Mass Arrests, Tear Gas, Sound Weapons used Against West Illinois University Students

reply to post by Xcathdra

Which has what to do with college students getting drunk at a block party and starting a riot?

There was no riot.

As I said before, stick to the topic at hand and quit trying to deflect / change direction.

How is it that every time you make a false statement or ask a question that is then answered and you don't like the answer it is trying to deflect or change direction?

The corporate government and it's excesses is the topic.

Since there was no riot and it was a corporate government excess in attacking the lawfully assembled citizens.

If you feel so strongly about the Government issue crap, then start a sep[erate thread and take your debate / thoughts there.

This thread is all about the government, your defense of it, other's denounciation of it's actions.

You keep opening the door to things you then pretend you didn't inquire about and make statements in regards to.

Responding to such statements and openings of other posters is part of the topic.

See how that works.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Protos issue in this case revolves around the cops responding to the riot, and not the riot itself. My argument and information comes from my education and job profession coulped with my years of experience dealing with the very laws others are trying to say dont apply or are illegal.

There was no riot. The video evidence clearly supports that.

Nor have you established your credentials as a armed henchmen of the state, in this or any other thread.

So like your entire argument based on exageration and hear say, your statement regarding your credentials are not based on any evidence either.

reply to post by Xcathdra


As bad as the corruption is I actually want a big BUT FAIR government, I have respect for statue laws(but not 600,000 codes, more like a few hundred or 1,000 would be ok), LEOs and our military. Most people that run government are honest, law abiding citizens who want what is good for the country.

The people at the top of the food chain ruin everything, and as I already stated before I dislike capitalism.

We went off-topic because everything is inter-rellated and because others brought up natural and unalienable rights which I disagree with. I believe in statue laws! Deal with your anger issues and why do you feel compelled to keep arguing in this thread?

reply to post by Aim64C


The video still doesn't show what you claimed.

The 'normal' police officers were getting pelted with beer bottles and had started setting fire to property and vandalizing public property.

They had a fire going in a yard. They took down a stop sign. Sending in riot police, and the constant harassment by the officers brought in before hand, probably on overtime, cost a lot more than that sign.

They didn't start throwing beer cans at the officers until they marched in the riot police, which were already standing by.

Then they started indiscriminately spraying pepper spray, or whatever it was, at people who were just standing by.

Instead of dealing with who ever took down the sign, they marched in riot police right away.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Simply saying its not a riot over and over doesnt make it true -

City of Macomb Ordinances

(Code 1972, § 5-3)

Sec. 5-3. Shows which tend to cause riot or breach of peace prohibited.
It shall be unlawful to present any public amusement or show of any kind which tends to
or is calculated to cause or prompt any riot, breach of the peace or public disturbance.

Sec. 16-11. Disorderly conduct.
(a) No person shall engage in disorderly conduct. A person commits disorderly conduct,
which is prohibited, when he knowingly:
(1) Does any act in such an unreasonable manner as to alarm or disturb another and
to provoke a breach of the peace;
(2) Enters upon the property of another and for a lewd or unlawful purpose
deliberately looks into a dwelling on the property through any window or other
opening in it;
(3) Disrupts the lawful activity of another by any act of violence, threat or other
unreasonable or abusive conduct;
(4) Causes, provokes or engages in any fight, brawl or riotous conduct which
disturbs the public peace or threatens the safety of any person or property;
(5) Assembles or congregates with another person or persons for the purpose of
causing, provoking or engaging in any fight, brawl or riotous conduct;

Emphasis added by me. Again, your lack of understanding of the law and terms used seems to be problematic for you. Disorderly conduct includes riotous behavior.

Illinois State Law
PUBLIC SAFETY
(430 ILCS 70/) Illinois Public Demonstrations Law.

More news accounts with more details of what occured -
Macomb Wheeler Block Party


Time Index 1:20 - The camera man yells at the cops that no one was throwing bottles at the Police. He then asks a guy standing next to him if anyone threw bottles at the police, and the guy responds by saying he saw one wizz by the helmet of an officer.

Since you are all about the youtube video of this incident -

Time Index 1:35 - Stop sign ripped down
Time Index 1:21 - Burning Bikes and other items
Time Index 1:35 - Stop sign ripped down and fire in background
Time Index 1:54 - "#" the police being chanted
Time Index 2:43 - Bottle thrown at officer, hitting him
Time index 2:49 - bottle hitting the back of an officer
Starting at time Index 2:49 and running through time index 3:33 - you can see glass bottles and other items being throan at officers. You can see the glass bottles breaking as they impact.
Time Index 3:47 - resisting an arrest
Time Index 3:59 - Student gets hit by bottle



Time Index 0:01 - Student sqaures off against the gig line - gets pepper sprayed
Time Index 0:23 - guy is fighting with the deputy


Time Index 0:02 - Beer bottles being thrown
Time Index 0:15 - They are throwing beer bottles at the riot police
From that point on the video speaks for itself, as does the behavior of the WIU students.


So there you have it.. WIU students got out of hand, threw bottles at the police, burned property, destroyed city property, open containers in public, resisting arrest, blocking a public right of way,

Everything you are saying did not occur, occured. The police acted appropriately.

Not sure why this is so hard for you to understand. Maybe if you took your I hate the government blinders off and actually watched what happened.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Well there you have it, the POLICE ARE GUILTY OF RIOTING, you convinced me.

They meet all the criteria, so in addition to police brutality and excessive use of foce, the police are guilty of rioting too.

No riot occured it was a peaceful yet festive crowd until the Riot Police showed up and started rioting.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


I continue to argue in this thread so the opposing view is represented. I continue in this thread because people do not know what the law is, they dont understand how its enforced, they dont undertand how government works, at either the state or federal level.

They are ignorant in terms of Police operations. The argument being made is the police over reacted, which they did not. They are within policy, state and federal law. The reason for the number of officers present is because of the number of students present. I

ts a massive number of people in a small area coupled with alcohol. The term is called mob mentality, and when you get that many people together, all it takes is one person to spark off the incident, as we saw. From the Police point of view, they werent dealing with only a few people, but 3k people.

As evidenced in this thread, the hatred for the poilice is present. Why should the police lower their guard and assume that they wont be attacked by students (which they were).

Why is it so hard for students to act responsibly?
Why are you guys so dead set against personal responsibility on the part of the students?

reply to post by Xcathdra


Being how you are so knowledgeable in law I wonder if you've heard of the term "self defense" ??

If you are attacked by an angry,armed mob for "no reason" then you are entitled to defend yourself..

Whether that angry,armed mob are civilians,police or military bears no relevance in law...

These police attacked for "no reason"..
You say a couple of students played up but it was more than a couple that the police attacked and probably mostly innocent party goers..

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


I see once again you are ignorant about how the law works in addition to once again proving my point about how you debate. The info calls you out, and shows just how wrong you are, and you once again come up with another deflection.

The Police are exempt from certain laws while performing their duties (running code and speed, parking where they need to, etc). Again if you actually knew the law you would know and understand how it works, apparently you dont.

If thats the best rebuttle you can come up with, then you should probably stop now.

All the info you said was not there, is in the video. I suggest you watch them.

reply to post by Xcathdra

I continue to argue in this thread so the opposing view is represented. I continue in this thread because people do not know what the law is, they dont understand how its enforced, they dont undertand how government works, at either the state or federal level.

Well I think you continue to argue because you are a "mouth piece" for the Government and are trying to soften the sheeple into accepting this police state as the norm with your stupid/twisted assessment of the entire situation..

BTW, I don't think you are doing too well...

reply to post by backinblack


You need to stick to the laws of the country you are in, since you obviously have no understanding of how the laws work here in the states.

There is no self defense argument present for the WIU students. There is no affirmative defense to refusing a lawful command or resisting an arrest. Also, in order to claim self defense in Illinois, you have to be justified in the action. Illinois is a retreat state, which means if a person comes under attack, and has the opprotunity to retreat, then they MUST retreat.

In this case the students did not comply, nor did they retreat.

Secondly, your argument is irrelevant since the police were present in an offical capacity.

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

I continue to argue in this thread so the opposing view is represented. I continue in this thread because people do not know what the law is, they dont understand how its enforced, they dont undertand how government works, at either the state or federal level.

Well I think you continue to argue because you are a "mouth piece" for the Government and are trying to soften the sheeple into accepting this police state as the norm with your stupid/twisted assessment of the entire situation..

BTW, I don't think you are doing too well...

And we have yet another winner...

As I stated before people, Proto, BIB and Xcheu, when confronted with information that undermines their argument, resort to attacking the poster.. In this case, I am now a government mouth piece.

They do this because they know they lost the argument, and have no other ability to push their BS agenda. Also, as you can see, they dont care about the riot at all. They seize any chance they can to go after the Government. BIB doesnt even live in the states, yet here he is, pretending he knows how it works.

Either provide information to refute or confirm the thread topic, or bwe quiet.. Its that simple. All you are doing is deflecting / distracting from the fact you are once again wrong.

As far as doing well lets recap -
ME 0 provided all the info, video , laws etc that show the officers did not use excessive force.

YOU guys - Government bad, police evil, no supporting info other than your rants on sovereign citizens and the US corporation.

Yeah... im doing bad...

reply to post by Xcathdra

In this case the students did not comply, nor did they retreat.

Secondly, your argument is irrelevant since the police were present in an offical capacity.

Are you trying to tell me Joe citizen MUST comply with every police request in the USA??

BTW, did the police have warrants to trespass on private property?
Who made the official complaints?
What charges have since been laid??

reply to post by backinblack


When the police are dealing with that type of situation, and they tell you to move / leave the area, you must comply.

A warrant is not needed to be on someones outside property, since there is no search going on. Yet another reason why you guys should really learn the law and how it works before opening your mouth.

There were 104 citations issued to 89 students, and that info is in the articles and posts going back. Again though thank you for proving my point again about how you guys debate. You are asking for info thats already been posted. Your next step will be to come up with some excuse as the why the info is wrong, and attack the poster.

Goi back and read the thread before commenting. It will save us alkl the time of having to rehash whats already been located.
*snip*

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Being how you are so knowledgeable in law I wonder if you've heard of the term "self defense" ??

If you are attacked by an angry,armed mob for "no reason" then you are entitled to defend yourself..

Whether that angry,armed mob are civilians,police or military bears no relevance in law...

These police attacked for "no reason"..
You say a couple of students played up but it was more than a couple that the police attacked and probably mostly innocent party goers..

Oh my freaking word....is everyone really that out to lunch? The facts have been presented numerous times, but it doesn't matter in your world because every single law enforcement officer is some holier-than-thou, ex-military, egomaniac, ready to taze your butt if you look at them the wrong way.

It would be more accepted if all of you willing to condone the actions of the students as right and responsible behavior would just come right out and say you hate cops, so therefore whatever they did was completely and utterly wrong.

I'd like to think this thread was about debate, but it isn't. It seems the real intent is to always get the last word, spin what actually happened into a fairy tale with the hope of wearing down those who try to present factual evidence (not mere opinion or conjecture) in order to get them out of this thread. And, I bet all of you would feel like you really accomplished something, maybe even sticking it to the man.

All that you have accomplished is that you're nothing more than a bunch of words on a screen.

This thread is a joke.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Yep not only are the police guilty of rioting I think there is a pretty suspect condition going on with the Town itself as there is no way that Stop Sign was erected to code if a couple of kids could pull it out of the ground.

That's a clear case of endangering the citizens right there.

I mean what would have happened if a couple pre-schoolers had tugged on that thing?!?

They could have really gotten hurt.

Thank heavens those honest decent law abiding college kids had the good sense to remove it as the public hazzard and nuisance that it obviously was!

Makes you wonder what the cops were doing there all day besides harassing kids that they didn't notice an obviously defective stop sign and launch a proper investigation.

Thankfully while the police were endangering public safety these decent college kids were looking out for it.

What a crappy town that must be, known for police brutality and crooked public officials.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


As I said.. now we are back to attacking anything and everything in an effort to ignore the facts, as well as the fact that you are wrong.

I provided all the evidence you demanded, and you still go down this road.


I dont understand how you think you have any credability at all when your argument is based on ignorance.

Either or, I proved my points time and again, and supported my views with suppoting information that others can view. I note that once again, you 3 make accusations, yet have absolutely NOTHING to support your opinions.

You 3 can talk amongst yourself and discuss your hatred of the government and your ignorance of the law.

have fun.

reply to post by Xcathdra


No you didn't I asked for the ordinance on burning in that town.

You still haven't provided any of the evidence I asked for.

What you have tried to do is misconstrue a law to insist there was a riot when clearly there was no riot.

You haven't provided any thing but exageration, hear say and innuendo.

The video speaks for itself.

The students were peaceful but festive prior to the attack of the police who used excessive force to handle a few minor code violations.

Considering you are running around claiming the justice in shooting untried people in cold blood, your morality is as suspect as your repititious dialouge.

Excessive force was used, there is no riot, you can not possibly justify why such excessive force was used, no matter how you try to spin it or defame or slander people.

Thanks.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Anyone that watches the videos can plainly see the police when in there with the full intent of provoking the students..

The police were well equipped and coordinated which tells me it was all planned well in advance..

That also tells me they were always going to go in whether there was trouble or not..

It looks to me like they. the police, created the trouble....