Police officer pepper-sprays seated, non-violent students at UC Davis

This video has been making the rounds. I searched for it, but didn't see it posted. If it is, mods feel free to delete.

This is possibly one of the most outrageous videos I've seen from this protests so far. This is why peaceful protests turn into riots. They could have zip tied this kids and carried them off no problem. This is ridiculous.

At the University of California at Davis this afternoon, police tore down down the tents of students inspired by the Occupy Wall Street movement, and arrested those who stood in their way. Others peacefully demanded that police release the arrested. In the video above, you see a police officer [Update: UC Davis Police Lt. John Pike] walk down a line of those young people seated quietly on the ground in an act of nonviolent civil disobedience, and spray them all with pepper spray at very close range. He is clearing a path for fellow officers to walk through and arrest more students, but it's as if he's dousing a row of bugs with insecticide.

Source

Im actually suprised no one shot that cop in the face, if i was there i wouldnt be able to control myself watching that happen to innocent people.
Why does the government not want us to have a voice?

wow if I was there i couldn't help but get up and take that guy to the ground and break his nose.

To hell with the consequences because he deserves it.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


It seems you have a hard time understanding.
Try this and use it as a rule and measure.

Death and hatred to mankind
Poisoning their brainwashed minds
Oh lord yeah!

This is the mindset you jave to be to understand.
So, I find comfort in your inability to think like these tools.
S&F Bro.

Yeah.. when someone finally does stand up to the abuse the MSM will parade those images around yelling about how violent the protesters are, yadda yadda.

Sadly some people here on ATS will see this and still find a way to slam the protesters.

They where blocking a through fair, The policeman had every right to remove the people blocking the common path, (as I am sure he and several (verbally) others did multiple times). peaceful protest does not include interfering with the passage rights of the people commuting.

These individuals where attempting to make maryters of them selves. They where doing these actions to get attention, although they where breaking the very laws the supposedly protect.

Originally posted by mileysubet
They where blocking a through fair, The policeman had every right to remove the people blocking the common path, (as I am sure he and several (verbally) others did multiple times).

But he does not have the right to turn his weapons on civilians who are posing no harm to himself or others.

peaceful protest does not include interfering with the passage rights of the people commuting.

Yes it does. Your ignorance does not transform fact.

These individuals where attempting to make maryters of them selves. They where doing these actions to get attention, although they where breaking the very laws the supposedly protect.

Yeah, that's kind of the point of protest, to draw attention to something. Were you confused by this?

Stupid people block path, stupid people refuse to move, they are then moved.

Simple really, it was their choice , they should start taking personal responsibility for their own actions!

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox

Originally posted by mileysubet
They where blocking a through fair, The policeman had every right to remove the people blocking the common path, (as I am sure he and several (verbally) others did multiple times).

But he does not have the right to turn his weapons on civilians who are posing no harm to himself or others.

peaceful protest does not include interfering with the passage rights of the people commuting.

Yes it does. Your ignorance does not transform fact.

These individuals where attempting to make maryters of them selves. They where doing these actions to get attention, although they where breaking the very laws the supposedly protect.

Yeah, that's kind of the point of protest, to draw attention to something. Were you confused by this?

You are quite the word smith, but that doesn't mean any of your arguments are valid when critically read.

reply to post by mileysubet


So to you its ok to be pepper sprayed for sitting in a public place.

What a load of BS

Police want respect; then they allow a fellow officer do this?

This jury finds John Pike guilty of assault with a chemical weapon AND guilty of (attempted) inciting a riot. This officer should be fired for use of unreasonable force and lack of common sense.

This jury finds ALL of the attending officers guilty of being an accessory to aforementioned multiple count crimes, failure to perform their duty to arrest the wayward cop, and unfit to wear the uniform.

Pepper spray wasn't necessary. They could have easily arrested those people one-by-one with twist-ties.

Originally posted by Trexter Ziam
They could have easilt arrested those people one-by-one with twist-ties.

or they could have moved off the path when told to - their choice, but with choice comes repercussions.

reply to post by mileysubet


I simply abhor the use of wikipedia as a source but some need an easy broadstroke type of explaination.

Use of force continuum
It is the basic rule and guide to threat escalation.
Tear gas is a defensive tool.
From what I saw the officer was in no physical danger.
But I sure hope he will be in legal danger for his misuse of his tools.
Hope it helps

Originally posted by mileysubet
You are quite the word smith, but that doesn't mean any of of arguments are valid when critically read.

So you believe the police are, in fact, entitled to assault people with weapons, even in situations where there is no threat of violence?

Since you feel that impeding a walkway (from whom, the other protestors? uh...?) is not "peaceful," do you then feel it is "violent"? 'Cause there's not really a grey area, there is no "maybe-sort-of protest." Further if this is your feeling, what do you have to say about methods of protest such as boycotts, strikes, and sit-ins (such as the famous lunch counter sit-ins of hte 1950's)

Further, is the point of protest not to draw attention?

Please explain.

Originally posted by CharterZZ
reply to post by mileysubet

 

So to you its ok to be pepper sprayed for sitting in a public place.

What a load of BS

edit on 19-11-2011 by CharterZZ because: (no reason given)

When I block access to a public pace..."Yes I expect to be removed from blocking it" ...you can quote that if you want.
1

Originally posted by spoor

Simple really, it was their choice , they should start taking personal responsibility for their own actions!

That's right! The corrupt cops should start taking responsibility for thier own actions!

if this had happened in the UK, it would be headline news and that police man would be losing his job. What consequences will he face for doing this?

Doesnt look like pepper spray.

www.davisenterprise.com...

Could be a weak solution but full strength pepper spray is doubtful.

reply to post by woodwardjnr


None. As you can see from this very thread - amid others - Americans get off on fascism and the abuse of people they disagree with.

Originally posted by mileysubet
They where blocking a through fair, The policeman had every right to remove the people blocking the common path, (as I am sure he and several (verbally) others did multiple times). peaceful protest does not include interfering with the passage rights of the people commuting.

These individuals where attempting to make maryters of them selves. They where doing these actions to get attention, although they where breaking the very laws the supposedly protect.

edit on 19-11-2011 by mileysubet because: (no reason given)

That appeared to be a walkway and not a road (I didn't watch the whole thing, just the money shot , so I could be wrong). This was a peaceful demonstration of the rights of assembly. People could easily walk around them with no hindrance whatsoever. This was a symbolic gesture of protest, the best kind IMO, because nobody was getting hurt, nobody was being harassed, and nobody was being harmed.

Until the gestapo showed up. As another poster said, if the police wanted them out they could've used zip ties and carried them out. It's unlikely anyone would've given a fight. This was a lovely example of the fascist police state we are headed for. I'm pro-police, but even I see the changes in that direction. And it saddens me. I'm not a LEO, but my family is chock full of them, and the couple I've talked to hate this direction, too.

I'm not a supporter of OWS, but this was wrong and immoral. Those kids did nothing to be assaulted like that. Shame on those police.

/TOA