• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Occupy Wall St - Occupy Everywhere, Occupy Together!

Status
Not open for further replies.
You act as if this place should be the pinnacle of discourse on the movement and its issues when, really, it's just a forum. It doesn't matter if it's being trolled and it's your prerogative as to whether or not you answer them. You can still have this highly intellectual discourse that you speak of, you just choose not to.

As for civil discourse in real life, yeah, that generally doesn't happen. I mean, if you look at the OWS movement it should be clear enough that it doesn't.

A huge injustice is present in our society and peaceful protestors, no matter how un-organized, should not be treated like shit because they are trying to uphold some responsibility on their future, in hopes of preventing more financial criminality/corruption.

Manos tends to ignore this form of criminality and instead spams his agenda. When one questions him about OWS criminality vs Wall Street criminality he purposefully ignores it.

This is not a human perspective. This is not attempting to have civil discourse. This is about supporting ideology no matter what and shouting down anything that brings that ideology into question, Bill O Reilly style.
 
Am embarrassment to the city and people of Philadelphia.

Have you even listened to him speak? Ray Lewis has spoken very highly of the officers down at OWS. He said regarding the situation and his arrest, and this is from his appearance on Up with Chris Hayes (which everyone should watch he brings up a lot of good points),"It was exemplary of professional conduct with me and every protester that I witnessed."

He also regrets the sign he had that said "NYPD- do not be Wall Street Mercenaries" because he felt it came off as calling the officers mercenaries already rather than as a plea to them not to become them.

He seems very level-headed and reasonable and pretty far from an embarrassment.
 

Alucrid

Banned
A huge injustice is present in our society and peaceful protestors, no matter how un-organized, should not be treated like shit because they are trying to uphold some responsibility on their future, in hopes of preventing more financial criminality/corruption.

Manos tends to ignore this form of criminality and instead spams his agenda. When one questions him about OWS criminality vs Wall Street criminality he purposefully ignores it.

This is not a human perspective. This is not attempting to have civil discourse. This is about supporting ideology no matter what and shouting down anything that brings that ideology into question, Bill O Reilly style.

Pepper spraying the college kids? Definitely overboard and could have easily been dispersed via another method. As to why they were required to be dispersed I'm not clear on. Was it the university that wanted them gone?

However, taking down that asshat who flicked the cops cap off his head was, in my opinion, completely justified.
 

akira28

Member
Keep in mind, lurkers read the thread but don't post. Some of them are undecided on the issue, and they watch how both sides of the debate play out. Personally, I'm glad Manos is the spokesmen for the 1%.


Thread could be better. He might believe what he says but that doesn't make him any more or less honest or right. Keep in mind this thread was were we all went when we left his thread. Where he said he would stay, until someone, not me, did the genie/bottle thing. And as soon as we find the 7th dragon ball, guess where he's going?

However, taking down that asshat who flicked the cops cap off his head was, in my opinion, completely justified.

That's when they lost me. Can't handle challenges or perceived embarrassment or humiliation. Power to abuse. Bad combination. Seemed like a bully getting his shots back in because someone made him look bad in front of the class. He should have been arrested as peacfully as possible, but instead he ended up bloody. "He got hurt during a fall when they forcibly took him, during arrest." And that's just a rumor that made it to the news.
 

Alucrid

Banned
Thank you.



Keep in mind, lurkers read the thread but don't post. Some of them are undecided on the issue, and they watch how both sides of the debate play out. Personally, I'm glad Manos is the spokesmen for the 1%



However you feel about Manos, he is expressing his real opinion. Minus is intentionally saying things he does not believe to get a rise out of people, the definition of trolling.

To be fair a lot of the pro-OWS people are pretty grating as well.
 

WARCOCK

Banned
Pepper spraying the college kids? Definitely overboard and could have easily been dispersed via another method. As to why they were required to be dispersed I'm not clear on. Was it the university that wanted them gone?

However, taking down that asshat who flicked the cops cap off his head was, in my opinion, completely justified.

~
 

They had a similar amendment proposed earlier this month to allow Congress to legislate general campaign finance reform.

It was ignored by every Congressmen save for the two that devised it:

http://tomudall.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=968

Edit:

And a guy in the comments section points out that this new amendment would allow for non-profit entities to donate money:

Robert Murri
There is a major problem with this particular amendment. It says "For-Profit" entities are prohibited. That means the super PAC are still allowed to send as much as they want in an election since they are formed as non-profit entities. He needs to change it to read that no entity whatsoever, be it a corporation, limited liability company, partnership or sole proprietor as authorized by any state within the union of the United States, by the United States of America or any foreign government or state is prohibited from participating in any way, to include but not limited to monetary contributions or in-king value to a candidate, political part and special interest group for the purpose of promoting, advocating, or otherwise influencing the political and election process. Such entities are NOT natural persons and do not enjoy the protections and rights of the Constitution of the United State of America. Only "Natural Persons" who are eligible to vote in the federal elections, any state or subdivision thereof election shall be allowed to contribute money or in-kind value to a candidate or political party. Limits of such contributions may be regulated by the Congress of the United States and the states therein.
 

Eteric Rice

Member
Is Occupy going to do something in terms of voting when the time comes?

I'm just wondering, because I'm on 4chan's /pol/ board, and this one guy (allegedly a tea partier) says that they're banking on the OWS people not voting so they can get more of their republicans in office.

Just curious.
 

bounchfx

Member
this is probably the biggest chance anyone in congress right now for them to be remembered positively, if they just stop being so fucking greedy and think of the people they're supposed to be serving first.

same with Obama.. he can be remembered for all the bullshit he did, or he can step up and be remembered for setting America straight.

at least that's how it feels to me right now :(
 
Is Occupy going to do something in terms of voting when the time comes?

I'm just wondering, because I'm on 4chan's /pol/ board, and this one guy (allegedly a tea partier) says that they're banking on the OWS people not voting so they can get more of their republicans in office.

Just curious.

this is probably the biggest chance anyone in congress right now for them to be remembered positively, if they just stop being so fucking greedy and think of the people they're supposed to be serving first.

same with Obama.. he can be remembered for all the bullshit he did, or he can step up and be remembered for setting America straight.

at least that's how it feels to me right now :(

Change isn't going to come from within the power structure. It's going to come because the people exert overwhelming pressure on whoever's in office. There could be a republican sweep in 2012 and it wouldn't matter. The anti-war movement destroyed LBJ's political career and when Nixon, a republican, came into office, he withdrew from Vietnam.
 

Eteric Rice

Member
Change isn't going to come from within the power structure. It's going to come because the people exert overwhelming pressure on whoever's in office. There could be a republican sweep in 2012 and it wouldn't matter. The anti-war movement destroyed LBJ's political career and when Nixon, a republican, came into office, he withdrew from Vietnam.

Maybe so, but participating would still be a good thing. Even if we voted for a third party candidate.
 

Jenga

Banned
Is Occupy going to do something in terms of voting when the time comes?

I'm just wondering, because I'm on 4chan's /pol/ board, and this one guy (allegedly a tea partier) says that they're banking on the OWS people not voting so they can get more of their republicans in office.

Just curious.
for one i wouldn't take anything on /pol/ seriously
 

Brolic Gaoler

formerly Alienshogun
Pepper spraying the college kids? Definitely overboard and could have easily been dispersed via another method. As to why they were required to be dispersed I'm not clear on. Was it the university that wanted them gone?

However, taking down that asshat who flicked the cops cap off his head was, in my opinion, completely justified.


It looks like they are blocking a walk way, I don't know the specifics of what happened though.

I'm curious though, what would you consider "easier methods of dispersion" of a group that refuses to move and have interlocked themselves together? Not looking for an anger response, and I'm not poking you. I'm trying to see what you think should have been the correct course of action to remove the kids.

I will say that if you're going to tell me physically separate them, well 1. That's easier said than done when 1 person isn't cooperating, let alone a mass of people and 2. That's physically MORE dangerous than the use of pepper spray in this instance.
 

Alucrid

Banned
It looks like they are blocking a walk way, I don't know the specifics of what happened though.

I'm curious though, what would you consider "easier methods of dispersion" of a group that refuses to move and have interlocked themselves together? Not looking for an anger response, and I'm not poking you. I'm trying to see what you think should have been the correct course of action to remove the kids.

I will say that if you're going to tell me physically separate them, well 1. That's easier said than done when 1 person isn't cooperating, let alone a mass of people and 2. That's physically MORE dangerous than the use of pepper spray in this instance.


Call up their parents and tell them to halt their allowance.

ba dum pshhhh
 

Alucrid

Banned
lol, but seriously.

Ok, I admit, I'm probably wrong in terms of crowd dispersal methods. I'm not exactly sure what better way there would have been. Although, and I fully admit that this is a baseless assumption on my part, from the looks of them I'm not sure they would have put up much of a fight had they been arrested.
 

Brolic Gaoler

formerly Alienshogun
Ok, I admit, I'm probably wrong in terms of crowd dispersal methods. I'm not exactly sure what better way there would have been. Although, and I fully admit that this is a baseless assumption on my part, from the looks of them I'm not sure they would have put up much of a fight had they been arrested.


They are already interlocked. I've experienced a lot of these types of protests (being ex military a lot of people tried to block the port of Tacoma in exactly this manner). A person when they don't want to cooperate/be arrested is very, very hard to manipulate, even small people are hard to get in the "right" position to arrest. That's typically why you see 2+ people ontop of/going at 1 person to subdue them. That's also why pepper spray/tasers are used.

The "physical only" act of restraining/subduing/arresting just 1 person is extremely dangerous not only to the police, but to the person being subdued. That's why pepper spray and tasers are actually a better option both for the police and the public, even though they are demonized by the public.

With these protests and the ones I experienced in Tacoma you're not just dealing with 1 person, you're dealing with a whole lot, and that makes it exponentially harder/more dangerous.


As for the protest (not directly to you Alucrid)
I'm not against the protest at all, however, civil disobedience is a great thing. Those of you FOR this protest should be grateful and thankful you have videos of people being "abused." That only vindicates, galvanizes and gains support for your cause. However, those of you ignorant enough to call for violent retaliation are not only missing the point, you're scuttling everything this movement stands for.
 
what is john boehner planning on doing? sorry i cant watch the video right now

essentially it was a memo outlining methods to delegitimate the OWS movement as there is a financial risk to the banking institutions if it were to gain leverage.

However, those of you ignorant enough to call for violent retaliation are not only missing the point, you're scuttling everything this movement stands for.

I'd hope anyone who supports such insane notions would be quickly dislodged from the group.

i've said this multiple times in this thread. When MLK's house was literally bombed by KKK, his followers were ready to go to war for him, but he calmed them down, stayed the bigger man and showed them the narrow path. This is what all peaceful movements must do.
 

Brolic Gaoler

formerly Alienshogun
essentially it was a memo outlining methods to delegitimate the OWS movement as there is a financial risk to the banking institutions if it were to gain leverage.



I'd hope anyone who supports such insane notions would be quickly dislodged from the group.

i've said this multiple times in this thread. When MLK's house was literally bombed by KKK, his followers were ready to go to war for him, but he calmed them down, stayed the bigger man and showed them the narrow path. This is what all peaceful movements must do.



Yep, I posted it before, but I think it was ignored. Here's a poignant quote from Ghandi.

Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state has become lawless or corrupt. And a citizen who barters with such a state shares in its corruption and lawlessness...Every citizen is responsible for every act of his government...There is only one sovereign remedy, namely, non-violent non-cooperation. Whether we advertise the fact or not, the moment we cease to support the government it dies a nature death....My method is conversion, not coercion, it is self-suffering, not the suffering of the tyrant....I hope the real Swaraj (self-rule) will come not by the acquisition of authority by the few but by the acquisition by all of the courage to resist authority when abused. In other words, Swaraj is to be attained by education the masses to a sense of their capacity to regulate ad control authority.... Civil disobedience is the assertion of a right which law should give but which it denies...Civil disobedience presupposes willing obedience of our self-imposed rules, and without it civil disobedience would be cruel joke....Civil disobedience means capacity for unlimited suffering without the intoxicating excitement of killing....Disobedience to be civil has to be open and nonviolent....Disobedience to be civil implies discipline, thought, care, attention...Disobedience that is wholly civil should never provoke retaliation....Non-cooperation and civil disobedience are different but [are] branches of the same tree call Satyagraha (truth-force).... Coercion cannot but result in chaos in the end....One who uses coercion is guilty of deliberate violence. Coercion is inhuman....Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as cooperation with good... Nonviolent action without the cooperation of the heart and the head cannot produce the intended result....All through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time they can seem invincible, but in the end they always fall, always.
 

ReBurn

Gold Member
I will say that if you're going to tell me physically separate them, well 1. That's easier said than done when 1 person isn't cooperating, let alone a mass of people and 2. That's physically MORE dangerous than the use of pepper spray in this instance.

They had to physically separate them anyway. I don't see how they were any easier to manage post pepper spray. They were just as limp and uncooperative. They probably could have separated each pair of arms, arresting people as they go down the line. It would've been harder and slower but none of the protesters showed any desire to get violent so I don't think things would've escalated. We cannot know for sure, but they had plenty of pepper spray so if things did get crazy they could have used it then. It just seemed senseless to pepper spray them all in one big group.
 
It looks like they are blocking a walk way, I don't know the specifics of what happened though.

I'm curious though, what would you consider "easier methods of dispersion" of a group that refuses to move and have interlocked themselves together? Not looking for an anger response, and I'm not poking you. I'm trying to see what you think should have been the correct course of action to remove the kids.

I will say that if you're going to tell me physically separate them, well 1. That's easier said than done when 1 person isn't cooperating, let alone a mass of people and 2. That's physically MORE dangerous than the use of pepper spray in this instance.

I don't think this is for anyone in this thread to answer. What needs to happen right now is for the public to express outrage over the tactics that Mayors and other officials are ordering the police to perform. It's up to people with knowledge and training who have studied the issue to come up with new, more humane tactics. During the civil rights movement, they used fire hoses and attack dogs. There was a public outcry and the tactics changed. That's what needs to happen again.

The other issue is what laws we make regarding the first amendment and what is or is not protected speech. We have to ask whether or not the police she be allowed to intervene in a given situation.
 
I can do that. You'll be getting a lot of questions though!
Let's start down this rabbit hole:
What's your position on soft money in politics? eg: Lobbyists, PAC's etc

I'm fine with them. Part of the reason is that they are participation/content neutral. They can be used for both "good" or "bad" causes. I understand that people think well they're only for the rich and those with money, but I have to ask what about if Unions use them to push for worker related issues? Does that bother people? What if John Stewart had a PAC dedicated to liberal ideas?

I think that OWS people need to understand that they can use these same methods. Why spend thousands of dollars of feeding yourself when sleeping outside when you could actually form a PAC or hire a lobbyist? I also don't want to hear the "oh billionaires and big corporations will drown us", that's just defeatism. If people keep saying oh these millionaires (members of the 1%) wanted to be taxed higher, well how about trying to get them to fund things? How about the fact that left/liberals aren't only broke people. I mean isn't Michael Moore and Russell Simmons one of the 1%? They seem to agree with you. Besides I don't buy the oh the media is controlled example, guess what the internet exists and paid ad space is actually pretty cheap, and there is a ton of avenues for free space for text, audio, video available for free.

Like I said I am fine with them because they are content neutral, people should learn to use them and not just complain about them.


They are already interlocked. I've experienced a lot of these types of protests (being ex military a lot of people tried to block the port of Tacoma in exactly this manner). A person when they don't want to cooperate/be arrested is very, very hard to manipulate, even small people are hard to get in the "right" position to arrest. That's typically why you see 2+ people ontop of/going at 1 person to subdue them. That's also why pepper spray/tasers are used.

The "physical only" act of restraining/subduing/arresting just 1 person is extremely dangerous not only to the police, but to the person being subdued. That's why pepper spray and tasers are actually a better option both for the police and the public, even though they are demonized by the public.

With these protests and the ones I experienced in Tacoma you're not just dealing with 1 person, you're dealing with a whole lot, and that makes it exponentially harder/more dangerous.

That makes a lot of sense, thank you for posting that, people seemed to forgot basic facts like that.

It's up to people with knowledge and training who have studied the issue to come up with new, more humane tactics.
People would just complain about them the same that they are doing now.

During the civil rights movement, they used fire hoses and attack dogs. There was a public outcry and the tactics changed. That's what needs to happen again.

You are not the civil rights movement, you are nowhere to them in the ideals, organization, decency, and courage they faced.
 

Dude Abides

Banned
That makes a lot of sense, thank you for posting that, people seemed to forgot basic facts like that..

LoL. The "fact" that police would prefer to deal with people after they've been semi-incapacitated with pain? I don't think anybody disputes the fact that police who do this would rather hurt people than be inconvenienced.
 

Brolic Gaoler

formerly Alienshogun
They had to physically separate them anyway. I don't see how they were any easier to manage post pepper spray. They were just as limp and uncooperative. They probably could have separated each pair of arms, arresting people as they go down the line. It would've been harder and slower but none of the protesters showed any desire to get violent so I don't think things would've escalated. We cannot know for sure, but they had plenty of pepper spray so if things did get crazy they could have used it then. It just seemed senseless to pepper spray them all in one big group.



When the person is hit with the spray they are more easily moved. They resist less. You didn't understand that from my post?

If you're not "getting it" from my previous post, I don't know what to tell you except for "I'm sorry."

Also, this had nothing to do with worrying about things getting violent, it has everything to do with forcing compliance upon someone who's being non compliant, and the safest way to do so.

It seems senseless to you because you're probably uneducated in proportional use of force, police tactics, etc. Not slighting you because of it, just letting you know that it's not senseless at all.

That makes a lot of sense, thank you for posting that, people seemed to forgot basic facts like that.

I'm a criminal justice major close to graduation. I actually have an internship at a local police department coming up this summer. I'm just trying to help people understand police tactics and how they aren't always as malicious as they outwardly appear to the uninformed.
 
I'm fine with them. Part of the reason is that they are participation/content neutral. They can be used for both "good" or "bad" causes. I understand that people think well they're only for the rich and those with money, but I have to ask what about if Unions use them to push for worker related issues? Does that bother people? What if John Stewart had a PAC dedicated to liberal ideas?

I think that OWS people need to understand that they can use these same methods. Why spend thousands of dollars of feeding yourself when sleeping outside when you could actually form a PAC or hire a lobbyist? I also don't want to hear the "oh billionaires and big corporations will drown us", that's just defeatism. If people keep saying oh these millionaires (members of the 1%) wanted to be taxed higher, well how about trying to get them to fund things? How about the fact that left/liberals aren't only broke people. I mean isn't Michael Moore and Russell Simmons one of the 1%? They seem to agree with you. Besides I don't buy the oh the media is controlled example, guess what the internet exists and paid ad space is actually pretty cheap, and there is a ton of avenues for free space for text, audio, video available for free.

If you consistently posted like this in the thread people wouldn't be jumping on you constantly.
 
LoL. The "fact" that police would prefer to deal with people after they've been semi-incapacitated with pain?
People who willingly chose to resist arrest and who refused to disperse after being ordered too despite knowing they would be arrested are the kind of people I would think are luckily to get pepper sprayed. They are the authors of their own problems.


I don't think anybody disputes the fact that police who do this would rather hurt people than be inconvenienced.
That's ridiculousness.

If you consistently posted like this in the thread people wouldn't be jumping on you constantly.

Hey, if someone asked politely who hasn't been a dick to me I'd answer like that more often.
 
I'm fine with them. Part of the reason is that they are participation/content neutral. They can be used for both "good" or "bad" causes. I understand that people think well they're only for the rich and those with money, but I have to ask what about if Unions use them to push for worker related issues? Does that bother people? What if John Stewart had a PAC dedicated to liberal ideas?

I think that OWS people need to understand that they can use these same methods. Why spend thousands of dollars of feeding yourself when sleeping outside when you could actually form a PAC or hire a lobbyist? I also don't want to hear the "oh billionaires and big corporations will drown us", that's just defeatism.

No, it's math. They have more money, therefore they have more influence.
 
No, it's math. They have more money, therefore they have more influence.

This is the defeatism I speak of.

No, it's what he's saying and what motivates the use of pepper spray and tazers. It's easier for police to arrest people if they're in pain. It's not hard to understand but I'm not surprised you are struggling with it.
Look I think you are going to have to except you aren't the expert here in the matter is, AS is.
 

Brolic Gaoler

formerly Alienshogun
I don't think this is for anyone in this thread to answer. What needs to happen right now is for the public to express outrage over the tactics that Mayors and other officials are ordering the police to perform. It's up to people with knowledge and training who have studied the issue to come up with new, more humane tactics. During the civil rights movement, they used fire hoses and attack dogs. There was a public outcry and the tactics changed. That's what needs to happen again.

The other issue is what laws we make regarding the first amendment and what is or is not protected speech. We have to ask whether or not the police she be allowed to intervene in a given situation.



You can't be serious.

You're equating pepper spray to fire hoses which can literally skin someone alive, break bones, and kill?

People like you are the reason a lot of people don't take this movement seriously.

Also, you can't sit there and complain about something you don't know the first thing about. The first thing you should be doing is educating yourself about what's going on so you can argue effectively.

Essentially what you're doing is making crap up to stir the pot then when you're called on it you say "Well I'm allowed to be ignorant, it's up to them to explain themselves!."

In the end you still look like an uninformed activist nut.
 
When the person is hit with the spray they are more easily moved. They resist less. You didn't understand that from my post?

If you're not "getting it" from my previous post, I don't know what to tell you except for "I'm sorry."

Also, this had nothing to do with worrying about things getting violent, it has everything to do with forcing compliance upon someone who's being non compliant, and the safest way to do so.

I alluded to this in my previous post, but I think we as a society need to debate whether police should be allowed to use this type of force to gain "compliance". It's not about what's authorized under current regulations, it's about what we think is just in a free and fair society.
 

Brolic Gaoler

formerly Alienshogun
LoL. The "fact" that police would prefer to deal with people after they've been semi-incapacitated with pain? I don't think anybody disputes the fact that police who do this would rather hurt people than be inconvenienced.


You're missing the point.

By incapacitating the person and making them more managable you minimize risk to both the person and the officer.
 

Foffy

Banned
.....hardly surprising.


It's not, but it really has to be something we nix in this country. Seriously, I can't name a single thing this country does on a large scale to benefit the citizens anymore. There's caring and things for groups, but not for the collective whole.

That report, the whole SOPA shit going on, and the potential shaky standing the PPACA (I don't agree with all of this reform, but it's a start) has me genuinely depressed to be American.

I almost feel like I'll be bailing out of this country before I'm 30. :<
 

Brolic Gaoler

formerly Alienshogun
Re-read my post, because you clearly did not understand a word I said.


No, I didn't "misunderstand" that's exactly what you did.

I alluded to this in my previous post, but I think we as a society need to debate whether police should be allowed to use this type of force to gain "compliance". It's not about what's authorized under current regulations, it's about what we think is just in a free and fair society.

Whether you believe it or not, pepper spray and tasers are actually minimal force. They are the safest for both officers and the public. Actual physical restraint and force of compliance is much more dangerous for the officer and the person being subdued, but I already said that. You can't seem to grasp that.

LoL. Yeah, I'm sure he has an advanced degree in Pepper Spray Studies.

Actually, I was the non lethal NCO for my platoon. That included use of tasers, OC spray and "beanbag" rounds.

Some of you guys are really "out there" with this stuff.
 
No, I didn't "misunderstand" that's exactly what you did.



Whether you believe it or not, pepper spray and tasers are actually minimal force. They are the safest for both officers and the public. Actual physical restraint and force of compliance is much more dangerous for the officer and the person being subdued, but I already said that. You can't seem to grasp that.

Maybe he would prefer they used guns I guess.
 

Dude Abides

Banned
You're missing the point.

By incapacitating the person and making them more managable you minimize risk to both the person and the officer.

To the officer sure. Like I said, I'm sure these things make it much easier for the police. That's why it's done. You're not doing the subject any favors by blinding them, though.

Actually, I was the non lethal NCO for my platoon. That included use of tasers, OC spray and "beanbag" rounds.

Right, so you see everything from the perspective of the one doing the arresting. And I'm sure they told you it was safer for the arrestee. That's always a good thing to reassure people who are inflicting pain on non-violent people so they don't feel as bad about themselves.
 

Brolic Gaoler

formerly Alienshogun
To the officer sure. Like I said, I'm sure these things make it much easier for the police. That's why it's done. You're not doing the subject any favors by blinding them, though.


Jesus christ, you're on ignore. I can't deal with someone who only reads what they want to read in a post.
 
For the purposes of having a civil debate, I'm going to clarify my points because you seem to be missing all of them.

You're equating pepper spray to fire hoses which can literally skin someone alive, break bones, and kill?

No. During the civil rights movement, fire hoses and dogs were used in lieu of lethal force. We as a society decided that these methods, although they were not usually lethal, were still not appropriate to use in dispersing a peaceful protest. What I'm saying in regards to pepper spray is that we as a society may decide that we don't want to see pepper spray used in this context. I never said that pepper spray and fire hoses were equivalent. What I'm talking about is the continued evolution of standards.

Also, you can't sit there and complain about something you don't know the first thing about. The first thing you should be doing is educating yourself about what's going on so you can argue effectively.

You seem to have an almost pressing desire to misinterpret everything I say. I'm saying when we as a society deem a specific tactic to be illegal, it is up to professionals to design newer, more ethical tactics.


Essentially what you're doing is making crap up to stir the pot then when you're called on it you say "Well I'm allowed to be ignorant, it's up to them to explain themselves!."

In the end you still look like an uninformed activist nut.

Ad homonyms are always helpful.

Whether you believe it or not, pepper spray and tasers are actually minimal force. They are the safest for both officers and the public. Actual physical restraint and force of compliance is much more dangerous for the officer and the person being subdued, but I already said that. You can't seem to grasp that.

I do understand that. What I'm saying is that the standards of the public evolve over time. What is considered minimal force today may be inappropriate tomorrow. It's incumbent on the people to demand that standards continue to progress in an ethical and humane way.
 
Right, so you see everything from the perspective of the one doing the arresting. And I'm sure they told you it was safer for the arrestee. That's always a good thing to reassure people who are inflicting pain on non-violent people so they don't feel as bad about themselves.

That man's experience outclasses you. You need to understand they you know dick compared to him in this area. Then again you've entered the Walmart pattern again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom