|
|
Post by booley on Nov 22, 2011 0:56:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sadhuman on Nov 22, 2011 1:20:12 GMT -5
I am torn by this, I would rather police forces used stuff like pepper spray and tasers then having to use batons or guns. Pepper spray and tasers hurt like hell, but you get over it a lot faster then a broken arm or a bullet wound. But using it is something that has to be judged carefully and on a case by case basis.
I won't judge if the cops should have used it on the OWS or if the protesters deserved it or not. I wasn't there, I don't know all the facts and I am biased. I have always been pro police, I respect the job they have and the split second decisions that can ruin their lives. And I am all for the bad eggs in the force being smashed and thrown out as fast as possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by booley on Nov 22, 2011 1:40:09 GMT -5
.... And I am all for the bad eggs in the force being smashed and thrown out as fast as possible. that's the thing though. There aren't bad eggs. the whole chicken is corrupt. Ok that analogy obviously only goes so far but you know what I mean. It's not a problem of individual cops. It's the system itself that may be the problem. |
|
|
|
Post by ragabash on Nov 22, 2011 2:06:31 GMT -5
I am torn by this, I would rather police forces used stuff like pepper spray and tasers then having to use batons or guns. Pepper spray and tasers hurt like hell, but you get over it a lot faster then a broken arm or a bullet wound. But using it is something that has to be judged carefully and on a case by case basis. I won't judge if the cops should have used it on the OWS or if the protesters deserved it or not. I wasn't there, I don't know all the facts and I am biased. I have always been pro police, I respect the job they have and the split second decisions that can ruin their lives. And I am all for the bad eggs in the force being smashed and thrown out as fast as possible. The problem isn't that police are using things like pepper spray instead of more damaging weapons like batons or guns, it's that they're using non-lethal weapons in situations when they previously would have used nothing. Non-lethal weapons are giving police, all too often, an opportunity to use violence in a more easily dismissed way than cracking a skull or shooting someone would be. Just to look at a couple of recent cases, do you think that Tony Baloney would have been transferred to a desk job if he had randomly clubbed those four women in NYC with a baton instead of randomly spraying them? Or how about the 84 year old woman who was pepper sprayed in Oakland? Do you an officer would have been as likely to shoot her in the face as he had been to use spray on her? |
|
|
|
Post by Damen on Nov 22, 2011 2:07:09 GMT -5
As was pointed out on a show I was watching, the idea with giving police less-than-lethal weapons like beanbag rounds, rubber bullets, pepper spray and pepper balls is that they will be used in situations where lethal force would not be called on in the first place and that is the antithesis to goal of them being used in place of lethal force only.
However, police instead use them where force is not called upon. Instead of being Less-Than-Lethal weapons, they become "Compliance Tools." It's like me calling a 12-gauge shotgun loaded with buckshot a "Compliance Tool." These are weapons, pure and simple.
Case in point: the pepper-spraying at UC Davis. LTL weapons were meant to be used instead of live ammo, in situations where a cop would reach for his gun, he'd instead reach for a tazer or mace canister. At UC Davis, no cop would shoot sitting protestors with live ammo, but this guy hoses them down with mace in the most casual manner possible.
The only way he could be more casual about it is if he stuck his hand in his pocket at the time.
*EDIT*
It seems I have been ninja'd.
|
|
|
|
Post by sadhuman on Nov 22, 2011 2:15:56 GMT -5
I don't know anything about either of those two cases. And in both cases from what you have said I would have bounced that officer right out of the force, no matter how much good they had done before. No matter what the police have their will always be members who go over the top and they should be punished for it and done so in the open not in secret.
I would rather the police have as many options as they can before they have to use deadly force then to remove them because someone misuses them. And as I said I would rather if anyone who misuses it should be put through an open trial and booted out.
*Edit*
Not all of the "non lethal" weapons are meant to replace live ammo. They are there to stop police getting physical and hurting the person or themselves. I would rather be pepper sprayed then have four cops tackle me down. And to make it clear MISUSE of the lethal or non lethal options should be punished and harshly. Police should be held to a high standard.
|
|
|
|
Post by sylvana on Nov 22, 2011 3:19:15 GMT -5
I agree with sadhuman for the most part.
Living in a country with some of the most ludicrous criminal protecting laws in the world and with the police being corrupt from top to bottom I would far prefer to be tazered than shot.
With this stupid laws I mentioned though, it has gotten to the point where non lethal weapons are treated as almost lethal weapons. If a criminal suffers from asthma and gets pepper sprayed, I am the one in trouble. While this is the most ludicrous law in the world in a country where a house breaking often ends with the entire family brutalized raped and murdered. In a country like America it would be a really good thing.
Non lethal weapons should be treated like lethal weapons. Whenever a police officer fired their weapon, they have to give an account for it especially if someone was injured. Similarly they must give complete accounts for every time they utilize non lethal weapons. Reliance on these tools breeds carelessness in their duties and to be blunt, non lethal weapons can kill. Most of the time they don't, but we don't want a dead body on our hands before the police realize the truth.
|
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Nov 22, 2011 7:20:16 GMT -5
Pepper spray and tasers hurt like hell, but you get over it a lot faster then a broken arm or a bullet wound. Nobody disputes the use of lethal force when it is required. What we'd like is for the police to use it only then. Which is what the police department rejects. The police department would like a one-size-fits-all policy: police get to use whatever they like, whenever they want. You get to complain, maybe. Most liberals would like the decision to be made on the balance of public and personal safety, not police convenience. |
|
|
|
Post by largeham on Nov 22, 2011 8:18:21 GMT -5
They are not non-lethal, the correct term should be less-lethal. Also, fuck the police. They may be part of the 99% but they sure as hell aren't on their side. But this is nothing new. The problem isn't that police are using things like pepper spray instead of more damaging weapons like batons or guns, it's that they're using non-lethal weapons in situations when they previously would have used nothing. Non-lethal weapons are giving police, all too often, an opportunity to use violence in a more easily dismissed way than cracking a skull or shooting someone would be. I agree with this. I am torn by this, I would rather police forces used stuff like pepper spray and tasers then having to use batons or guns. Pepper spray and tasers hurt like hell, but you get over it a lot faster then a broken arm or a bullet wound. But using it is something that has to be judged carefully and on a case by case basis. I won't judge if the cops should have used it on the OWS or if the protesters deserved it or not. I wasn't there, I don't know all the facts and I am biased. I have always been pro police, I respect the job they have and the split second decisions that can ruin their lives. And I am all for the bad eggs in the force being smashed and thrown out as fast as possible. Possibly it would have benn better not to use anything at all? There was no cause to attack the protestors in anyway, be it with peppers-spray, tasers or other less-lethal weapons. Also, getting rid of bad eggs won't change anything. The police are a tool for repression and always will be. Filling the institution with people who 'care' and 'want to make a difference' won't change the fact that they are used to protect the state and its interests. |
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Nov 22, 2011 8:39:25 GMT -5
Because pepper spray in the eye is so painless.  |
|
|
|
Post by gyeonghwa on Nov 22, 2011 14:00:47 GMT -5
Bill O'Reilly and Megyn Kell on Fox News said it's just a food product. Of course, they wouldn't be saying that if they got sprayed in the face. |
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Nov 22, 2011 14:18:17 GMT -5
That video was hilarious. "Well, there may have been SOMETHING off-screen that made the cop feel threatened."
Like a bear! You don't KNOW! There COULD have been!
But, in fairness, she was just explaining the concept of Pepper Spray to him. It's not like she literally said, "What are they complaining about? It's delicious!"
|
|
|
|
Post by SimSim on Nov 22, 2011 16:29:12 GMT -5
Bill O'Reilly and Megyn Kell on Fox News said it's just a food product. Of course, they wouldn't be saying that if they got sprayed in the face. The part that angered me the most was when O'Reilly says that we shouldn't Monday morning quarterback the police and that UC Davis is a liberal place. That heavily implies it'd be an issue for him if this occured somewhere conservative. Political ideology shouldn't matter here, peaceful protesters shouldn't be reacted to violently by police. Yes, I do consider being sprayed in the face multiple times with pepper spray to be violence. To put things in to perspective a bell pepper rates 0 Scovilles, a jalapeno pepper rates 3,500-8,000, police grade pepper spray is 500,000-2milion. I've gotten a jalapeno seed in my eye before, that was pretty painful. I can't imagine the pain from getting pepper sprayed multiple times. |
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Nov 22, 2011 16:30:03 GMT -5
That video was hilarious. "Well, there may have been SOMETHING off-screen that made the cop feel threatened." Like a bear! You don't KNOW! There COULD have been! Oh, my god! A bear 200 feet from the protester! Spray the protester! |
|
|
|
Post by lexikon on Nov 22, 2011 16:38:44 GMT -5
From what I heard, some of the people got pretty severe burns.
|
|
