Police mace the hell out of peaceful OWS protesters

[Corporate Thug]

The people I have been discussing this with have agreed that the protesters were trespassing and were given a legal order to leave. So, for the sake of the argument, it has been agreed that the protesters broke the law.

The school may be past the point of discussing the merits. I am not as I do not have to worry about PR. All I have to worry about is the truth and the law.

MotionMan

Again, evening ASSUMING a law was broken, the debate is about the appropriateness of the response.

 

[Corporate Thug]

I aim to please.

But I am still waiting for some honest answers. I wonder why that is?

MotionMan

You wonder why? Because it's irrelevant. Clearly you disagree with one of Logham's statements but you condition a response to another one of his positions on ATOT's analysis of what we think about the statement you disagree with? What's the point? Why hide the ball? If you disagree with one, two, or all of his points, why don't you just come out and say why?

Imagine getting a ridiculous response in a deposition (and I'm sure you have your fair share of them), would you turn to opposing counsel and ask him to justify or rationalize his client's position before you move onto another area of questioning? I think you would just go ahead and attack everything you believe is not credible no?

 

[MotionMan]

Again, evening ASSUMING a law was broken, the debate is about the appropriateness of the response.

Who says? I believe the appropriateness of the response of the protesters to a legal order to leave and their knowledge of the result if they don't leave is just as important as the response of the cops. Obviously, the protesters multiple violations of the law and the stupidity of their actions are not important to others here.

And, still, despite my multiple requests, we have no information about any injuries at other protests when they were "deadlifted" and pried apart instead of sprayed.

And where is the interview with the guy who had the pepper spray forced down his throat?

MotionMan

 

[Corporate Thug]

The people I have been discussing this with have agreed that the protesters were trespassing and were given a legal order to leave. So, for the sake of the argument, it has been agreed that the protesters broke the law.

The school may be past the point of discussing the merits. I am not as I do not have to worry about PR. All I have to worry about is the truth and the law.

MotionMan

Truth and law is fine and dandy but as we all know, other factors play a more important role for real world implications. And that has consistently been my point: we do bone headed thing (although it may be legal (again assuming)) that will nonetheless get you in hot water?

 

[Corporate Thug]

The people I have been discussing this with have agreed that the protesters were trespassing and were given a legal order to leave. So, for the sake of the argument, it has been agreed that the protesters broke the law.

The school may be past the point of discussing the merits. I am not as I do not have to worry about PR. All I have to worry about is the truth and the law.

MotionMan

Truth and law is fine and dandy but as we all know, other factors play a more important role for real world implications. And that has consistently been my point: why do bone headed thing (although it may be legal (again assuming)) that will nonetheless get you in hot water?

 

[Corporate Thug]

Who says? I believe the appropriateness of the response of the protesters to a legal order to leave and their knowledge of the result if they don't leave is just as important as the response of the cops. Obviously, the protesters multiple violations of the law and the stupidity of their actions are not important to others here.

And, still, despite my multiple requests, we have no information about any injuries at other protests when they were "deadlifted" and pried apart instead of sprayed.

And where is the interview with the guy who had the pepper spray forced down his throat?

MotionMan

Not sure what you're talking about the guy who got pepper sprayed down his throat -- I never brought him up.

Who says? maybe a jury, maybe not. I'll stop repeating it soon enough, but why put the school in that position?

 

[MotionMan]

You wonder why? Because it's irrelevant. Clearly you disagree with one of Logham's statements but you condition a response to another one of his positions on ATOT's analysis of what we think about the statement you disagree with? What's the point? Why hide the ball? If you disagree with one, two, or all of his points, why don't you just come out and say why?

It is is not hiding the ball. Before I can respond to someone's argument, it is important to establish their position on the facts. Once we have established the facts, then we can have an intelligent discussion. I make my position on the facts clear. I simply insists that others do as well.

Imagine getting a ridiculous response in a deposition (and I'm sure you have your fair share of them), would you turn to opposing counsel and ask him to justify or rationalize his client's position before you move onto another area of questioning? I think you would just go ahead and attack everything you believe is not credible no?

I love getting attorneys to try to justify their clients' BS stories. It is fun to watch them squirm. Then I can bury the deponent with both the deponents BS story and the attorney's failed attempt to justify it.

MotionMan

 

[mattpegher]

I still dont know what other response the officers should have used. Available options

1. Let them sit there and violate the rights of others.
2. Pick them up one by one bodily -- likely hood of officer getting hurt, ~20%/protestor.
3. Taze each protestor individually -- likelyhood of protestor being seriously hurt, ~10%/protestor.
4. Mace the group -- likelyhood of someone getting hurt ~ 1%/protestor.
5. Tear-gas the group -- likelyhood of protestor getting hurt ~10%

Any other options?
Seems they used the least likely response to produce injury.

 

[WelshBloke]

So you don't like the way I argue? Tough shit. I don't like the way people refuse to answer my simple questions, but this discussion is not about debate style.

Point out the errors in my facts. Point out the errors in the my application of the facts to the law. Respond to my questions/statements and prove me wrong, if you can.

MotionMan

Wow you have a very high opinion of yourself dont you?

Why the hell should anyone have to prove you wrong. The reaction of the person in charge of this debacle says pretty much everything.

Your continued stamping of your foot and pouting that people dont agree with you says more about you than it does about the issue.

 

[MotionMan]

Not sure what you're talking about the guy who got pepper sprayed down his throat -- I never brought him up.

Others have, but have yet to back it up.

Who says? maybe a jury, maybe not. I'll stop repeating it soon enough, but why put the school in that position?

But what is the alternative to pepper spray or "deadlifting" them, asking them again to leave, but this time louder?

MotionMan

 

[MotionMan]

Wow you have a very high opinion of yourself dont you?

It is earned.

Why the hell should anyone have to prove you wrong. The reaction of the person in charge of this debacle says pretty much everything.

So you think that all PR moves prove something?

Your continued stamping of your foot and pouting that people dont agree with you says more about you than it does about the issue.

Where am I stomping my foot and pouting?

It is not that people do not agree with me, it is that they fail to support their position.

How many people have brought up Lundberg since I thoroughly analyzed it?

MotionMan

 

[theeedude]

I still dont know what other response the officers should have used. Available options

1. Let them sit there and violate the rights of others.
2. Pick them up one by one bodily -- likely hood of officer getting hurt, ~20%/protestor.
3. Taze each protestor individually -- likelyhood of protestor being seriously hurt, ~10%/protestor.
4. Mace the group -- likelyhood of someone getting hurt ~ 1%/protestor.
5. Tear-gas the group -- likelyhood of protestor getting hurt ~10%

Any other options?
Seems they used the least likely response to produce injury.

Option 0. Let them sit there and not violate the rights of others, which is what they were doing.

 

[Corporate Thug]

It is is not hiding the ball. Before I can respond to someone's argument, it is important to establish their position on the facts. Once we have established the facts, then we can have an intelligent discussion. I make my position on the facts clear. I simply insists that others do as well.



I love getting attorneys to try to justify their clients' BS stories. It is fun to watch them squirm. Then I can bury the deponent with both the deponents BS story and the attorney's failed attempt to justify it.

MotionMan

his own statement establishes his position on the facts, not ATOT approval or disapproval thereof.

 

[WelshBloke]

And as for facts.

"My instructions were for no arrests and no police force," she said. "I explicitly directed the chief of police that violence should be avoided at all costs."

Katehi, a former electrical engineer, has placed the campus police chief and two pepper-spraying officers on administrative leave, and has asked prosecutors to drop charges against nine students who were arrested.

Which would say to me that the officer involved certainly overstepped his authority.

 

[mattpegher]

Option 0. Let them sit there and not violate the rights of others, which is what they were doing.

That is another debate entirely. If they were then there should have been no need to remove them. I am not clear on the particulars of the case, ie private property vs public, and whether they were preventing anyone else from their lawful persuits. I am strictly focussing on the removal of an unlawful person and how to do so safely.

 

[MotionMan]

And as for facts.

Which would say to me that the officer involved certainly overstepped his authority.

He should be sanctioned if it true that he did not have authority to do what he did.

Of course, the Constitutionality of using pepper spray is a different discussion.

MotionMan

 

[MotionMan]

Option 0. Let them sit there and not violate the rights of others, which is what they were doing.

What about property rights?

MotionMan

 

[WelshBloke]

He should be sanctioned if it true that he did not have authority to do what he did.

Are you assuming that she is lying there?

Of course, the Constitutionality of using pepper spray is a different discussion.

MotionMan

Fair enough, we can ignore it as irrelevant then.

 

[MotionMan]

Are you assuming that she is lying there

I have no basis for it, just my Spidey Sense, but, yeah, I think she is lying.

MotionMan

 

[WelshBloke]

I have no basis for it, just my Spidey Sense, but, yeah, I think she is lying.

MotionMan

So not arguing law or facts now then? 😛

 

[biostud]

Why don't the protesters bear arms and protect their right to protest?

 

[WelshBloke]

Why don't the protesters bear arms and protect their right to protest?

😵 Sometimes my lack of ability to work out if ATOT is serious or not worries me.

I'm not sure if it worries me about me or ATOT though.

 

[MotionMan]

So not arguing law or facts now then? 😛

Not on that point.

MotionMan

 

[WelshBloke]

Not on that point.

MotionMan

So we are in agreement then that the officer is in the wrong for overstepping his authority?

 

[MotionMan]

So we are in agreement then that the officer is in the wrong for overstepping his authority?

If the statements by Katehi are true, then, yes, the cop overstepped his authority.

(Again, we are not discussing the Constitutionality of his actions.)

MotionMan