listening, AND she taunted the officer to "****ing do it again" right before she got pushed away. She got just what she asked for...

So, what's the problem here?

[pppoe]

It's not necessary to use force simply because someone doesn't follow orders. And even if she did seriously want the officer to hit her doesn't mean he's allowed to do it.

[Independent_CA]

well that is obviously a logical conclusion well done i am convinced



um all the authoritarian measures imposed on the day to day life of americans are taken and accepted without question or care really by the vast vast majority which is quite normal for anywhere really, but i think its a shame that you say people who 'disobey' police officers/tsa/whoever are asking for it when after all a police officer is what? just another citizen, your peer with a badge, so why do you think they are somehow elevated to a position where they can decide to smack someone because they are flustered or annoyed

I don't, and most other people don't either. The fact is though that they have the backing of the state, which will almost always side with them, and most of the time it's not worth the effort to challenge them.

[sLarkin20]

So how many times is it required for an officer to ask someone to comply with an order before force is deemed necessary?

[Mr. Ron]

So how many times is it required for an officer to ask someone to comply with an order before force is deemed necessary?

why should someone obey an officer



Plus he could have extracted her if she was being a threat through other means besides body checking her into the ground.

[Avalanche.]

why should someone obey an officer



Plus he could have extracted her if she was being a threat through other means besides body checking her into the ground.

its the law

[Light Fantastic]

law isnt infallible sorry try again

not that it is the law anyway

[Smokey D]

Or how about when someone isn't obeying their orders?

No, you can't use force just because someone isn't doing what you want.

[sLarkin20]

I'm pretty sure a police officer can, and he sure did in that video!

What the **** are they supposed to do, just keep asking and hope the other person responds?

[Smokey D]

No they can't.

There are certain times when they can use force but generally random body checks are unwarranted.

[ringworm]

it's hilarious how many of you think it's perfectly acceptable for a police officer to assault a civilian

whats funnier is the lot of you making dumb statements about facists pigs over this incomplete video :lol:

this is no different than the patriot act library video which also cant be intelligently discussed since the events prior to the assault werent taped

[Avalanche.]

law isnt infallible sorry try again

not that it is the law anyway

im fairly certain disobeying a direct order from an officer is against the law

the law is made by the people and the people agree to be governed by the law - if she was disobeying a direct order from an officer, then she deserves some sort of repercussion. whether or not that repercussion was within reason is up to the viewer, but i understand why he may have overreacted in such a tense situation (not that it was the right action to take).

[sLarkin20]

No they can't.

There are certain times when they can use force but generally random body checks are unwarranted.

You couldn't hear the police yelling for all the people to get back? Or when the woman egged him on and told him to push her again? That wasn't a random act from the officer.

[Smokey D]

im fairly certain disobeying a direct order from an officer is against the law

Nah, not really. Only if the officer is trying to arrest you or something.

You couldn't hear the police yelling for all the people to get back? Or when the woman egged him on and told him to push her again? That wasn't a random act from the officer.

Egging someone on isn't really a justification or defence for violence.

[BillyBonebrake]

The cop was way out of line. As said before, the idea is to protect and serve, not to order and control. A police officer should only use force in a demonstration when they feel that somebody is going to get hurt, and if they weren't so authoritarian then the cops wouldn't have to worry about being hurt themselves. A protest only moves from peaceful to violent when violence actually occurs.
"Protect And To Serve." yes. law abiding citizens. a police officers job is not to "protect and to serve" criminals or people breaking the law. no, that is another part of the justice system.

that is why we equip officers with deadly weapons, night sticks, mace, tasers, and tear gas. because they are AUTHORIZED TO USE FORCE in particular situations. and they have every right to use it reasonably under color of authority in order to "protect and serve" the rights of law abiding citiizens like you and i

again, i do not defend police brutality or beatings or intimidation. but this wasn't ANY of those things and i assure you was well within reugulation use of force. i'm no expert, but knowing what we know about police officers and their work and crowd control and crowd suppression it is clearly obvious this was not a case of brutality or inappropriate action on the officers part

what is upsetting is those who want to treat this like some great injustice or "police going too far." that is really just tying the hands of the police in that situation...

...so the cop doesn't push her and she continues to say "****in' do it again!" and he just ignores her. she contimues, her friends get brave, the cops are wimps and the crowd senses that. the cops will give, WE HAVE RIGHTS. and the whole scene goes to hell

yes, you have the right to be arrested for not following the direct orders of officers trying to maintain the PEACE. how? by telling you to back off. its a simple order. its easy to do. they have that authority in that situation, they don't know the protesters, don't know if the girl is armed. she gets up and threatens a cop...and he pushed her. once more. because she said "fuc.kin' do it again." so i guess she didn't get the message the first time. the second time she did and that was that. end of incident

law abiding citizens help officers do their job in that situation. they are the ones to "protect and serve." not people trying to incite something just to make the evening news

guess they got what they wanted but not how they wanted it. sometimes you just gotta take it as it comes

[Mr. Ron]

im fairly certain disobeying a direct order from an officer is against the law

the law is made by the people and the people agree to be governed by the law - if she was disobeying a direct order from an officer, then she deserves some sort of repercussion. whether or not that repercussion was within reason is up to the viewer, but i understand why he may have overreacted in such a tense situation (not that it was the right action to take).
No its not. The law is made by rich people who have it in their interest to keep people like us in line. I didn't agree to anything.

[Smokey D]

Why don't you guys get it? If she was breaching the peace, he was authorised to arrest her.

If he was pissed off because she was egging him on, he was not authorised to deck her.

[Akira]

Why don't you guys get it? If she was breaching the peace, he was authorised to arrest her.

If he was pissed off because she was egging him on, he was not authorised to deck her.

Nah man, she was a dumb bitch and deserved it.

...


Seriously though, this is ridiculous. The police have to take the high ground. Otherwise the whole legal system would fall apart. The woman might have been annoying, and even disruptive, by yelling, but that is not against the law. And even if she was breaking the law, the cop can't just get violent. I'm fairly confident that the cop could have arrested her without pushing her.

[Reaganista]

the legal system only falls apart if the cop doesn't get punished for this
which he probably won't but yeah

[Mr. Ron]

Why don't you guys get it? If she was breaching the peace, he was authorised to arrest her.

If he was pissed off because she was egging him on, he was not authorised to deck her.

Don't you bring common sense into this

[Aaron]

Common sense would make the woman stop acting the fool.

[Smokey D]

Common sense is the arbitrary collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen and shouldn't be used to judge anything ever.

[Mr. Ron]

I don't think you could have sounded anymore nerdy right there smokey :p

[Smokey D]

I think I stole that from Einstein so that figures

[Mr. Ron]

The man had a good set of hair.

[Aaron]

Common sense is the collective result of 18 years of life experiences? Sounds like a pretty decent source of information for how to act in a public space to me.

[Smokey D]

I thought the idea of protesting was to behave publicly in such a way as to make the status quo difficult or at least challenge people to question it.

[Mr. Ron]

Yeah it is.

[PunkItUp]

Why don't you guys get it? If she was breaching the peace, he was authorised to arrest her.

If he was pissed off because she was egging him on, he was not authorised to deck her.
the police officer is authorized to use force to defend himself if he feels threatened and does not need to wait to be assaulted first.

he pushed her. pushed. she flopped

why don't you get that?

[Mr. Ron]

how was he threatened?

[Aaron]

I thought the idea of protesting was to behave publicly in such a way as to make the status quo difficult or at least challenge people to question it.
The aim of protest is to deliver a message, it can be done in a number of ways. This woman obviously didn't realise this and thought the only way to protest is to be a public nuisance.

[FIGHTCRIMEALLTHETIME]

didnt look like that big of a deal
this is the same kind of shi as the video that blew up of the officer wrestling the skate boarder to the ground and taking his skate board
ya i would be pissed if i was that chick and that cop looked like a asshole but cops do way worse shi all the time and dont get called out on it and thats the most fuked up part of the whole cop situation
getting pushed down doesnt hurt all that bad and obviously she was right back up a few seconds later
where cops cross the line is situations like tazing somebody who is walking away from a traffic stop and what not

[Smokey D]

The aim of protest is to deliver a message, it can be done in a number of ways. This woman obviously didn't realise this and thought the only way to protest is to be a public nuisance.

Same deal, really.

Also, the least touching without lawful justification is an assault, so he has to show how he had a justification. Being pissed off isn't a justification, even in such tense circumstances. It migt be mitigation.

[Aaron]

A tense situation is justification for the police to act though. Just in alternate ways. It's not like there was no justification and realistically, we don't know what's happening outside of the scope of the camera.

[Iscariot]

how was he threatened?

this

she wasn't holding a weapon

she was a skinny chick that posed no immediate physical threat

the cop was just abusing his authority

[Smokey D]

A tense situation is justification for the police to act though. Just in alternate ways. It's not like there was no justification and realistically, we don't know what's happening outside of the scope of the camera.

I dunno. It's not really a justification. Maybe it's an explanation.

[Iscariot]

and even in a tense situation, police are given proper training to act appropriately in those situations and using undue force is not acting appropriately

[Aaron]

Yeah, that I agree on. Short video is short. Cannot tell what else is happening.

[BillyBonebrake]

Same deal, really.

Also, the least touching without lawful justification is an assault, so he has to show how he had a justification. Being pissed off isn't a justification, even in such tense circumstances. It migt be mitigation.
a police officer does not have to show justification the same way a private citizen does. they do have certain....privilege to use physical force

why are so many against this? its how things get done sometimes

i believe a police officer is entitled to use "reasonable force." how many can't seem to see this was reasonable force in that situation baffles me

when you have an instigator in a crowd in that situation who is threatening physical encroachment you put them down. they even teach this in training. she was instigating at THAT moment. you can clearly hear them ordering the crowd back to get a vehicle through. she stepped forward and was confronting an officer

he pushed her with his club to her chest as he was trained

i don't see how that is not reasonable force for reasons of crowd control and putting down someone who could very easily throw the first blow. idc how small she is she wasn't alone, right? she had plenty of friends around who may have been moved by her action to take action. so if they want a little riot they can have one if they choose. the police are clearly outnumbered

the cop put her down because she was asking for it. literally and figuratively. "Step back" does not mean two steps forward confronting officers, and they do exert authority to demand that action in that situation. so she got pushed. then she got up and got arrested

nothing is wrong with thiat imo

[Iscariot]

a police officer does not have to show justification the same way a private citizen does. they do have certain....privilege to use physical force

no they don't

unwanted contact against another human being is assault

a pretty little badge doesn't make you exempt from the law

why are so many against this? its how things get done sometimes

wrongfully

i believe a police officer is entitled to use "reasonable force." how many can't seem to see this was reasonable force in that situation baffles me

reasonable force does not include assaulting an unarmed civilian who poses no immediate threat

when you have an instigator in a crowd in that situation who is threatening physical encroachment you put them down.

where was the threat

they even teach this in training.

having received similar training i can vouch that police officers are not trained to knock over unarmed civilians with big mouths stop making things up

she was instigating at THAT moment.

that's nice she still posed no threat

you can clearly hear them ordering the crowd back to get a vehicle through. she stepped forward and was confronting an officer

so they could have detained her or used another non-violent method to allow the vehicle to pass

hitting someone because they're in the way isn't exactly reasonable force

he pushed her with his club to her chest as he was trained

prove it

i don't see how that is not reasonable force for reasons of crowd control and putting down someone who could very easily throw the first blow.

explain how preemptive violence is justified when used by someone who's job is to protect, serve, and uphold the law including laws against assault and battery

idc how small she is she wasn't alone, right?

and who else was standing there with her provoking the officer? oh right, no one

she had plenty of friends around who may have been moved by her action to take action.

again, false logic used in an attempt to vindicate poor judgment and undue preemptive force

so if they want a little riot they can have one if they choose. the police are clearly outnumbered

and had faced no physical threat or violence whatsoever

the cop put her down because she was asking for it. literally and figuratively. "Step back" does not mean two steps forward confronting officers, and they do exert authority to demand that action in that situation. so she got pushed. then she got up and got arrested

protesting is not a crime, and neither is saying 'no' when an officer tells you to do something

unless a civilian uses force against an officer that officer is not permitted to use force on the civilian

nothing is wrong with thiat imo

then you're pretty stupid

[BillyBonebrake]

why does everything have to be so pristine and non violent?

wtf is wrong with you

get the hell off your high horse you know that was "reasonable force" in that situation and any reasonable person would agree. and police officers are allowed to use it whether you like it or not

case closed

[Iscariot]

why does everything have to be so pristine and non violent?

because that's how the law works

wtf is wrong with you

idk i guess i just like proper justice and i'm not a fascist

get the hell off your high horse you know that was "reasonable force" in that situation and any reasonable person would agree.

no it wasn't

and police officers are allowed to use it whether you like it or not

no they really aren't

you still haven't backed up any of your hilarious claims to vindicate that abuse of power you're just being an idiot

case closed

hardly

[BillyBonebrake]

The principle governing the use of force as explained in the law and in police procedures remains constant: force should only be used when it is absolutely necessary, it should be minimum and proportional to the situation and its use should be discontinued as soon as the danger to life and property subsides


1. it was absolutely necessary as she was given a COMMAND by a peace officer which she refused to obey and in fact took opposite action, which threatened the safety and the security of the situation, the police, and civilians, as men and vehicles were trying to pass

2. the force used was proportionate to the situation and was immediately discontinued when she went down. no beating, stomping, or killing took place. she was told to comply, she took opposite action, and reasonable force was taken to compel her to comply. she complied


Officers in a riot control situation are often fully armored and carry weapons such as batons, designed to be in direct contact with the crowd. These officers use force and intimidation to subdue rioters and subsequently allow less heavily armoured, more mobile officers to arrest people. In face of a greater threat, the riot police will be backed up with other officers equipped with riot guns to fire tear gas, rubber bullets, plastic bullets or "beanbag" rounds


case closed again

[Give me Beer]

She wasn't rioting, there was no immediate threat and the response was disproportionate.

A batch is just that, a batch, it's not a license to do whatever the **** you please. Physical violence is always the last resort, and as you saw, they could have arrested her very easily without having to push her over.

Law & order ... right. I think you saw one too many police shows growing up. I know that on television cops seem to have the right to do whatever the **** they please to get things solved, but that's fiction mate.

[BillyBonebrake]

Crowd Control


1. After the required announcements, if a crowd refuses to disperse, the police may use squad or platoon formations (skirmish line, wedge, echelons, etc.) to move the crowd along.

2. Batons shall not be used for crowd control, crowd containment or crowd dispersal, except as specified below.

3. Batons may be visibly displayed and held in a ready position during squad or platoon formations. When reasonably necessary for protection of the officers or to disperse individuals in the crowd pursuant to the procedures of this policy, batons may be used in a pushing or jabbing motion. Baton jabs should not be used

[Give me Beer]

Nope, still not there.

[Light Fantastic]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ed5_1220077092

longer video, doesnt change much though

"Protect And To Serve." yes. law abiding citizens. a police officers job is not to "protect and to serve" criminals or people breaking the lawactually they have the same duty of care to everyone

[deadinholywood]

And holywood the police officer enters the discussion...

no they don't

unwanted contact against another human being is assault

a pretty little badge doesn't make you exempt from the law

All the female has to do is something that makes the officer fearful for his safety and he is justified in taking action which isn't disproportionate to prevent it. Yes it is an unlawful assault but one of the 6 defence's to this is that the other person was acting in self defence. Further to that, the size/shape/sex/actual physical ability of the female is totally irrelevant as to whether for some reason he is in fear of her... it would be the prosecutions job to prove that he wasn't in fear of her which would be quite difficult.

Looking at the video there is not much in this, if the officer had pushed her with his hands instead of the baton I don't believe that as big a deal would be made of it. Police brutality is the deliberate use of excessive force and it would be hard to deem this as excessive in my opinion.

Not to say that this was the best way to deal with the situation, as has been previously stated she should have been arrested for breach of the peace and detained for the remainder of the protest.

[Avalanche.]

Nah, not really. Only if the officer is trying to arrest you or something.


My bad

No its not. The law is made by rich people who have it in their interest to keep people like us in line. I didn't agree to anything.
Well perhaps you should run for office if you're dissatisfied

[sLarkin20]

Crowd Control


1. After the required announcements, if a crowd refuses to disperse, the police may use squad or platoon formations (skirmish line, wedge, echelons, etc.) to move the crowd along.

2. Batons shall not be used for crowd control, crowd containment or crowd dispersal, except as specified below.

3. Batons may be visibly displayed and held in a ready position during squad or platoon formations. When reasonably necessary for protection of the officers or to disperse individuals in the crowd pursuant to the procedures of this policy, batons may be used in a pushing or jabbing motion. Baton jabs should not be used

Winner.

[Mr. Ron]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ed5_1220077092



The comments made me raaage

[spitfirejunky]

The principle governing the use of force as explained in the law and in police procedures remains constant: force should only be used when it is absolutely necessary, it should be minimum and proportional to the situation and its use should be discontinued as soon as the danger to life and property subsides


1. it was absolutely necessary as she was given a COMMAND by a peace officer which she refused to obey and in fact took opposite action, which threatened the safety and the security of the situation, the police, and civilians, as men and vehicles were trying to pass

2. the force used was proportionate to the situation and was immediately discontinued when she went down. no beating, stomping, or killing took place. she was told to comply, she took opposite action, and reasonable force was taken to compel her to comply. she complied


Officers in a riot control situation are often fully armored and carry weapons such as batons, designed to be in direct contact with the crowd. These officers use force and intimidation to subdue rioters and subsequently allow less heavily armoured, more mobile officers to arrest people. In face of a greater threat, the riot police will be backed up with other officers equipped with riot guns to fire tear gas, rubber bullets, plastic bullets or "beanbag" rounds


case closed again

Self-pwn.

[ringworm]

No its not. The law is made by rich people who have it in their interest to keep people like us in line. I didn't agree to anything.
really? :lol:

seriously, you and Iscariot crack me up on these type of threads

this one brings as many lulz as the library vid and dont tase me bro :lol:
not the vid itself, just how many times pigs, facists and abuse of force etc is used

[BillyBonebrake]

Self-pwn.
how can you not see given the overall situation it was absolutely necessary in that situation. she had been warned. what you quoted is true from what i posted earlier. that is under "normal circumstances." and even under those standards if the officer felt the woman was a threat in that situation as she was approaching him, he can push her down. if someone approached me on the street like that and was yelling at me, i might push them down

the second post i made about crowd control is more accurate. and apparently police are given more leeway here. after they have given the "required announcements," if instructions are not followed they may use their batons in a responsible fashion to disperse the crowd, defend themselves, and maintain the safety of other officers and citizens

codepink should stick to their cute little website and stay out of reality. where the rest of us live

[spitfirejunky]

how can you not see given the overall situation it was absolutely necessary in that situation. she had been warned. what you quoted is true from what i posted earlier. that is under "normal circumstances." and even under those standards if the officer felt the woman was a threat in that situation as she was approaching him, he can push her down. if someone approached me on the street like that and was yelling at me, i might push them down

Are you serious? She's as threatening as a handbag. And that would likely be assault.

the second post i made about crowd control is more accurate. and apparently police are given more leeway here. after they have given the "required announcements," if instructions are not followed they may use their batons in a responsible fashion to disperse the crowd, defend themselves, and maintain the safety of other officers and citizens

codepink should stick to their cute little website and stay out of reality. where the rest of us live

Nothing about the situation allows the police any authority over her, so stop propping up that stupid notion that he can drop her just because she wasn't listening. They were well within the limits of their protest no matter how obnoxious they were.

[BillyBonebrake]

nope. antagonizing peace officers while they are ordering you to step back is not "well within the limits if their protest." i can post more of what is if you like

and the push was not excessive force in that situation. maybe next time some nice mace to the face would be better. at least the officer would not have touched her and the bleeding hearts....might not bleed for this rabble rouser so much

oh well anything for a cause, i guess....


EDIT: lol click the ads everyone!!

[Iscariot]

so to sum up your views

ugh ugh you yell.. loud noise ugh.. me smash.. me justified because you make loud noise ugh ugh

[spitfirejunky]

nope. antagonizing peace officers while they are ordering you to step back is not "well within the limits if their protest." i can post more of what is if you like

Except that they weren't antagonizing and they were well distanced. If you've already watched the video I can't help you here. But it would help if you tell me why you're trying so hard to draw up these wimpy imbeciles as some threat.

and the push was not excessive force in that situation. maybe next time some nice mace to the face would be better. at least the officer would not have touched her and the bleeding hearts....might not bleed for this rabble rouser so much

oh well anything for a cause, i guess....

I'm gonna have to defer to Iscariot here.

[sLarkin20]

1. Crowd told to step back

2. Woman doesn't step back

3. Officer pushes woman back

4. Woman gets back in front of the officer again, proceeds to taunts him

5. Officer pushes woman again, harder

6. End of confrontation

So...what is it exactly that went wrong here?

[spitfirejunky]

1. Crowd told to step back

2. Woman doesn't step back

3. Officer pushes woman back

4. Woman gets back in front of the officer again, proceeds to taunts him

5. Officer pushes woman again, harder

6. End of confrontation

So...what is it exactly that went wrong here?

Step 1.

[sLarkin20]

Ok, good reason.

[spitfirejunky]

Ok, good reason.

If a cop tells me to lick his shoes I'll tell him to go **** himself.

[Mr. Ron]

really? :lol:

seriously, you and Iscariot crack me up on these type of threads

this one brings as many lulz as the library vid and dont tase me bro :lol:
not the vid itself, just how many times pigs, facists and abuse of force etc is used

Can you tell me where I am wrong? Politicians largely make laws that overall includes their self interest that often overshadows OUR interests.


I don't hate cops btw, and the word "fascist" is thrown around way too much.

[sLarkin20]

Are you 12?

There's a slight difference between a cop telling you to step back from somewhere, and a cop telling you to lick his shoes.

[Iscariot]

when you are protesting and a cop tells you to stop it would be against the interests of the protest to obey

and given our right to protest and our right to free speech, this is an completely legal response to such a demand

[spitfirejunky]

Are you 12?

There's a slight difference between a cop telling you to step back from somewhere, and a cop telling you to lick his shoes.

In this case there isn't. They're two completely arbitrary commands.

[sLarkin20]

when you are protesting and a cop tells you to stop it would be against the interests of the protest to obey

and given our right to protest and our right to free speech, this is an completely legal response to such a demand

At what point in the video were the protesters told to stop protesting?

They weren't. They were simply told to "move away from the vehicle."

Pretty simple instructions to follow.

[Iscariot]

"i'm here protesting and you're here to interfere with that but if you tell me to move or generally follow any commands that go against my current activity then i'll do what you say"

yeah that makes sense

[spitfirejunky]

At what point in the video were the protesters told to stop protesting?

They weren't. They were simply told to "move away from the vehicle."

Pretty simple instructions to follow.

She was clear from the vehicle and the officer that was giving the order was not the same one that assaulted her.

If you watch the video carefully there seems to have been a conversation between the assaulting officer and the girl that ended with the officer saying "Back it up!" then pummeling her.

If you want my opinion, he smashed her because she was up in his face.

[apple pie]

but this is why the radicalist are able to, to an extent change society, and push what they want, becasue people see the big bad cops, harm a little protestor, and all hell breaks lose.

[sLarkin20]

She was clear from the vehicle and the officer that was giving the order was not the same one that assaulted her.

If you watch the video carefully there seems to have been a conversation between the assaulting officer and the girl that ended with the officer saying "Back it up!" then pummeling her.

If you want my opinion, he smashed her because she was up in his face.

Exactly...

You are aware that people actually DON'T have the right to jump up in the face of a cop and start yelling and cursing at them when they don't like what they are told to do, right?

[ringworm]

Can you tell me where I am wrong?
both you and Iscariot are way off base on these police type, authority threads

sure the cop was out of line, but i'd bet so was the chick, only before the film caught her, maybe, maybe not, who knows really, but you act like you can leap in someone's face so long as no contact is made you're legal

but time after time, the aggression and anger of protesters gets directed at people that could care less what is being protested about

you guys act like these people (cops) come out there looking to kick your *** and hate your ideals
most of them wish you were smart enough to realize they'd rather be at home grilling out than having to try and keep a bunch of idiots from hurting themselves and others


you act like you can legally get right in someone's face and shout at them and if they hit you, you were wronged so long as you didnt touch them first

try that on me, i'll deck you the minute a small particle of saliva touches a pour on my skin

[Mr. Ron]

both you and Iscariot are way off base on these police type, authority threads

sure the cop was out of line, but i'd bet so was the chick, only before the film caught her, maybe, maybe not, who knows really, but you act like you can leap in someone's face so long as no contact is made you're legal

but time after time, the aggression and anger of protesters gets directed at people that could care less what is being protested about

you guys act like these people (cops) come out there looking to kick your *** and hate your ideals
most of them wish you were smart enough to realize they'd rather be at home grilling out than having to try and keep a bunch of idiots from hurting themselves and others


you act like you can legally get right in someone's face and shout at them and if they hit you, you were wronged so long as you didnt touch them first

try that on me, i'll deck you the minute a small particle of saliva touches a pour on my skin

If you've ever been to a protest you would know that there are plenty of cops looking to start violence.

I can shout in a cops face, and guess what? Nothing is illegal about that, and they would be in the wrong for using violence.


man, you're really sensitive if some screaming sets you into a violent rage lol

[sLarkin20]

They sure as hell wouldn't be in the wrong if you were first told to do something, then responded by getting in their face.

[Mr. Ron]

They sure as hell wouldn't be in the wrong if you were first told to do something, then responded by getting in their face.

I have every right to not oblige them if what they ordered me to do was counterproductive to my health or any legal activities I was engaging in.


For the record, I don't hate all cops. But there certainly are some that don't deserve to wear their uniform.

[ringworm]

I can shout in a cops face, and guess what? Nothing is illegal about that, and they would be in the wrong for using violence.
see, this what i mean, what the **** does that achieve?
besides making you look like the dumbass?
man, you're really sensitive if some screaming sets you into a violent rage lol
says the person screaming in my face? :lol:

[Mr. Ron]

see, this what i mean, what the **** does that achieve?
besides making you look like the dumbass?

says the person screaming in my face? :lol:

I never said it did accomplish anything. I personally wouldn't do what that code pink chick did, I was just saying.

[sLarkin20]

I have every right to not oblige them if what they ordered me to do was counterproductive to my health or any legal activities I was engaging in.


For the record, I don't hate all cops. But there certainly are some that don't deserve to wear their uniform.

Ok, I could of phrased that better. I assumed that would be interpreted as not being asked to do something unethical, illegal, etc...

[Mr. Ron]

Ok, I could of phrased that better. I assumed that would be interpreted as not being asked to do something unethical, illegal, etc...

I still don't see the use for that kind force if someone gets in your face. I could see cops grabbing you or pushing you away with their hand, but this dude took that chick out.

[ringworm]

I still don't see the use for that kind force if someone gets in your face. I could see cops grabbing you or pushing you away with their hand, but this dude took that chick out.

and it totally ruled :lol:

[Smokey D]

Exactly...

You are aware that people actually DON'T have the right to jump up in the face of a cop and start yelling and cursing at them when they don't like what they are told to do, right?

What you don't seem to get that even if he was justified in using such force as was necessary to effect crowd control, he was not justified in smashing her because she was 'up in his face'.

[Iscariot]

and actually yes people do have the right to yell at a cop they aren't above they law they are supposed to set an example in protecting and enforcing the law, and there is no written law anywhere in the history of the united states that says you cannot question or confront an officer in a non-violent manner

i never saw her strike the officer or threaten him with physical violence so she was acting in an entirely non-violent manner and in complete accordance with her rights

if she had said, "do it again" and then struck the officer, i would have no problem with his reaction

[mph4ever]

police arrest 300 protesters at republican venue

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0903/uselection.html

[Give me Beer]

you act like you can legally get right in someone's face and shout at them and if they hit you, you were wronged so long as you didnt touch them first

try that on me, i'll deck you the minute a small particle of saliva touches a pour on my skin

lol @ tough internet guy.

Also, yeah, you would be wrong if you hit somebody in the face for yelling at you. In fact, I think that might just get you booked for assault. :)

[mph4ever]

assaulting me includes entering my personal space, get too close and you get hit, just enough to get you out of my space again

[siva_chair]

my personal space encompasses all of the 48 contiguous states + Alaska and Hawaii so everyone gtfo of myspace.

[Give me Beer]

assaulting me includes entering my personal space, get too close and you get hit, just enough to get you out of my space again

Dude, I want in on the tough internet guy action. Did I mention I always carry a knife? :smoke:

[siva_chair]

Just one?

I carry like 5 in case I have to fight off ninjas and use some as throwing weapons.

[Give me Beer]

****, guess I'm not 'tuff 'nuff.

[siva_chair]

No just unprepared for dire situations.

[Give me Beer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2D3_Bp5YyUU

[Crapdragoon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJmeDX9K0iU

[siva_chair]

I understood none of that and it just sounded like someone who just got back from the dentist trying to rap but hey that's just me.

EDIT: To beer.

[mph4ever]

Dude, I want in on the tough internet guy action. Did I mention I always carry a knife? :smoke:

there's nothing tough about it, nothing at all. just if anyone is so close that they are shouting in my face and they end up spraying me with saliva then i'm going to hit them, we can argue when the guy is a little more relaxed

[siva_chair]

tuff srsly

[Reaganista]

there's nothing tough about it, nothing at all. just if anyone is so close that they are shouting in my face and they end up spraying me with saliva then i'm going to hit them, we can argue when the guy is a little more relaxed

argue before the judge u mean

[mph4ever]

i was provoked, when i told him to back off and that i would get the cops after him he laughed and said they were a bunch of spine less tossers, your honor

[spitfirejunky]

Exactly...

You are aware that people actually DON'T have the right to jump up in the face of a cop and start yelling and cursing at them when they don't like what they are told to do, right?

What you don't seem to get that even if he was justified in using such force as was necessary to effect crowd control, he was not justified in smashing her because she was 'up in his face'.

Thank you.

[BillyBonebrake]

he did not "smash" her. it makes me wonder if we're all watching the same video

we have all seen police "smash" people. and continue to. its not the officers problem she went down like a ton of bricks. maybe he should have just blown on her

it amazes me that many think a somewhat non peaceful protest should go down without incident, and the police, who are dispatched to maintain some sort of control, should just politely stand around as people become more and more unruly

did you see the tape from the repub convention last night? lots of tear gas, some people got hit, i don't think anyone has cried over it yet

i am not against protest, protesters, or free speech. in fact i'm all for it. but to expect to be hostile and belligerent and to discard the commands of police in that situation (and in fact confront one) without any sort of action taken upon you is pretty stupid. you would have to be a stupid human being to think you can antagonize a police officer like that and threaten the safety of those around you with your disobedience (police included) and not have reasonable action taken against you

you would have to be an idiot to think they should just stand there, after command after command has been given (which they are authorized to give) and not take any action. a cop has weapons at his side. what if she distracts the cop and another protester goes for them?

you guys just don't get it

protest, have a ball, get your kicks. if you want to fight the cops like they did last night, great. but quite honestly, just don't expect them not to fight back. and don't expect to antagonize one in a potential riot situation and not get put down

many of you sound like a bunch of sheltered brats. i've had my run ins with the law before. several times. i always knew when to back off. it didn't take much and if i hadn't i might have gotten beat or shot. and if i would have it most likely would have been my own damn fault for thinking i was somehow so special i could confront an armed law enforcement officer and somehow, magically, get away with it

people are just dumb. not because they might get pushed in a situation like the one on the video, but to expect they won't and shouldn't

this isn't your home where you get to fight with mommy and daddy and say you're sorry afterward. and a cop is not a school principle with a paddle

they are allowed to use reasonable force in that situation, and one did

also, this was not a "crowd control" situation but a "riot control" one. the rules are different then if you get caught stealing a candy bar

i'm not "pro cop" and don't necessarily like the ones i have met. even casually. but it doesn't mean i don't want them to do their job

[BillyBonebrake]

here is another video

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b03_1219956099

they direct him away, but he gets closer, spits at them, and then turns to face them. when they "push" him away instead of getting the message and running in the other direction he approaches instead. but i guess they should just wait for him to actually attack

i don't know why they should. in that situation. he is an immediate threat, same as the woman was

[Light Fantastic]

its not the officers problem she went down like a ton of bricks.of course it is hes supposed to use measured force based on a number of things including who he is using force against

[sLarkin20]

The moral of the story is, if you are stupid enough to fight against police, you are going to lose.

On the street, and in the court :]

[Light Fantastic]

um its stupid to fight any group of people who have a huge advantage over you

there are plenty of occasions where groups have fought police and won outright

so that statement is pretty untrue

[BillyBonebrake]

pepper sprayed while holding a flower

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=431_1220331552

but i guess facing 25 riot police with a flower while they're trying to move the crowd back should be ok. forget the fact she is way too close to them not to b a threat

hey, if one "protester" wants to do it, maybe more will come join in with more flowers!

i'd have sprayed her just for killing a poor flower. what about the flowers?

they are innocent :(

never laid a hand on her but i'd rather be pushed tbh

[sLarkin20]

"if you see a wall of riot officers...you move...she probably wanted a picture that would win a prize...i think she did, "flower in the mace"

Haha, that guy knows what's up.

[Light Fantastic]

you guys are being dumb

police are perfectly capable of moving someone without causing pain

[Already_Taken]

yeah for some reason it doesn't have the same emphasis as standing in front of tanks a la Tiananmen square.

i wonder why, stupid lady.

[mph4ever]

pigs can riot all that they please, didn't you all know

[spitfirejunky]

here is another video

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b03_1219956099

they direct him away, but he gets closer, spits at them, and then turns to face them. when they "push" him away instead of getting the message and running in the other direction he approaches instead. but i guess they should just wait for him to actually attack

i don't know why they should. in that situation. he is an immediate threat, same as the woman was

Apples and oranges. The guy visibly threatened the officer, then the officer made a peaceful, practical approach to the guy, in which case the guy pulled away then they resorted to the use of force.

In the original video the guy just slammed the girl completely unprovoked.

[RG560M]

ITT people don't know what verbal provoking is.

[spitfirejunky]

ITT people don't know what verbal provoking is.

It mounts to an assault charge.

[BridgeToSolace]

What a weird way to hit someone, with both hands on the stick like that. Looks like he's trying to push her but used more force than he would have otherwise intended, probably because he was so pissed off at what she did before the footage we see.

Honestly, I wouldn't get too mad at a dude for doing what he did to another dude (or chick) who was screaming in his face. Cops are people too. Did she deserve it? No. Did he use excessive force? Yes. But you can't expect a police officer to be superman. They have limits, and sometimes they cease being policemen and become a dude who feels threatened. Or maybe this guy is a poopty officer with a short temper, I don't know.

Doesn't help that he called her a bitch, though.

I'm not outraged because of the push so much as I'm pissed that they took her away when she was talking to the cameras. That's inexcusable.

And really, don't say the push was unprovoked unless you see the whole scene. We don't know what happened, really. It could have been provoked or not.

[sLarkin20]

What do you think you're doing looking at both sides of the situation like that?

You have to pick a side, and convince the other side why they are stupid/wrong.

[Mr. Ron]

assaulting me includes entering my personal space, get too close and you get hit, just enough to get you out of my space again

lol what

[BridgeToSolace]

7. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask them to stop. If they do not stop, destroy them.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

7. When Walking In Open Territory, Bother No One. If Someone Bothers You, Ask Them To Stop. If They Do Not Stop, destroy Them.

*11

[spitfirejunky]

And really, don't say the push was unprovoked unless you see the whole scene. We don't know what happened, really. It could have been provoked or not.

Officer claims she grabbed his baton. The only thing corroborated by witnesses including neighboring officers was his reaction. It was clear from all accounts that she was not about to overpower and floor a whole fleet of trained officers. Nothing about the situation suggests that she was any threat at all. Why this isn't obvious I have no idea.

I do admire that you're putting things in perspective.

[BridgeToSolace]

It's clear to us because we weren't there. We're seeing this afterwords, in a hopefully calm mindset.

The fact that the neighboring police officers can't corroborate much more than the reaction was because they were all dealing with their own ****. They were busy. Tense situations and such.

And I don't know if you've ever dealt with angry crowds of yelling people, but I can completely understand feeling threatened by particular person in that situation, even if on her own she would have been laughed off as a stupid "bitch".

Or again, he may of just been a dick.

I do admire that you're putting things in perspective.
Thanks :D

[spitfirejunky]

It's clear to us because we weren't there. We're seeing this afterwords, in a hopefully calm mindset.

The fact that the neighboring police officers can't corroborate much more than the reaction was because they were all dealing with their own ****. They were busy. Tense situations and such.

I find it hard to believe that even though no one saw this it happened.

And I don't know if you've ever dealt with angry crowds of yelling people, but I can completely understand feeling threatened by particular person in that situation, even if on her own she would have been laughed off as a stupid "bitch".

Or again, he may of just been a dick.

Officers on protest lines are trained specifically not to submit to this feeling of threat. The officer failed at his job if it's true that he was particularly sensitive.

I should add that said officer is no longer allowed to work on protest lines, and the reason (allegedly) they pulled the girl away from the camera is because they didn't want her to report the officer's blunder and inspire the crowd to violence. (Not sure how that would have helped anyway.)

[BridgeToSolace]

There are specific officers for protest lines?

I wonder how they train them 0.o

I would say the training failed, but that's just me. I'm fine with the outcome of this, though. The chick seemed fine when they talked to her. Still not happy with her being taken away, and the justification is a little shaky. But oh well.

[Iscariot]

riot police receive additional training that beat cops don't

they're taught to assess the situation and factor out personal stress so they can appropriately determine when force is necessary

essentially it's one of the same things i was taught in the military

[BridgeToSolace]

Do they bus in additional riot police for a particularly large event like this?

[Iscariot]

sometimes they're forced to place officers without this particular training on the lines because being able to bus in additional riot police isn't an option and unfortunately this raises the risk for abuse of power

i'm not saying fully trained riot police are perfect though everyone is human and if you're a conservative officer at a liberal rally you're going to be very likely to do something out of line because of your own personal views

[spitfirejunky]

There are specific officers for protest lines?

I wonder how they train them 0.o

I would say the training failed, but that's just me. I'm fine with the outcome of this, though. The chick seemed fine when they talked to her. Still not happy with her being taken away, and the justification is a little shaky. But oh well.

I wouldn't call it a justification, but it's the reason they claim to have done it.

Not too long ago there was a riot in downtown Montreal that followed a hockey game (I think it was a home game vs Boston). The officers, with riot shields and whatnot, walled themselves against the crowd and pushed them away from a police car that they were destroying. All they had to do was make a forceful approach against the crowd to move them. They didn't slam anyone or even talk to anyone, all while being sweared at and at times having objects thrown at them.

At some point during the riot, a kid in the crowd threw a glass bottle at one of the officers. The bottle hit the officer's helmet. The officer then gave a nod to a fellow officer and sprinted through the crowd towards the one kid. The crowd literally dispersed from the one kid and the officer batonned the poop out of him. No one came to the kid's defense. The crowd got really calm. This was one of the greatest things I have ever seen. One officer managed to make at least 500 people flinch by setting an example of that one kid.

I have nothing against the police using force for crowd control as per my story. More often than not even people in the most roving mob will properly calculate their actions in situations when inidividuals unwittingly attack police. But if the police resort to violence like in the OP's video, you can only make the mob angrier.

So the point of this story is that there is such a way to be properly trained to react to mobs.

[BridgeToSolace]

Of course there is, but this situation is very different from the one you outlined.

Not that I'm supporting this guy much more.

[spitfirejunky]

Of course there is, but this situation is very different from the one you outlined.

Not that I'm supporting this guy much more.

I didn't mean to draw parallels. Anyways, I'm done with this.

[BridgeToSolace]

kk, point made.

Cheers :)

[ringworm]

and actually yes people do have the right to yell at a cop

you really think that yelling in someones face, especially someone not really involved in what you're protesting about, is ok?
lol @ tough internet guy.

Also, yeah, you would be wrong if you hit somebody in the face for yelling at you. In fact, I think that might just get you booked for assault. :)
so be it, childish behavior=more childish behavior
try screaming at me with no teeth :)

but you guys really crack me up when you portray the screaming protester as the rational side of the argument :lol:


you really believe that personal freedom equates invading someone elses personal freedom?

[Reaganista]

no two wrongs dont make a right

next we're going to read clifford the big red dog and drink applejuice class

[Mr. Ron]

Yus!

[Smokey D]

assaulting me includes entering my personal space, get too close and you get hit, just enough to get you out of my space again

Generally self defence laws require a genuine belief in iminenent death or grievous bodily harm and only allow you to use such force as is reasonable to prevent its infliction. Smacking someone hard in the face just because they enter your personal space won't be covered by self defence. And smakcing someone because you're angry they entered your personal space definitely won't be covered.

Although it is an assault to threaten by word or gesture, so that person who is yelling at you might also be booked for assault.

In response to BillyBroke, it doesn't matter whether he smashed her or pushed her or whatever. If he did it because he was angry, it's an unlawful assault. If he used disproportionate force, even if trying to effect proper crowd control, it is still an assault.

[PunkItUp]

hit 'em with a rake!

[Smokey D]

You're gonna have to start contributing seriously, or go away.

[Iscariot]

smokey you have to appreciate the mx legacy behind "hit him with a rake"

[siva_chair]

mx legacy=serious business

[mph4ever]

lol what

i didn't mean that space

but if someone is shout aggressively in your face, where you can't see their hands properly, they follow you when you stand back and stuff, then deck them and discuss it later. too close for comfort, thats all

[Smokey D]

That's assault.

[ringworm]

nobody wants to touch my post last page?

i guess you all think i am the one acting moronish and outside the law if i react to someone screaming in my face by silencing the screaming in my face with a good pimp smack?

[Amit]

well it's a pretty pussy way to react to something ringworm

[ringworm]

lol, you guys disturb and puzzle me sometimes when you seem to ignore the main cause of an exchange and only concentrate on the person who probably would have remained peaceful except for the enraged moron who chose to behave irrationally?

[mph4ever]

That's assault.

yup, guess it is

[JohnXDoe3]

Assault:

1. A violent physical or verbal attack


well i guess she got verbal and he got a little physical based on her assault. stands to reason in that situation imo

[Smokey D]

You can't assault someone because they're yelling at you, even if what they're doing is also assault.