The Occupy Wall Street Movement is WORKING!!!

[Synthaholic]

Again I notice that no one is posting what happened in the minutes before the police used the spray.

Fallows/The Atlantic


3) Shooting vs spraying. Reader MS sends in a link to a different UC Davis video.

I'd like to direct to you to this far less publicized video [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuWEx6Cfn-I"]far less publicized video[/ame] that starts a couple of minutes earlier in the incident, where Officer Pike [who did the spraying] seems to have threatened the students that he and his men would shoot them:

At that point in the video, they are clearly brandishing their non-lethal guns.

Again, more questions...

- I'm sure he would now try to say he meant 'shoot them with pepper spray', but notice his officers' posture and that Pike immediately rejoins their ranks. It's only later, after the crowd yelling "don't shoot students" and some seeming deliberation that the pepper spray is fetched. Plus, why use the verb "shoot", when "spray" would be more appropriate?

- How non-lethal is it to shoot those guns from a standing position down towards the heads of protesters at close range?

- Does it not at least violate policy to shoot even non-lethal guns at perps that have their back turned to you, aren't menacing anyone, and aren't fleeing?

- It's clear to a viewer of the video that Pike meant that his officers would shoot protesters with non-lethal weapons, not their lethal firearms. However, considering the seated protesters had their backs to the officers, did/could they know that?
​

4) Cameras. *snip*

None of the wingnuts want to talk about this.

 

[WillowTree]

Again I notice that no one is posting what happened in the minutes before the police used the spray.

Fallows/The Atlantic


3) Shooting vs spraying. Reader MS sends in a link to a different UC Davis video.

I'd like to direct to you to this far less publicized video [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuWEx6Cfn-I"]far less publicized video[/ame] that starts a couple of minutes earlier in the incident, where Officer Pike [who did the spraying] seems to have threatened the students that he and his men would shoot them:

At that point in the video, they are clearly brandishing their non-lethal guns.

Again, more questions...

- I'm sure he would now try to say he meant 'shoot them with pepper spray', but notice his officers' posture and that Pike immediately rejoins their ranks. It's only later, after the crowd yelling "don't shoot students" and some seeming deliberation that the pepper spray is fetched. Plus, why use the verb "shoot", when "spray" would be more appropriate?

- How non-lethal is it to shoot those guns from a standing position down towards the heads of protesters at close range?

- Does it not at least violate policy to shoot even non-lethal guns at perps that have their back turned to you, aren't menacing anyone, and aren't fleeing?

- It's clear to a viewer of the video that Pike meant that his officers would shoot protesters with non-lethal weapons, not their lethal firearms. However, considering the seated protesters had their backs to the officers, did/could they know that?
​

4) Cameras. *snip*

None of the wingnuts want to talk about this.

They coulda shudda killed two stinky birds with one stone and hauled out the high pressures hoses.. free bath and moving right along.. that's my song and I'm stickin to it.. how did the liberals amass 200 pounds of liberal feces in Santa Cruz,, that musta took some extraordinary pooping. donchyathink?

 

[naturegirl]

Oh it's working alright. They are looking like total spoiled, gimme, gimme brats. Kinda like the kid that won't sit in the time out chair. It accomplishes nothing, they already cost a lot of businesses around their areas why not get a couple of cops fired. Such great minds, too bad they're not putting them to use, you know like working somewhere.

They are nothing but little kids having a temper tantrum, that's how the adults view them anyway.

 

[WillowTree]

Oh it's working alright. They are looking like total spoiled, gimme, gimme brats. Kinda like the kid that won't sit in the time out chair. It accomplishes nothing, they already cost a lot of businesses around their areas why not get a couple of cops fired. Such great minds, too bad they're not putting them to use, you know like working somewhere.

They are nothing but little kids having a temper tantrum, that's how the adults view them anyway.

It's working like the took EX Lax or something.

 

[naturegirl]

Oh it's working alright. They are looking like total spoiled, gimme, gimme brats. Kinda like the kid that won't sit in the time out chair. It accomplishes nothing, they already cost a lot of businesses around their areas why not get a couple of cops fired. Such great minds, too bad they're not putting them to use, you know like working somewhere.

They are nothing but little kids having a temper tantrum, that's how the adults view them anyway.

It's working like the took EX Lax or something.

(my new favorite smiley when talking about OWS )

 

[blastoff]

It is?

How Did Occupy D.C. Protesters Respond to a Table Full of Job Applications?

The news media watchdog Accuracy in Media (AIM) released a video Wednesday that may denounce the notions from some that the Occupy protesters are primarily concerned with jobs.

In it, “head hunters” set up a table full of job applications near the protest and start offering them to protesters. But the reception they get, according to the video, is less than warm. To many, that might seem odd considering the protesters have camped out in our nations capital for over a month following the Occupy Wall Street protest that began on September 17, partly because of no jobs. Accuracy in Media put it this way in a written statement:

“After more than a month of protest demands for better employment opportunities and benefits, Accuracy in Media saw fit to test their desires with…employment applications. Our ‘headhunters’ were treated to every excuse as to why these jobs aren’t good enough for them. We guess middle management opportunities with healthcare and 401k benefits aren’t desirable anymore.”

Occupy DC Ignores Head Hunters Offering Job Applications | Video | TheBlaze.com

They apparently don't want jobs... so what is it they want? Money for nothing? Fuck 'em.

But....but...make it money for nothing and your chicks for free and maybe I'll consider joining.

 

[Gadawg73]

I would rather that these peaceful demostrators were treated humanely.

Ollie, you seem like a decent fellow. This is America. People have the right to protest.

Even when in violation of the Law, when the tone is peaceful, it should be respected. Leave the mace, the tazers, the batons, the Tear Gas, for when Violence does break out. Don't Incite and inflame by using extreme measures when they are not warranted. Don't blur the distinction between right and wrong.

here's the problem. The protesters know this. Once they have been told to move along, they sit or lie in place. This forces the polce to use physical force in order to perform their duty. At times the individuals become belligerent which then requires the police to use no lethal weaponry.
This is all part of the plan. Make the cops look bad and gain sympathy for themselves.
If it were up to me, I'd have the police set up the loudest most annoying music system and torture them with noise.

It doesn't force the police to do a damn thing. You know squat of police procedure.
Law enforcement rules of engagement do not act on being forced to do anything. Their actions are based on the law and their safety. The law requires them to arrest those that break the law.
They never made an attempt to arrest anyone.
No one has made the cops look bad. They did that themselves.
And what is my plan? I have been the loudest opponent of these Occutards on here since these morons have started.
The UC Davis campus police are about as ignorant as I have seen in 30 years. The strategy to use is well known on college campuses. Arrest and fine a miminum of $1000 and then Mommy and Daddy has to bail out these lazy brats. Then the kids quit doint it because the spicket is turned off my Mommy and Daddy if they do it again.
I say the police knew that and ignored that. They wantes to rough ip these kids no matter what.
Happens all the time folks. Undisciplined law enforcement is a serious problem. Low pay and a thankless job is NO EXCUSE to break the law.

 

[Gadawg73]

We ran off the Occutards here in Atlanta very well without having to pepper spray anyone.
Imagine that.
I vividly remember in the late 60s when the police COULD USE the old long metal MagLites. Most all of you whipper snapper young Rambo wannabes here were not even born then.
MagLite made those 18 inch metal flashlights for a reason and it was not to lighten up anything other than someone's head.
Anyone that knows anything about police procedure and crowd control can see that what went on with the campus police out there was illegal.
Being a police officer or campus police is a very hard job and they deserve our respect. However, they do not deserve A FREE PASS to attack unarmed citizens that are not a risk.

 

[Gadawg73]

The head of campus police was suspended today. Take a look at her resume and one can see she has NO street experience whatsoever. Career desk cop.
Imagine that.

 

[Gadawg73]

Even when in violation of the Law, when the tone is peaceful, it should be respected. Leave the mace, the tazers, the batons, the Tear Gas, for when Violence does break out. Don't Incite and inflame by using extreme measures when they are not warranted. Don't blur the distinction between right and wrong.

here's the problem. The protesters know this. Once they have been told to move along, they sit or lie in place. This forces the polce to use physical force in order to perform their duty. At times the individuals become belligerent which then requires the police to use no lethal weaponry.
This is all part of the plan. Make the cops look bad and gain sympathy for themselves.
If it were up to me, I'd have the police set up the loudest most annoying music system and torture them with noise.

The plan of Non-Violent Civil Disobedience is to Force Arrest, Give Witness in Court, as to why you were compelled to break the Law in the first place. What Perceived Injustice you are willing to sacrifice your time and freedom to act against in such a way, is on you. from MLK, Gandhi, Locke, it is about facing Prosecution to battle a greater wrong. Be it on target, or misguided, is another issue. The side effects like overburdening the system, is another issue.

The Cop's need to recognize and distinguish between Committed Nonviolence and Actual Threat, it is not the same, nor should it be treated in the same way. There is Rally, there is Protest and Demonstration, There is Non-Violent Civil Disobedience, there is Riot. You treat everything like Riot, they will all end like Riot, fueling Dissent.

Excellent.

 

[Gadawg73]

Well the bull shit artist cop left out THE LAW. It has to be active resistance WITH AN ATTEMPT TO FLEE.

cite the Ga law

Resisting arrest IS AN ATTEMPT TO FLEE.
Without an attempt to get away how, IN ANY WAY, is there EVER resisting arrest?
In all states.
California law is applicable here so let us take a look at that:
People v. Bower "even an outright refusal to cooperate with police officers CANNOT create adequate grounds for police intrusion"
That pretty much sums it up here sports fans and the Chief of Police of the campus was from Washington state.
And there is a lot more California law.
People v. Quiroga "It surely can not be supposed that Penal Code Section 148 (giving a police order) criminalizes a person's failure to respond to police orders"
Wow, California case law goes so far as to it not being a crime to NOT respond to police orders.
I hope these campus police hire good lawyers. They are going to need them.

 

[Gadawg73]

And they do not have "full training". Some do I am sure as most likely a lot of them are retired and 2nding their years. Nothing wrong with that as I like to see that but someone made a big BOO BOO on this and watch the heads roll.
As they should. Lack of professionalism.

In many states, sworn officers must attend a police academy.
Here in NC, all sworn police officers (power of arrest on public or private property) must attend a police academy and acquire Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET) certification.
Look, the protesters are smart. They know what buttons to push. They know how to push the envelope.
The general public has had enough and probably, so has law enforcement.
OWS is losing public support. With each day, the next traffic snarl or street closing pisses off working people, OWS loses credibility.
Enough! Time to set things right again. If the politically correct hand wringers don't like it, they will just have to be upset.

Man, these Occutards are dumb ass college kids. Spoiled brats pampered since birth.
In my world that does not translate to "smart".
Campus police can or can not be POST certified.
You loved it too watching those Occutards get sprayed.
Something bad wrong about that Moe. It ain't legal. We are a nation of LAWS, not men and their various biases and opinions.
They broke the law. Deal with it. I knew you got off on that but it ain't legal.

 

[boilermaker55]

His version of OWS and veterans.
Watch the video.
Listen to his remarks about veterans and to the OWS movement in general.
Rep. Joe Walsh: Veterans at ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protests are anti-American | The Raw Story

 

[Gadawg73]

His version of OWS and veterans.
Watch the video.
Listen to his remarks about veterans and to the OWS movement in general.
Rep. Joe Walsh: Veterans at ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protests are anti-American | The Raw Story

He is an idiot but he is right about 1 thing:
Occutards ARE Barry's kids. He supports them 100%.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Well the bull shit artist cop left out THE LAW. It has to be active resistance WITH AN ATTEMPT TO FLEE.

cite the Ga law

Resisting arrest IS AN ATTEMPT TO FLEE.
Without an attempt to get away how, IN ANY WAY, is there EVER resisting arrest?
In all states.
California law is applicable here so let us take a look at that:
People v. Bower "even an outright refusal to cooperate with police officers CANNOT create adequate grounds for police intrusion"
That pretty much sums it up here sports fans and the Chief of Police of the campus was from Washington state.
And there is a lot more California law.


People v. Quiroga "It surely can not be supposed that Penal Code Section 148 (giving a police order) criminalizes a person's failure to respond to police orders"
Wow, California case law goes so far as to it not being a crime to NOT respond to police orders.
I hope these campus police hire good lawyers. They are going to need them.

resisting arrest is grounds for police intrusion

 

[Intense]

Here is a Group I was affiliated with long ago. They really did a good job both Organizing and keeping the peace. It was a good structure. Very few People Injured.

The Abalone Alliance (1977–1985) was a nonviolent civil disobedience group formed to shut down the Pacific Gas and Electric Company's Diablo Canyon Power Plant near San Luis Obispo on the central California coast in the United States. They modeled their affinity group-based organizational structure after the Clamshell Alliance which was then protesting the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant in coastal New Hampshire. The group of activists took the name "Abalone Alliance" referring to the tens of thousands of wild California Red Abalone that were killed in 1974 in Diablo Cove when the unit's plumbing had its first hot flush.

The Abalone Alliance staged blockades and occupations at the Diablo Canyon Power Plant site between 1977 and 1984.[1] Nearly two thousand people were arrested during a two-week blockade in 1981, exceeding Seabrook as the largest number arrested at an anti-nuclear protest in the United States.[2]

Abalone Alliance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Intense]

Theories

In seeking an active form of civil disobedience, one may choose to deliberately break certain laws, such as by forming a peaceful blockade or occupying a facility illegally, though sometimes violence has been known to occur. Protesters practice this non-violent form of civil disorder with the expectation that they will be arrested. Others also expect to be attacked or even beaten by the authorities. Protesters often undergo training in advance on how to react to arrest or to attack, so that they will do so in a manner that quietly or limply resists without threatening the authorities.

Mahatma Gandhi outlined several rules for civil resisters (or satyagrahi) in the time when he was leading India in the struggle for Independence from the British Empire. For instance, they were to express no anger, never retaliate, submit to the opponent's orders and assaults, submit to arrest by the authorities, surrender personal property when confiscated by the authorities but refuse to surrender property held in trust, refrain from swearing and insults (which are contrary to ahimsa), refrain from saluting the Union flag, and protect officials from insults and assaults even at the risk of the resister's own life.

Civil disobedience is usually defined as pertaining to a citizen's relation to the state and its laws, as distinguished from a constitutional impasse in which two public agencies, especially two equally sovereign branches of government, conflict. For instance, if the head of government of a country were to refuse to enforce a decision of that country's highest court, it would not be civil disobedience, since the head of government would be acting in his capacity as public official rather than private citizen.[18]

Ronald Dworkin held that there are three types of civil disobedience:

"Integrity-based" civil disobedience occurs when a citizen disobeys a law he feels is immoral, as in the case of northerners disobeying the fugitive slave laws by refusing to turn over escaped slaves to authorities.
"Justice-based" civil disobedience occurs when a citizen disobeys laws in order to lay claim to some right denied to him, as when blacks illegally protested during the Civil Rights Movement.
"Policy-based" civil disobedience occurs when a person breaks the law in order to change a policy (s)he believes is dangerously wrong.[19]

Some theories of civil disobedience hold that civil disobedience is only justified against governmental entities. Brownlee argues that disobedience in opposition to the decisions of non-governmental agencies such as trade unions, banks, and private universities can be justified if it reflects "a larger challenge to the legal system that permits those decisions to be taken". The same principle, she argues, applies to breaches of law in protest against international organizations and foreign governments.[20]

It is usually recognized that lawbreaking, if it is not done publicly, at least must be publicly announced in order to constitute civil disobedience.[21] But Stephen Eilmann argues that if it is necessary to disobey rules that conflict with morality, we might ask why disobedience should take the form of public civil disobedience rather than simply covert lawbreaking. If a lawyer wishes to help a client overcome legal obstacles to securing his natural rights, he might, for instance, find that assisting in fabricating evidence or committing perjury is more effective than open disobedience. This assumes that common morality does not have a prohibition on deceit in such situations.[22] The Fully Informed Jury Association's publication "A Primer for Prospective Jurors" notes, "Think of the dilemma faced by German citizens when Hitler's secret police demanded to know if they were hiding a Jew in their house."[23] By this definition, civil disobedience could be traced back to the Book of Exodus, where Shiphrah and Puah refused a direct order of Pharaoh but misrepresented how they did it. (Exodus 1: 15-19)

Civil disobedience - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SFC Ollie]

In seeking an active form of civil disobedience, one should choose to actually know what end result you are attempting to achieve.

 

[Gadawg73]

In seeking an active form of civil disobedience, one should choose to actually know what end result you are attempting to achieve.

I like it Ollie! The Occutards do not have a clue what they want.
But that has nothing to do with being assaulted for not responding to a police command.
What the cops did there was against the law. I saw many videos today and overkill is an understatement of what happened.
Wrong is wrong and there are no excuses for wrong.

 

[Gadawg73]

cite the Ga law

Resisting arrest IS AN ATTEMPT TO FLEE.
Without an attempt to get away how, IN ANY WAY, is there EVER resisting arrest?
In all states.
California law is applicable here so let us take a look at that:
People v. Bower "even an outright refusal to cooperate with police officers CANNOT create adequate grounds for police intrusion"
That pretty much sums it up here sports fans and the Chief of Police of the campus was from Washington state.
And there is a lot more California law.


People v. Quiroga "It surely can not be supposed that Penal Code Section 148 (giving a police order) criminalizes a person's failure to respond to police orders"
Wow, California case law goes so far as to it not being a crime to NOT respond to police orders.
I hope these campus police hire good lawyers. They are going to need them.

resisting arrest is grounds for police intrusion

First you have to have an ATTEMPT to arrest someone.
That never happened. They never attempted to arrest anyone.
All they did was command them to leave and help them leave.
Try all you want but what happened was wrong and against the law. Pepper spraying kids in the face for not getting up and leaving.
Anyone that supports undisciplined and lazy police are asking for larger problems in the future.