Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 90

Thread: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

  1. #71
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,937

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    So the State made no response? No action? Then why do we even have this thread. The police obviously stood there and took no action against the people, and thus we have nothing to discuss.
    We have this thread because the person in question claims that the state took action, and another person claims that said claimed action would not be allowed in a War Zone.

    I can claim that the government spied on my personal computer and stole information, another person could claim such thing is illegal.

    Claims do not equal fact.

    IF what the individual who was injured says comes to light as being the actual truth of the matter then I think the cops in question went too far...IE, the guy was not doing anything threatening, his injury came from a cannister, and said cannister was actually fired from a weapon by an officer.

    However, at this point I have no idea if his story is true or not and nothing substantial enough to lead me to believe its true any more than for me to doubt its veracity. At this point I am not going to demand that the government prove something, that their response was appropriate, that may not be provable because it may not have happened as stated. I'm going to do the same thing I do in most matters or potential illegality...wait until all the emotion of the immediete circumstances dies out and try to look at all the facts as they actually become clear and make a judgement once something solid seems to form. That, from what I've seen, isn't where this issue is.

    I didn't make accusations. I merely claimed that the State must prove its case. It is the State which is limited, not the People.
    The State is not required to "prove" every claim made against it is false or else accept that said claim is true. Its ridiculous and unrealistic to demand them to do such.

  2. #72
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    We have this thread because the person in question claims that the state took action, and another person claims that said claimed action would not be allowed in a War Zone.

    I can claim that the government spied on my personal computer and stole information, another person could claim such thing is illegal.

    Claims do not equal fact.
    Certainly do not. But if there is recorded evidence of your computer being broken into, you can certainly say action was taken against you. It's not as clear cut in this case as in this case we SAW the cops firing tear gas and other projectiles into the crowd, so we KNOW that the State did take action. There is reaction against it, claims that how they conducted the action is not lawful under other sets of rules, etc. What is NOT in contention, however, is that of State action. We KNOW they took action, it's been measured.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    IF what the individual who was injured says comes to light as being the actual truth of the matter then I think the cops in question went too far...IE, the guy was not doing anything threatening, his injury came from a cannister, and said cannister was actually fired from a weapon by an officer.

    However, at this point I have no idea if his story is true or not and nothing substantial enough to lead me to believe its true any more than for me to doubt its veracity. At this point I am not going to demand that the government prove something, that their response was appropriate, that may not be provable because it may not have happened as stated. I'm going to do the same thing I do in most matters or potential illegality...wait until all the emotion of the immediete circumstances dies out and try to look at all the facts as they actually become clear and make a judgement once something solid seems to form. That, from what I've seen, isn't where this issue is.
    At this point we have immediate concern, however. From measured quantities we saw this man get injured during a period of launching projectiles and gas cans into the crowd (a technique that apparently isn't standard for dispersal). As this is government force against our own people, I do think that this requires investigation and not dismissal. There is enough from measured quantity to assume that there is a decent chance this man was injured through police action. Under such circumstance then, we must determine what happened. We must question the police as to why the responded in that manner, was that manner justified. Since this is action of the State against the exercise of the rights of the individual, we must demonstrate the State was within proper restraint to take the action it did.

    Whenever they fire into the crowds of our own people, it must be demonstrated that they acted justly and appropriately. Even if no one is hurt. Because the action is still being taken against our rights, and thus force used against our rights MUST BE JUSTIFIED. If not, then the State must be further explicitly restricted to prevent aggressive government force being used against our rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    The State is not required to "prove" every claim made against it is false or else accept that said claim is true. Its ridiculous and unrealistic to demand them to do such.
    Not every claim. But there's enough here to warrant the demand.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #73
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,937

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Certainly do not. But if there is recorded evidence of your computer being broken into, you can certainly say action was taken against you. It's not as clear cut in this case as in this case we SAW the cops firing tear gas and other projectiles into the crowd, so we KNOW that the State did take action.
    We have seen that in this particular case? Like I said in my first post, I've not read a ton which is why I was specifically asking for what evidence has been shown outside of what I mentioned above. I know they've shown things of tear gas at places...I didn't know if there was evidence that it happened at the location this gentleman was at.

    I do think that this requires investigation and not dismissal.
    I'm not against investigation, I have no issue with that. I'm just saying I'm not of the mind to start condemning and significantly accusing the government of definite wrong doing prior to said investigation.

  4. #74
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Quick question...

    has any definitive conclussion even came about that this guy WAS hit by a firearm launched cannister of tear gas, and was doing nothing prior to it?

    I've not been keeping up with it a ton, but from the little I've read and seen it seems all there is are protesters, already upset at the cops, claiming that's what happened and video that isn't anything but footage after the fact. I understand the notion that the Cops are potentially biased in what they claim happen, but the same can be said of the protesters.

    Its hard for me to scold the government for doing something it shouldn't do if we don't even know if they actually did said thing.
    Im still not convinced the guy was struck with anything.
    From the video I saw, two others just ran pretty much right on top of him and he fell, and didn't even try to get up at that point. Its unknown if some debris from a riot control munition uncontrolably flew into his head, or he just got knocked down by other protesters and smacked his head good on the pavement.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  5. #75
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,416
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    Im still not convinced the guy was struck with anything.
    From the video I saw, two others just ran pretty much right on top of him and he fell, and didn't even try to get up at that point. Its unknown if some debris from a riot control munition uncontrolably flew into his head, or he just got knocked down by other protesters and smacked his head good on the pavement.
    He went down like a sack of potatoes right after the big burst just downscreen.

    You can see it in the video if you look. My wife saw it first and pointed it out to me, but its there. Looks just like some piece of shrapnel got him, not that he was struck directly.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  6. #76
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Everywhere and Nowhere
    Last Seen
    03-07-12 @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,692

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Look at all the apologists coming to defend the actions of police brutality.

    If you care anything about American rights and the constitution, you would not be cheering for the disempowerment of your fellow citizens.

    I am disgusted with many commentators on this site. You repulse me with how you celebrate people getting their skulls cracked open and First Amendment rights jackbooted.

    You won't be celebrating when one day they come for you.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Everywhere and Nowhere
    Last Seen
    03-07-12 @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,692

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    At this point we have immediate concern, however. From measured quantities we saw this man get injured during a period of launching projectiles and gas cans into the crowd (a technique that apparently isn't standard for dispersal). As this is government force against our own people, I do think that this requires investigation and not dismissal. There is enough from measured quantity to assume that there is a decent chance this man was injured through police action. Under such circumstance then, we must determine what happened. We must question the police as to why the responded in that manner, was that manner justified. Since this is action of the State against the exercise of the rights of the individual, we must demonstrate the State was within proper restraint to take the action it did.
    I agree wholeheartedly. When police use this kind of force, it needs to be justified with accurate, follow up reporting. But it seems like they are just able to do it now without any real investigation into why, other than the word of a few.

    Why does the media, government, and some members of the public readily dismiss what the protesters have to say about what happened, yet they will immediately accept the story of some police officers?

    If police are seriously injuring people without just cause, they need to be brought up on charges. I'm tired of the double-standard.

  8. #78
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    He went down like a sack of potatoes right after the big burst just downscreen.

    You can see it in the video if you look. My wife saw it first and pointed it out to me, but its there. Looks just like some piece of shrapnel got him, not that he was struck directly.
    Which I can accept..........

    It disturbs me for folks to act as if the intent was to hit him in the head with a direct shot, like that stupid Marine in this article claims.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  9. #79
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Quote Originally Posted by Temporal View Post

    If police are seriously injuring people without just cause, they need to be brought up on charges. I'm tired of the double-standard.
    All you have are protesters making opposing claims.

    Except,

    We already have a protester who was present in Oakland during the attempted "Re-Taking" of the park (where the alleged "Brutality" occurred) who admitted on MSNBC that the crowd started throwing stuff at police before they began their crowd control techniques of using rubber bullets, riot control agents, etc.

    I admire her honest though, because she was very hesitant to answer the question, and then finally answered it with a sort of "So what?" attitude/tone.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  10. #80
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,416
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    Which I can accept..........

    It disturbs me for folks to act as if the intent was to hit him in the head with a direct shot, like that stupid Marine in this article claims.
    That would be ****ty and contrary to training I'm sure. Cops can be dicks and succumb to testosterone and adrenaline. Ive seen it with my own eyes. But I don't believe this to be the norm or even common.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •