This could be bad

[svauto-erotic855]

From what I read, he was hit in the head with a CS grenade. It wasn't deadly force, it was expressly LESS THAN LETHAL weapons used. They could have just opened fire, but they have shown remarkable restraint. And it's not non violent. Have you not been paying attention to the rapes, robberies, burglary, destruction of private and public property these animals have been engaged in?

The Federal Courts passed a ruling in the 90's that says that a tear gas canister IS deadly force. This was in response to a law suite resulting from a TX prison guard who was trying to break up a large fight between 20 or so prisoners on an outside basket ball court. He made 2 "Head Shots" out of 6 or 8 (can't remember exactly how many) canisters fired killing 1 inmate and causing massive amounts of damage to the other inmates face that required many years of surgery to patch up. The officer had a history of doing this but had gotten away with it in the past. He was convicted of a class A assault in state court. As far as case law goes the ruling by the Feds still stands. I also forgot to mention that the 2 hit were not fighting but were the easiest target because they were standing still.

I don't see anything here (see below) that makes the protesters actions anything other then a lawful protected right to assemble even thought I don't like what they are saying.


Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

[Maddhattter]

I didn't justify killing someone. I justified the use of less than lethal force on a crowd who refuses to obey lawful orders.

Ok. I'll concede that I may have misread your post. If I did, I apologize.

I still say that I don't agree that people in public space, protesting, were compelled to follow an order which violates their first amendment rights, thereby meaning that the officers were not justified in removing people from the public space they were in.

Kind of how I see it, they're breaking other laws as the protest. Break the law the police come.

There has been no indication that these people broke any laws that wouldn't have violated their first amendment rights in the first place.

When the police show up do what you're told or expect some sort of force to be used.

It seems to me that you're implying that this is some kind of right for the police. If you're just stating that's the way it is, then changes are needed as the police do not have the right to violate the rights of others arbitrarily.

These people aren't worth the rubber bullets wasted on them though. Case and point

or this

Shall I keep going? I don't get the entitlement thing with people these days, everyone wants something for nothing.

Two incidents among thousands of protesters means the whole group is the problem? That's like saying that Japan is a bunch of criminals, so we should just go over there and force our laws and customs down their throat, regardless of their sovereignty. Who cares if people are hurt or killed in the process, right? They have criminals over there who rape people, so they're all bad.

For what its worth, Forever_Frost is usually a ftp kind of guy.

So, the fact that he appeared to be making an exception based on if he agreed with the protestors, or "animals", should be seen as progress?

Honestly mad, it is like you are ignoring what half the people are telling you. The police did not use deadly force, it was not intended to kill someone.

I've not ignored what was said. I've outright stated that the attack, lethal or not, on a group of protestors, in public space, while exercising their first amendment rights is illegal. I also apparently misunderstood the intent behind Forever_frost's post. So, I condemned what I read to be a justification of killing someone to disperse a legal gathering.

If you would pay attention to these protest you would know that they have been trespassing, blocking building entrances and refusing to leave these areas. That is a crime, but when you have thousands of people doing it at once, what do you suggest to do?

From the video, they were clearly in the street, so they were not trespassing.

There have also been many protests before this one. When a group of people commit a crime, those people are arrested. That gives no one the right, or justification, to violate the first amendment rights of the majority.

I would love to hear how you would get a crowd of people trespassing off the property.

Again, the police have handled the matter many times in many other protests. They arrest those breaking the law, and leave the rest to their legal protest.

They are not dispersing the crowd to stop the protests as you seem to believe.

No? What did they expect to happen when they fire tear gas and firing baton rounds into the crowd? That it would only affect the guilty parties?

They have been allowing them to protest, as it is anyones right.

As a Constitutional right, they don't allow it, they have no legal justification to stop it. But perhaps we just have a semantic disagreement here.

They are doing it to get the people off of someones property that doesn't want them there. Get it yet?

Again, there is no evidence to that. All evidence points to them removing the protesters from public space, thereby violating there rights to peaceful protests.

[Maddhattter]

Snipped due to the article being edited after being posted. So, here's the link to the article so people can read what was said.
http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/...0_arreste.html

As the article was only posted yesterday, I'm going to assume you missed

"UPDATE: Fed up with Occupy Wall Street-style encampments, police in cities around the country are increasingly cracking down on protesters who refuse to vacate public spaces."

at the top of your article.

Edit: Rereading the article, perhaps I was too hasty to assume that you edited the article to give the wrong impression. It appears that the entire section before the video is likely part of the update. So, I'm retracting the insinuation that I made.

[ceyko]

I believe these folks are camping over night and so forth and that's another reason they are trying to get rid of them. Generally, it does not seem like they are protesting during the day and going home at night.

If I'm not allowed to just put up a tent and camp with friends in front of city hall, I sure as shit don't want these douches doing it.

Honestly, I feel a lot worst about this guy having a hard time since he is a veteran. However, that does not by default make him right.

Do we really want these protesters ignoring all laws and being like folks in our early wars? Is that really what you want these dip shits doing?

[talisman]

This isn't the first time something like this has happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubén_Salazar

Read HSTs account of the events if you can find it. I forget which book it was published in. It was disturbing to say the least.

[SS Junk]

Veteran Scott Olsen Could Be The First Person To Die At A Wall Street Protest

You are all talking as if he's dead, and fuck the media for putting that kind of spin on this.

[mustangguy289]

If everybody would ignore them they will eventually go home. No police, no media attention, nothing. They will eventually self destruct.

[jasonw_2005]

I kinda see the point that both sides are trying to make. Should this guy have been popped in the back of the head? NO. That cop should've payed more attention to where he was aiming. With that being said if this guy was part of a group that was throwing bottles,rocks,and fine chinaware. U better believe the cops are gonna defend them selves. If a cop walks up to me points a gun at me and says "move ur ass" imma do it. If I truly believe that might rights are being violated I can sue his ass later. Remember the old saying. "if u walk away and live today that means u can still fight tomorrow".

[Lason]

I love how everyone cries about the consitution untill they dont agree with the messege then its "they shouldnt be there" and "shooting someone in the head is justified".

I dont agree with what they are saying but there is no reason the police need to be doing this. I hate seeing cities and govt breaking this up. Complete crap, if you dont like it then ignore them. They have a constitutional right to do this.

[Denny]

You are all talking as if he's dead, and fuck the media for putting that kind of spin on this.

Did you see the video of the incident? It doesn't matter if he dies or not, heads better roll for this.

[GhostTX]

WTH? The way I'm reading this, the whole thing was an accident. The police weren't trying to kill him. I'm betting the officer fired CS grenade out of habit into the crowd and the dude got tagged by it by mistake.

This isn't about the police murdering people. It's about a protest that didn't do what was asked of them, then told to them and they got the force applied to them. The individual that got tagged was at the wrong place at the wrong time.

[Denny]

WTH? The way I'm reading this, the whole thing was an accident. The police weren't trying to kill him. I'm betting the officer fired CS grenade out of habit into the crowd and the dude got tagged by it by mistake.

This isn't about the police murdering people. It's about a protest that didn't do what was asked of them, then told to them and they got the force applied to them. The individual that got tagged was at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Nope

[GhostTX]

Nope

Can't see Youtube at work.

[SS Junk]

Did you see the video of the incident? It doesn't matter if he dies or not, heads better roll for this.

Only problem I see in that video is a concussion grenade being tossed when the poor bastard was trying to be collected by his fellow protesters. I don't see any proof as to any one cop pointing and purposely shooting the poor bastard in the head as the media is portraying.

[Machx2]

I kinda see the point that both sides are trying to make. Should this guy have been popped in the back of the head? NO. That cop should've payed more attention to where he was aiming. With that being said if this guy was part of a group that was throwing bottles,rocks,and fine chinaware. U better believe the cops are gonna defend them selves. If a cop walks up to me points a gun at me and says "move ur ass" imma do it. If I truly believe that might rights are being violated I can sue his ass later. Remember the old saying. "if u walk away and live today that means u can still fight tomorrow".

I agree completely. The officer should have used alot more caution. Also in the video, it shows one officer throw what appears to be tear gas into a small crowd of people who go to help this guy. THAT officer in my opinion should be punished. That was stupid. These people were allowed to protest. They were told they were not allowed to camp out in the plaza ( which I understand is like a park) and could only occupy the plaza from 6am-10pm. As public as it may be, parks and areas still have time restrictions. When this happened they were forced to leave the plaza by riot officers. They were then trying to "take over" the area again. If you watch the videos you can see thousands of people. Some standing in the tear gas and around it still not leaving. These people are not just protesting, they are defacing property, taking a crap in the parks like animals, and turning cities into sewers.