• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pepper spray: US campus police suspended

Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

OK... For those of you who think the police were out of line, please tell me in your opinion, exactly what the police should have done to enforce the law in this situation?


Our department doesn't deal with civil issues! Please use the courts if you want something done further and went home.
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Our department doesn't deal with civil issues! Please use the courts if you want something done further and went home.

Sounds like your department is as useless as tits on a bull.
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Protect the protesters from unwanted violence if there were violence and force aimed against the protesters.

HUH?

I ask again, please tell me in your opinion, exactly what the police should have done to enforce the law in that situation?
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Our department doesn't deal with civil issues! Please use the courts if you want something done further and went home.

Am I to understand, that you are suggesting that police not enforce the law and just walk away?
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

HUH?

I ask again, please tell me in your opinion, exactly what the police should have done to enforce the law in that situation?

What law, exactly? What should the police have done to enforce the law with Rosa Parks?
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Sounds like your department is as useless as tits on a bull.

This is were I keep saying that we need to quit funding these monkeys, If they see no blatant crime being committed and no court injunction, then what went on here is worth the same, minus all the money pissed away with calling in the extra goons and the lawsuit payouts before it is said and done. What a sham.
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

OK... For those of you who think the police were out of line, please tell me in your opinion, exactly what the police should have done to enforce the law in this situation?

Handcuffed the sitting protesters and dragged them away.
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Am I to understand, that you are suggesting that police not enforce the law and just walk away?

The law must abide by the rights and liberties of the individual.
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

What law, exactly? What should the police have done to enforce the law with Rosa Parks?

The fact that protesters were violating the law, is not in dispute... So I ask again, please tell me in your opinion, exactly what the police should have done to enforce the law in this situation?
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

The law must abide by the rights and liberties of the individual.

I'm not asking for your opinion of the law they were violating, I'm asking you to please tell me in your opinion, exactly what the police should have done to enforce the law in this situation?
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

The fact that protesters were violating the law, is not in dispute... So I ask again, please tell me in your opinion, exactly what the police should have done to enforce the law in this situation?

What law? And I already said, if there were any laws being broken, the people were sitting on the ground with their hands by their sides... arrest them one by one. I've already shown that the courts have found this type of response to peaceful protest to be excessive. Go back one page and you can read it for yourself.
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Am I to understand, that you are suggesting that police not enforce the law and just walk away?

Sorry I thought I seen that you are conservative not a socialist, look you know as well as I do without getting hypocritical that law enforcement is one of the biggest social programs in the U.S.
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

I'm not asking for your opinion of the law they were violating, I'm asking you to please tell me in your opinion, exactly what the police should have done to enforce the law in this situation?

Since it was non-violent and passive, you could have handcuffed them and hauled them off. Though the use of arbitrary law to infringe upon peaceful association and protest is in and of itself very suspect.
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

That's not a valid reason to pepper spray anyone.

HEADWATERS FOREST DEFENSE v. THE COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT




This appellate court disagrees with you.

No, I don't think so. Were the individuals in this case surrounding the police? Were they interlocking arms as to prohibit the officers effecting an arrest on these people by not allowing them to be moved? Were these protesters that the court is talking about her blocking a walk, or road way?

Pepper spray is not only a legal, but an effective way to disperse a crowd, and effect arrests while minimizing the threat to officers involved in crowd control.


j-mac
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Since it was non-violent and passive, you could have handcuffed them and hauled them off. Though the use of arbitrary law to infringe upon peaceful association and protest is in and of itself very suspect.


No, you are wrong. They tried that. View the second video provided earlier. With the arms interlocked, they would have had to fight directly with the protesters.


j-mac
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

This is were I keep saying that we need to quit funding these monkeys, If they see no blatant crime being committed and no court injunction, then what went on here is worth the same, minus all the money pissed away with calling in the extra goons and the lawsuit payouts before it is said and done. What a sham.

How do you know they didn't observe a crime being committed?
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

The fact that protesters were violating the law, is not in dispute... So I ask again, please tell me in your opinion, exactly what the police should have done to enforce the law in this situation?

Your right someone may have been disorderly, considered the same as a traffic ticket. Maybe they should have issued some tickets. BUT NOPE! Law Enforcement breaks the laws on felony levels, did any of them get arrested?
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

What law? And I already said, if there were any laws being broken, the people were sitting on the ground with their hands by their sides... arrest them one by one. I've already shown that the courts have found this type of response to peaceful protest to be excessive. Go back one page and you can read it for yourself.

Nope, now you are changing your story. The arms of these people were clearly interlocked to prevent police from removing them one by one. And you haven't shown anything yet other than one particular case, where circumstances could very well have been different than this protest. The fact is they were ordered to clear the sidewalk, and they refused, the police then employed a common agent to subdue them and effect arrest. Perfectly legal.


j-mac
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

No, I don't think so. Were the individuals in this case surrounding the police? Were they interlocking arms as to prohibit the officers effecting an arrest on these people by not allowing them to be moved? Were these protesters that the court is talking about her blocking a walk, or road way?

Pepper spray is not only a legal, but an effective way to disperse a crowd, and effect arrests while minimizing the threat to officers involved in crowd control.

j-mac

You did not even read it, did you? First of all, they pepper sprayed people who were sitting down, not an "agitated crowd" - so quit attempting to misrepresent that situation. Secondly yes, they said you could not do that:

plaintiffsappellants ("protestors") linked themselves together with selfreleasing lock-down devices known as "black bears." A "black bear" is a cylinder with a rod or post welded into the center.

So as you can see, yes, they were locking themselves together - though these people were using "black bears", not just interlocking their arms.

Defendants asserted at trial that the protestors' use of
"black bears" constituted " `active' resistance to arrest," meriting the use of force. The Eureka Police Department defines
"active resistence" as occurring when the"subject is attempting to interfere with the officer's actions by inflicting pain or
physical injury to the officer without the use of a weapon or
object." 240 F.3d at 1202-3. Characterizing the protestors'
activities as "active resistance" is contrary to the facts of the
case, viewing them, as we must, in the light most favorable
to the protestors: the protestors were sitting peacefully, were
easily moved by the police, and did not threaten or harm the
officers. In sum, it would be clear to a reasonable officer that
it was excessive to use pepper spray against the nonviolent
protestors under these circumstances.

Defendants' repeated use of pepper spray was also
clearly unreasonable. As we recently concluded, the use of
pepper spray "may be reasonable as a general policy to bring
an arrestee under control, but in a situation in which an
arrestee surrenders and is rendered helpless, any reasonable
officer would know that a continued use of the weapon or a
refusal without cause to alleviate its harmful effects constitutes excessive force." LaLonde v. County of Riverside, 204
551F.3d 947, 961 (9th Cir. 2000) (emphasis supplied). Because
the officers had control over the protestors it would have been
clear to any reasonable officer that it was unnecessary to use
pepper spray to bring them under control, and even
less necessary to repeatedly use pepper spray against the
protestors when they refused to release from the"black
bears." It also would have been clear to any reasonable officer
that the manner in which the officers used the pepper spray
was unreasonable.
Lewis and Philip "authorized full spray
blasts of [pepper spray], not just Q-tip applications," despite
the fact that the manufacturer's label on the canisters of pepper spray defendants used " `expressly discouraged' spraying
[pepper spray] from distances of less than three feet." 240
F.3d at 1195, 1208

Got it? That's ****ing crystal clear.
 
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Nope, now you are changing your story. The arms of these people were clearly interlocked to prevent police from removing them one by one. And you haven't shown anything yet other than one particular case, where circumstances could very well have been different than this protest. The fact is they were ordered to clear the sidewalk, and they refused, the police then employed a common agent to subdue them and effect arrest. Perfectly legal.


j-mac

Dude, I presented a court case where they used metal bars to interlock themselves and even in that case it was found to be unreasonable for the cops to spray with mace. In fact, according to the appellate court, they believe you would have to be an unreasonable person to condone such activity. Their words, not mine. I bolded them for you in the post right about this one.
 
Last edited:
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Define "appropriate"


j-mac

I'm not talking to someone dishonest like you. Please refrain from commenting on my posts. Once you learn to stop misrepresenting facts and using criminal thinking to rationalize the officer's excessive use of force and escalation of the situation, I will be happy to converse with you.
 
Last edited:
Re: UC Berkley: Police use excessive force

Handcuffed the sitting protesters and dragged them away.

And you think that the protesters would have willingly allowed this? If you look at the video, you will see that they locked arms and made their wrists unaccessible. Did it occur to you, such action would have resulted in a lot of physical injury (as opposed to temporary irritation with pepper spray), with a high potential of a physical altercation between police and protesters breaking out? Such altercations often lead to felony assault charges being filed, while the use of pepper spray only resulted in misdemeanor charges. You are also assuming that the police had the man power to physically move all those students locked in arm like they were. Based on what I saw, that didn't look very likely.

The use of pepper spray succeeded in dispersing the protesters without bloodshed, without a physical altercation between police and protesters breaking out, and without any serious criminal charges being filed against anyone. I would say that the use of physical, brute force removal as you suggest, wouldn't have such a peaceful outcome.
 
Back
Top Bottom