The UC Davis Pepper-Spraying Cop Gets a $38,000 Settlement
ABBY OHLHEISER
Former UC Davis officer John Pike, famous for casually pepper spraying a group of students in the face during a 2011 protest, was awarded a $38,000 settlement for psychiatric injuries for the way he was treated afterwards. Pike, who was eventually fired, filed a workers compensation claim this summer.
That means that Pike, who walked up to a group of sitting, passive students and pepper sprayed their faces, will get a comparable compensation from the university to that awarded to the students he targeted. UC Davis has also settled with the students actually targeted by Pike's pepper spray, agreeing to pay out $1 million total to 21 plaintiffs. That breaks down to a bit less per student than Pike himself will get: $30,000 per plaintiff, plus a $250,000 sum for their lawyers to split and a handful of other delegated portions of the award. The university also formally apologized as part of the settlement. Pike's settlement includes $5,700 in legal fees for his lawyer in the case.
Pike was eligible for worker's comp from the incident after a psychiatrist found that the former officer has a "moderate" disability, ABC affiliate KXTV explains. He claimed to have "suffered depression and anxiety over the way he was treated in the wake of the incident," they note. The Davis Enterprise has more from that evaluation, via a public records request:
Pike faced “continuing and significant internal and external stress with respect to resolving and solving the significant emotional upheavals that have occurred” in his life and had not shown evidence of substantial improvement, concluded Lieberman, who spoke with Pike twice in 2012.
Pike became one of the villains for the Occupy movement in November of 2011 thanks to a widely-circulated video showing the incident at the college. That video, among other things, prompted Anonymous to target Pike for online harassment, which included the publication of his contact information and home address.
The incident prompted an internal affairs investigation into the conduct of Pike and a handful of other officers that day. He, another officer, and UC Davis Police Chief Annette Spicuzza were suspended with pay coinciding with that investigation. Spicuzza retired in April of 2012.
Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments or send an email to the author at aohlheiser@theatlantic.com. You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.
I don't think you can legally walk around with a spray can of it, although I'm sure it would be super effective at fending off muggers and any stray bears you may happen to encounter.
Well I've already been tear gassed, and if I get into the police force (fingers crossed) they let you volunteer to get pepper sprayed, so I'll be able to compare them by the end of next year all things going according to plan. I just really want to know.
Hmm good point Grey, but couldn't it also be because its harder to accidentally let pepper spray off and have it force everyone to leave a theatre/building/whatever than a gas canister?
motyak wrote: I've always wondered which is worse, tear gas or pepper spray.
The problem with that question is that both come in wildly different concentrations. I was in the army, which means I have been hotboxed with CS, but I've never been pepper sprayed.
I thought you had to get pepper sprayed if you were going to carry it while on duty. At least that is what I remember my dad's friend who is a former police chief said.
Well I've already been tear gassed, and if I get into the police force (fingers crossed) they let you volunteer to get pepper sprayed, so I'll be able to compare them by the end of next year all things going according to plan. I just really want to know.
Hmm good point Grey, but couldn't it also be because its harder to accidentally let pepper spray off and have it force everyone to leave a theatre/building/whatever than a gas canister?
Possibly, Pepper Spray isn't a gas its just an aerosol suspension of liquid IIRC. Its not going to fill a room in the way an actual gas will.
Grey Templar wrote: I thought you had to get pepper sprayed if you were going to carry it while on duty. At least that is what I remember my dad's friend who is a former police chief said.
I know it's a standard policy for a lot of Use Of Force options, but that'll depend on country, state, county, force, individual trainer, etc, etc.
When I had asp and self defense training, our instructor made sure we were all on the receiving end (both by himself and by our fellow students). It was enlightening.
Especially seeing who flinched back, even knowing we were all getting it.
Point being, I think that's how it should be, and a lot of people and forces seem to agree, but I have doubts it's applied 100%. That's just life.
Grey Templar wrote: I thought you had to get pepper sprayed if you were going to carry it while on duty. At least that is what I remember my dad's friend who is a former police chief said.
I know it's a standard policy for a lot of Use Of Force options, but that'll depend on country, state, county, force, individual trainer, etc, etc.
When I had asp and self defense training, our instructor made sure we were all on the receiving end (both by himself and by our fellow students). It was enlightening.
Especially seeing who flinched back, even knowing we were all getting it.
Point being, I think that's how it should be, and a lot of people and forces seem to agree, but I have doubts it's applied 100%. That's just life.
It seems to be optional to be a copper in Queensland, but I'm going to do it, because why not.
Now I never paid much attention to the whole OWS thing, but
Bromsy wrote: I suppose by casually they mean with great deliberation and forewarning. God that story irks me.
What does this mean? Did he warn them and ask them to stop, stop, stop, then finally sprayed them?
motyak wrote: It seems to be optional to be a copper in Queensland, but I'm going to do it, because why not.
I'm feeling a career path that's more likely to end up in IT in the private sector than on a force, but there was a period where I was considering trying for the local department, and would absolutely have volunteered.
Point of pride, as opposed to the ones who shirked away, I volunteered to go first.
If there was a chance I'd have to do it to someone eventually, I might as well learn from the best.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Meh, He was following orders, What ws he supposed to do? Nothing? Disobey his superiors?
Are you serious? Since when did we start using robots in the police force? I'm pretty sure the guy could have thought, at one point, "Gee, maybe I shouldn't pepper spray these peacefully protesting students sitting here on the ground."
The guy deserved to be called a villain. Boo-fething-hoo if Mr. Macho Cop couldn't handle the pressure of being a symbol of whats wrong with America's police force.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Meh, He was following orders, What ws he supposed to do? Nothing? Disobey his superiors?
Are you serious? Since when did we start using robots in the police force? I'm pretty sure the guy could have thought, at one point, "Gee, maybe I shouldn't pepper spray these peacefully protesting students sitting here on the ground."
The guy deserved to be called a villain. Boo-fething-hoo if Mr. Macho Cop couldn't handle the pressure of being a symbol of whats wrong with America's police force.
Man, so close to Godwinning this thread.
You obviously haven't seen the full video. That was far from a peaceful protest. It was sooo fething close to a riot, not to mention those students were blocking the police officers from leaving, which they were attempting to do. The fact the officers were so calm is a credit to them.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Meh, He was following orders, What ws he supposed to do? Nothing? Disobey his superiors?
Are you serious? Since when did we start using robots in the police force? I'm pretty sure the guy could have thought, at one point, "Gee, maybe I shouldn't pepper spray these peacefully protesting students sitting here on the ground."
100% What was this cop supposed to do? The order came in to remove the protesters. Was he supposed to risk his job for a bunch of entitled kids? Risk his pension and possibly his nice retirement?
What does this mean? Did he warn them and ask them to stop, stop, stop, then finally sprayed them?
Yes, the protestors were asked to move, many times. When they refused to move, they were warned many times that they would be pepper sprayed if they refused to move. Then they were pepper sprayed. Look up unedited videos of the incident as basically every video that actually got air time was edited to make the protestors look like they were pepper sprayed out of no where - also the angle this piece is taking - as if Pike just sauntered up and started pepper spraying poor students sitting on the grass calmly.
Because chanting "We won't let you leave." while surrounding Law Enforcement Officers discharging their duty isn't forcing confrontation.
And once again, these weren't the students peacefully protesting on the grass on the side of the walkways that got pepper sprayed, these were the students linking arms and refusing to allow Law Enforcement Officers to pass by.
What does this mean? Did he warn them and ask them to stop, stop, stop, then finally sprayed them?
Yes, the protestors were asked to move, many times. When they refused to move, they were warned many times that they would be pepper sprayed if they refused to move. Then they were pepper sprayed. Look up unedited videos of the incident as basically every video that actually got air time was edited to make the protestors look like they were pepper sprayed out of no where - also the angle this piece is taking - as if Pike just sauntered up and started pepper spraying poor students sitting on the grass calmly.
Because chanting "We won't let you leave." while surrounding Law Enforcement Officers discharging their duty isn't forcing confrontation.
And once again, these weren't the students peacefully protesting on the grass on the side of the walkways that got pepper sprayed, these were the students linking arms and refusing to allow Law Enforcement Officers to pass by.
Careful. Posting this will make you a "government abuse apologist".
hotsauceman1 wrote: 100% What was this cop supposed to do? The order came in to remove the protesters. Was he supposed to risk his job for a bunch of entitled kids? Risk his pension and possibly his nice retirement?
Yes! That's the exact mindset that turns a cop into a crooked cop. Any police officer who is willing to do the wrong thing because it is in his best financial interests cannot be trusted.
And what exactly is the relevant part of that 190 page report? I'm not about to dig through it looking for what I don't know.
Interviews with officers involved in the incident indicate that they apparently felt that
they were surrounded by a hostile mob and that the use of pepper spray was necessary to
create a path for the officers and arrestees to leave the Quad. While there is some
support for this conclusion, a detailed review of the objective evidence undermines this
conclusion.
First, and foremost, the apparent reason for the officer and arrestees remaining on the
Quad after the tents were down was because there had been no arrangements made to
transport the arrestees from the Quad. The lack of timely decision-making by Lts. Pike
and to respond to this unplanned situation caused an escalation of an already
volatile situation.
There are a number of other factors that undermine the belief that there was no
alternative to use of pepper spray. Specifically, the following belie the conclusion:
was able to walk arrestees through the crowd to a waiting squad
car for transport to the Police Station;
was able to step over the line of seated protesters and walk
through the crowd to meet with the Davis PD who arrived to provide mutual aid
He led the Davis PD contingent back through the crowd to the protesters without
incident;
Lt. Pike’s actions and body language include stepping over the seated protesters
to get to their faces, a move that would not generally be undertaken with a hostile
crowd.
Approximately 20 minutes after the pepper spray was used, Lt. Pike and one
other officer returned to Quad without riot gear and asked protesters to remove
additional tents that had been erected. The tents were removed without incident.
On balance, there is little factual basis supporting Lt. Pike’s belief that he was trapped by
the protesters or that his officers were prevented from leaving the Quad. Further, there is
little evidence that any protesters attempted to use violence against the police. The Kroll
report did note that (officer) felt a protester was attempting to “attack” another officer
and they had a brief altercation.
Kroll concludes, “Considering all the available evidence - while recognizing that Kroll
investigators were not able to interview Lieutenant Pike to learn and report on his state
of mind at the moment he used the pepper spray - the deployment of pepper spray does
not appear to have been an objectively reasonable use of force.” The Task Force agrees.
On balance, there does not seem to be an objective, factual basis for Lieutenant Pike to have
believed that he was trapped or that his officers were prevented from leaving by the seated
protesters. Furthermore, there is no objective evidence available to Kroll that depicts any
attempt by the protesters to use violence.
Considering all the available evidence—while recognizing that Kroll investigators were not
able to interview Lieutenant Pike to learn and report on his state of mind at the moment he
used the pepper spray—the deployment of pepper spray does not appear to have been an
objectively reasonable use of force. This conclusion is buttressed by the facts that the MK-9
was not an authorized weapon under UCDPD guidelines and that UCDPD officers were not
trained in its use.
On balance, there does not seem to be an objective, factual basis for Lieutenant Pike to have
believed that he was trapped or that his officers were prevented from leaving by the seated
protesters. Furthermore, there is no objective evidence available to Kroll that depicts any
attempt by the protesters to use violence.
Considering all the available evidence—while recognizing that Kroll investigators were not
able to interview Lieutenant Pike to learn and report on his state of mind at the moment he
used the pepper spray—the deployment of pepper spray does not appear to have been an
objectively reasonable use of force. This conclusion is buttressed by the facts that the MK-9
was not an authorized weapon under UCDPD guidelines and that UCDPD officers were not
trained in its use.
Interesting. Who provided the MK-9? Was it his own personal device?
hotsauceman1 wrote: Meh, He was following orders, What ws he supposed to do? Nothing? Disobey his superiors?
Yes. Exactly that.
To keep the peace, which was not broken by a bunch of kids sitting passively on the ground. To protec, which no one was in danger, and serve - not via spraying college hippies in the face sitting on the ground in protest.
This guy is a disgrace to law enforcement, and it's ridiculous that they even settled with him. I would have kept fighting this guys spurious claims of workmans comp even if it cost more than to settle with him on general principle if i were the administration of UC Davis.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote: Um, What? The mindset is that a cop is supposed to follow orders or loose his job
No, not at all. Look up the term "police officer discretion".
Police Officers are allowed a wide berth of discretion in the discharge of their duties.
There's other ways of dispersing protesters than casually pepper spraying them at point blank range. This guy definitely stepped over the line, and was correctly fired.
Note my opinion would change the moment, the iota of a second, there was any unruly, violent, or dangerous behavior coming from the protesters. I'm not anti-cop at all, not by a longshot.
Yeah, seriously. In both the military and the police, if your superior gives you an order which violates any laws and so on, you are not supposed to "just follow that order".
I've known plenty of policemen who have questioned their superiors, refused to do things they thought were wrong, etc. They didn't lose their jobs, though I will admit, petty superiors can make it unpleasant for them (giving them gakky shifts, making them work Christmas all the time, stuff like that).
Better to stand up and take some crap than follow a bogus order and get fired- which is what happened in this case.
Edit: Also, if the protesters were being unruly, it's STILL an officers job to keep the peace.
If they mass assault the police, okay, have at them. But that other stuff is no call for escalating to a violent response. It's never going to help the police in the long term.
(It is apparently pretty frightening to be a policeman in that situation though. My dad was there when a mob of republicans tried to storm the british embassy in Dublin in the seventies. He said you'd batter anything that came in arms reach that wasn't wearing a uniform- the mob had axes and petrol bombs, the police had slightly longer sticks than normal and were outnumbered 20 to 1. In that situation, my sympathies are much more on the side of the policeman.)
I really want to dig into this discussion, but I know anything I say is going to be horribly jaded by the fact that I hate Occupiers and think they're all spoiled, entitled brats.
But that's just me.
Do they use water hoses anymore for this kind of thing?
cincydooley wrote: I really want to dig into this discussion, but I know anything I say is going to be horribly jaded by the fact that I hate Occupiers and think they're all spoiled, entitled brats.
But that's just me.
Do they use water hoses anymore for this kind of thing?
I'd usually agree about the nutters who took over Occupy Wall Street, but these weren't a bunch of smelly yuppies arguing that they were the '99 percent' while blogging on their iPads and laptops and banging on drums and doing spirit fingers.
They were students protesting a massive tuition hike, which is something I can understand. Forget peaceful protesting, I'd go nuts if my University suddenly announced that we'd see a 30% or more increase in tuition fees over the next year.
@Frazz, I don't know any musicals....The only Order Of The Golden Palm that I know of is given to soldiers in the Belgian Armed Forces. There is an Order Of the Date Palm in the Iraqi Armed Forces, but thats a little OT I feel.
I can't believe this cop got $38,000 in compo because of 'Stress'...That sucks. Still, having seen the videos that have been posted here, I can understand why he sprayed the students. But I'm inclined to go with my first thought, Policeman doing his job. If those students where in breach of the peace somehow, and if he was feeling threatened, then I can understand why he did it. Fight or flight, right
Hopefully this means we'll never, ever see you claiming someone else is making a slippery slope argument again, because you absolutely lost the right with this.
sarpedons-right-hand wrote: @Frazz, I don't know any musicals....The only Order Of The Golden Palm that I know of is given to soldiers in the Belgian Armed Forces. There is an Order Of the Date Palm in the Iraqi Armed Forces, but thats a little OT I feel.
I can't believe this cop got $38,000 in compo because of 'Stress'...That sucks. Still, having seen the videos that have been posted here, I can understand why he sprayed the students. But I'm inclined to go with my first thought, Policeman doing his job. If those students where in breach of the peace somehow, and if he was feeling threatened, then I can understand why he did it. Fight or flight, right
Mr. Roberts. He received the order of the Golden Palm at the end by his fellow crewmates for his interdictions with the captain on their behalf. You cute youngins...
One person has both Zimmerman'd and Godwin'd the thread. That one person is a mod. Although I'm not sure if you can Godwin it if they have already been brought up...
Manchu wrote: "Feeling threatened" is getting us everywhere in this country. Pepper spraying peaceful protesters, murdering black kids.
Be thankful that your Police can use that gak. Our Police are hamstrung when it comes to things like this, thanks to Mr Blair and his Human 'Rights' Bill. Looking back at the London Riots, some Tear Gas and a few Water Cannons wouldn't have gone a miss. Instead, our Police are left just watching whilst little gaks run riot and do whatever the feth they want..... Yes, the protest was for a good reason, a 30% hike in prices sucks ass, we had much the same thing here when the Uni's all put up their prices, but sometimes these things are going to happen.
I would much rather our Police had the means to prevent civil disorder than having their hands tied and just having to allow it to happen.
Eichmann's defense is the exact same used here to justify police brutality. Evoking some internet meme doesn't change that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sarpedons-right-hand wrote: I would much rather our Police had the means to prevent civil disorder than having their hands tied and just having to allow it to happen.
I don't oppose police use of pepper spray generally. Spraying a bunch of kids sitting on the ground and then claiming they felt threatened or were just following orders is another matter.
Manchu wrote: Eichmann's defense is the exact same used here to justify police brutality. Evoking some internet meme doesn't change that.
Pepper spray is hardly police brutality.
Comparing a cop using it to a guy crucial to the implementation of the Holocaust is in incredibly poor taste, and can only come from a truly woeful lack of historical perspective.
motyak wrote: just having a chuckle that one person did both
I have no doubt that if Zimmerman had been some kind of police officer or security guard he, too, would have invoked some kind of SOP. This is why bullies like uniforms so much.
Kids wouldn't move and were blocking the path. Pepper spray beats a truncheon to the head I guess. If time was available hiring some monkeys to fling poo would have been better though.
Stupid kids. When I went to school in Cali we protested by marching around, not doing dumbass sitins. Remember Zombieland Rule #1: Cardio.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
motyak wrote: One person has both Zimmerman'd and Godwin'd the thread. That one person is a mod. Although I'm not sure if you can Godwin it if they have already been brought up...
On the plus side of things, I'm just glad I got through Basic Training before they finished building the gas chamber. No breathing tear gas for this Airman.
Now, if my eventual goal of becoming Law Enforcement takes place, I'm sure I'll have to do the pepper spray thing...
I like it. It has a snap.
The Zimmerwin'd came a flowin in, from across the sea...
Automatically Appended Next Post: Now that I think about it, I'm more in line with Manchu, but against the President and that the storm trooper, er school wannabe cop. It was her call. If they weren't blocking the complete route then the best scourse would have been to ignore them, or threaten them with CSU .
Manchu wrote: Eichmann's defense is the exact same used here to justify police brutality. Evoking some internet meme doesn't change that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sarpedons-right-hand wrote: I would much rather our Police had the means to prevent civil disorder than having their hands tied and just having to allow it to happen.
I don't oppose police use of pepper spray generally. Spraying a bunch of kids sitting on the ground and then claiming they felt threatened or were just following orders is another matter.
Did you actually watch the video? The unedited video.
Those cops were totally right, when law enforcement tells you to vacate an area you do it.
I mean, it's not like you get to show up by the busloads when you know an area has been declared off limits, ignore their orders, yell at them for doing their jobs, and then tear down the barricades put in place by law enforcement...
Or maybe it just depends on whether you are a college student, a veteran, or a politician with a camera in your face...
d-usa wrote: Those cops were totally right, when law enforcement tells you to vacate an area you do it.
I mean, it's not like you get to show up by the busloads when you know an area has been declared off limits, ignore their orders, yell at them for doing their jobs, and then tear down the barricades put in place by law enforcement...
Or maybe it just depends on whether you are a college student, a veteran, or a politician with a camera in your face...
Of course they were right... but imo, that doesn't justify a face-full of pepper spray when the students are just sitting there.
Best course of action is round their asses up, put them in the slammer... and fine them for their trouble.
Forar wrote:When I had asp and self defense training, our instructor made sure we were all on the receiving end (both by himself and by our fellow students). It was enlightening.
Especially seeing who flinched back, even knowing we were all getting it.
Point being, I think that's how it should be, and a lot of people and forces seem to agree, but I have doubts it's applied 100%. That's just life.
An ASP collapsible baton will break your bones if you're hit at even close to 100% strength. No doubt about it. And any manager/boss/whoever that hits you with the baton "so you know what it feels like" ought to lose their job and be named in a lawsuit.
my god this is more stupidity than even I can find laughable;
Yeah. Those students were such a huge threat sitting there, with their heads down. Even the crowd is comparatively tame before and after the incident. There is nothing in that incident that warranted that use of force and anyone arguing otherwise is talking so far out of their ass they might as well be inside out.
Who are these locals? Unarmed civilian U.S. citizens exercising their constitutional right to peaceably protest? And are you a police officer or a soldier? Or don't you see a difference?
Manchu wrote: Who are these locals? Unarmed civilian U.S. citizens exercising their constitutional right to peaceably protest? And are you a police officer or a soldier? Or don't you see a difference?
As where shown, they where dliberatly antagonizing the officers.
fishy bob wrote: Or just think something in the lines of "Oh, he's whipped out the spray can. Perhaps we're done here?"
Don't know how your police work but here in the U.S. we don't usually suspect the police will use disproportionate violence against citizens (well, at least not white college students).
Or just think something in the lines of "Oh, he's whipped out the spray can. Perhaps we're done here?"
Nothing in the law gives him permission to take out the can in the first place. If that is someone idea of a mob then they are living in Candy Land where anything less sunshine filled than a rainbow is the end of the world. That was not a mob under any definition of the word and the people being sprayed where the ones who were the least active of all the students present.
You never been in that situation Manchu.
It would be relevant if the two situations were at all comparable. And I have been in that situation. UC Davis is not a war zone.
so shouting, at pepper spray holding cops "What are you going to do" isnt antagonizing?
Oh, lets not forget the fact they they where being tld to leave and refused?
hotsauceman1 wrote: so shouting, at pepper spray holding cops "What are you going to do" isnt antagonizing? Oh, lets not forget the fact they they where being tld to leave and refused?
Jihadin wrote: You never been in that situation Manchu. Before we go further remember you view me as a murderer
I remember you saying that the sight of children dying in war didn't bother you and I remember calling you out on that. Still stand by that?EDIT: My mistake -- we weren't even talking about war .. we were talking about how you're fine seeing a baby shot in a movie theater:
hotsauceman1 wrote: so shouting, at pepper spray holding cops "What are you going to do" isnt antagonizing? Oh, lets not forget the fact they they where being tld to leave and refused?
Of course it's antagonizing...
Still doesn't justify a face full 'o peppa spray. Had this "mob" moved aggressively towards the po-po, then spray all you want and I hope it goes into every orifices...
But if hte kid refuses to move... arrest and fine him. Much simpler outcome.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Its not shouting, It is shouting at the cops who you are making a circle around and not letting them leave.
Those poor officer. A bunch of skinny kids are sitting on the ground in a circle. Better break out the batons and spray cans we're gonna have to mace these mothers or we'll never make it home in time for steak and potatoes.
hotsauceman1 wrote: so shouting, at pepper spray holding cops "What are you going to do" isnt antagonizing?
Oh, lets not forget the fact they they where being tld to leave and refused?
That is the question. To those who are against the peppering
1. What would you have the PoPo do? (me, I'v ebeen enlightened. in an open space for a short protest, leave them alone. Maybe turn on the nearby water sprinklers heh heh heh)
2. Has anyone tested whether pepper spray works on people who eat Thai/Filipino/Mexican food on a regular basis?
I still do. Bodies don't faze me. I'm not squeamish at the sight of blood. Like Shuma told you. I have the background to stand by. You can take the moral high ground all you want and make believe I'm a killer. That attempts make me laugh and think of a possible "shelter" life you really have. If you do not know the situation then you really can't condemn, render final judgment, or prosecute a situation unless you know. You are basing your view at a personnel level and not at a professional level.
edit
Lordofhats. Your focus at the students on the ground. Notice how close the students were that was watching and filming. Then the chanting. That's escalation of a situation.
Situational Awareness. Both sides...well three sides because I'm including the Admin on this are wrong.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Its not shouting, It is shouting at the cops who you are making a circle around and not letting them leave.
Those poor officer. A bunch of skinny kids are sitting on the ground in a circle. Better break out the batons and spray cans we're gonna have to mace these mothers or we'll never make it home in time for steak and potatoes.
officers were told to do it by the President of the University. Don't blame the Minions. Blame Dr. Evil.
officers were told to do it by the President of the University. Don't blame the Minions. Blame Dr. Evil.
I'll blame them all. The officer had zero cause to spray those students. They've (presumably) been trained and should have know that was a line that tends to result in losing your job, so the argument "I had to do it or I'd be fired" is a bunch of bs. Officers have been fired for doing less than spraying some protestors so Sir Peppry Can has either been living under a rock the last 50 years or is a complete moron.
That's not the question. You said you weren't bothered by children getting shot in Aurora ("just casualties"). That's a monstrous comment. It's either false and you're an Internet Tough Guy or it's true and you are a sociopath.
ITT you are pretending police are soldiers, a peaceful protest is a war zone, and U.S. civilians are insugents. It's fethed up.
officers were told to do it by the President of the University. Don't blame the Minions. Blame Dr. Evil.
I'll blame them all. The officer had zero cause to spray those students. They've (presumably) been trained and should have know that was a line that tends to result in losing your job, so the argument "I had to do it or I'd be fired" is a bunch of bs. Officers have been fired for doing less than spraying some protestors so Sir Peppry Can has either been living under a rock the last 50 years or is a complete moron.
I respect this. Only wussies blame a few.
"Put him to the torch."
"But he's innocent!"
"we're all guilty of something."
- A Failure to Investigate Whether or Not “Non-Affiliates” in the UC Davis Occupy Encampment Were Present
- The Administration Decided to Deploy Police to Remove the Tents on Nov. 18 before Considering Other Reasonable Alternatives
- The Scope of the Police Operation to Remove the Tents Was Ineffectively Communicated, Not Clearly Understood by Key Decision-Makers, and, Accordingly, Could Not Be Adequately Evaluated as to Its Costs and Consequences
- There Were No Clear Lines Delineating the Responsibility for Decision-Making between Civilian Administrators and Police
- There Was Confusion as to the Legal Basis for the Police Operation
Wait.....campus own PD was questionable on its jurisdiction and SOP's? WTH they do. Create their own in house rules, regulations, and SOP's?
Alfndrate wrote: Ya know who else did sit-ins that violated the law?
Going by his posts so far, his answer will be "criminals."
I mean... technically he's not wrong, though there was a reason these peaceful sit ins were done during OWS and the Civil Rights Movement. Because it's hard to not look like the aggressor when you remove people (especially young adults) that are just sitting there.
Dead kids are bodies are they not? The ones that are wounded is the most important. Ignore the bodies and treat the wounded. Internet Tough Guy eh. I not beat around the bush with you Manchu. I neither like nor dislike you. To me it seems kids getting killed by others is not something you can wrap your head around or can fathom. As for the pepper spraying of these "kids" who are adults btw. The officer was nailed for not being at the proper distance was he not? Along with using unauthorized pepper spray to.
Manchu wrote: What it does is make the populace wonder how someone sitting quietly can be meaningfully called a criminal for sitting quietly.
When I worked for the evil Exxon corporation back in the day, we had a plant in France where protesters sat in front of the plant entrances and exits, preventing shipment of raw materials and goods into and out of the plant. Legal or no? Also, who looks like the bad guy when they're drug away?
Jihadin wrote: You never been in that situation Manchu. Before we go further remember you view me as a murderer
I remember you saying that the sight of children dying in war didn't bother you and I remember calling you out on that. Still stand by that?EDIT: My mistake -- we weren't even talking about war .. we were talking about how you're fine seeing a baby shot in a movie theater:
Jihadin wrote: To me it seems kids getting killed by others is not something you can wrap your head around or can fathom.
No, I understand that people get murdered and that some of them are kids. What I don't understand is how someone can dismiss that and expect to be viewed as morally sane. More to the point ITT, I'm having a tough time with your inability to distinguish between police and soldiers, between protesters and enemy combatants, and between a U.S. college campus and a war zone.
Yes, but this line of thought is OT for this thread.
The crowd was being more antagonistic than the people in the pathway. If Officer Pike had sprayed the people standing there shouting and chanting and yelling, it probably would have been considered an uncontrolled discharge or something along those lines (idk if that's a thing), hitting the kids in the path was a directed and controlled spray that hit just those that were easier to hit and presented less of an issue.
Jihadin wrote: To me it seems kids getting killed by others is not something you can wrap your head around or can fathom.
No, I understand that people get murdered and that some of them are kids. What I don't understand is how someone can dismiss that and expect to be viewed as morally sane. More to the point ITT, I'm having a tough time with your inability to distinguish between police and soldiers, between protesters and enemy combatants, and between a U.S. college campus and a war zone.
What makes you think he's not distinguishing them? o.O
Jihadin wrote: You never been in that situation Manchu. Before we go further remember you view me as a murderer
I remember you saying that the sight of children dying in war didn't bother you and I remember calling you out on that. Still stand by that?EDIT: My mistake -- we weren't even talking about war .. we were talking about how you're fine seeing a baby shot in a movie theater:
this jerkwad shot a 3 month old baby in the face and shot a 7 year old little girl IN THE BACK.
This doesn't bother me. To me thats causualties. I've been deployed to many times and seen a lot worse.
Whether I've been a soldier or a police officer has no bearing on my ability to tell the difference between them.
Maybe both of you should like, MELLOW OUT. RUle #1 people.
(when Frazzled is saying that we are truly doomed)
Does Rule #1 apply to Mods?
You should ask them. As a fallen mod I can neither confirm nor deny incriminating photos and candy are the only drivers of mod behavior. If you have an issue with a mod take it to another mod. If you have incriminating photos or candy that helps.
Just a post to both that you're get persniskkety. Its too nice today to be persnikkety. PLus I'm doing my IDPA club match toingiht so my view is bright. like a ray of sunshine on a dark day, to all who know and meet me.
Incorrect. A police officer is not a soldier, the end. A police officer's duty is to keep the peace. A soldier's duty is to make war.
Misread. One can go into the military. Does his/her time. Afterwards join Law Enforcement. Stop thinking in the "now". Also I guess our mission in Bosnia and Kosovo is war?
I know the difference
That's the second time I said that to you. First time was before Shuma got involved. This is the second time.
Your cracking me up Manchu. Pretty soon I'm going to start feeding into your imagination on me
Frazzled wrote: You're forgetting MP/SPs and police/peacekeeping duties performed by soldiers as well in active areas.
MPs fit into a larger mission that has no correlation in civil society. "Peacekeeping" is a matter of threatening war. We can talk about the abuse of the military by the executive if you want but I reckon we'd end up agreeing once again and ending the world once and for all.
Jihadin wrote: Misread. One can go into the military. Does his/her time. Afterwards join Law Enforcement.
And if s/he keeps thinking like a soldier, s/he's more likely to get in trouble/get someone hurt. Because the missions are different. The contexts are different.
My resolve is harden to the point of pepper spraying the link arm adults, ensuring my fellow LEO's keep the crowd back 20m from the situation, breaking the line, and stepping through them to shoot the pleading, crying student/adult in the head who's been bitten by a zombie. Ensuring the infection does not spread. Harming the other students/adults. File my report. and go drink coffee at my favorite tavern since I do not drink alcohol.
I do not consider anyone an enemy combatant. Unless they're planting IED's or shooting at others. As for Lt. Pike I do not think he viewed them as enemy combatants. Pretty clear the US Military does not view a US Citizen a enemy combatant until they become a threat to us. Its gets real personnel when someone tries to opt you out. Like the saying goes. Do unto to others as they do unto you but fire power is the key. Also everyone knows its easy to judge, predict, and evaluate a incident after it happens.
edit
Whether or not police should act like soldiers and treat citizens as enemy combatants is pretty on-topic, my good man.
Just want to point out the difference between the military and LEO's. Pike wouldn't have gotten 30K settlement. I myself would not have handle the situation like Pike did. I myself knowing the "critters" I'm dealing with will hit them where it really hurt. Fines. I myself will not take it upon myself to instigate physical confrontation. I myself will question that order. I myself will ask for a written order with signature. I myself will not follow the written orders due to it being a unlawful order. I myself will just watch the "critters" and drink coffee and eat Tasty Kreme donuts or Dunkin. I will though will ask for overtime if I was in charge and a LEO in Pike positions for myself and my crew.
Manchu wrote: "Feeling threatened" is getting us everywhere in this country. Pepper spraying peaceful protesters, murdering black kids.
Odd, i don't see visible wounds on the back of that cop's riot gear clad head, or blood coming down his nose.
Drawing lines of distinction between the UC pepper spray asshat and George Zimmerman is a bit much.
The degree of force was much less, but then, we have photographic evidence of the actual forceful act with the Davis cop, when there was no such evidence of the Martin homicide (edit: for clarity's sake, i mean the shooting).
Manchu wrote: What it does is make the populace wonder how someone sitting quietly can be meaningfully called a criminal for sitting quietly.
Depends on whether said group is doing anything contrary to criminal law. Just minding your own business and walking quietly can be illegal (jaywalking) depending on circumstances. However just because the protesters were doing something unlawful does not mean that the Police should not use reasonable force or use instruments that they have not been trained in. I remember protesters in Northern Ireland being baton charged by riot police for obstructing a march by peacefully sitting and blocking the path. Did I think that blocking a road was right in that instance? No. Did I think that the Police action was right? Absolutely not.
And any comparison between these protesters to the civil rights activists is a stretch. Civil rights protesters were demonstrating against patiently discriminatory legislation that was an affront to the notion of equality and adversely impacted their lives on a massive scale. These students are protesting an increase in their fees.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Manchu wrote: That's not the question. You said you weren't bothered by children getting shot in Aurora ("just casualties"). That's a monstrous comment. It's either false and you're an Internet Tough Guy or it's true and you are a sociopath.
ITT you are pretending police are soldiers, a peaceful protest is a war zone, and U.S. civilians are insugents. It's fethed up.
Manchu wrote: No, I understand that people get murdered and that some of them are kids. What I don't understand is how someone can dismiss that and expect to be viewed as morally sane.
I hope that you're at least making references to another poster's mental health from a position of clinical knowledge, otherwise it could come across as casting aspersions on the character of another and being less than polite.
Seaward wrote: Man. I wish I lived as sheltered a life as some of you.
You keep tossing out anecdotal one liners like this, which add little to the debate. Care to proffer an actual opinion substantiated by some fact, rather than being the kid who's too cool for school ?
I know some of the participants in this debate haven't led anything even remotely approaching a sheltered life. Nor have I. Assuming otherwise because we have opinions that don't match yours is obtuse.
Haight wrote: You keep tossing out anecdotal one liners like this, which add little to the debate. Care to proffer an actual opinion substantiated by some fact, rather than being the kid who's too cool for school ?
A "debate" where we've compared a cop who pepper sprayed people to an architect of the Final Solution, and some college students whining about tuition hikes to the civil rights movement, didn't start with a basis in fact, so I'm not so sure your sudden attempt at a switch to substantive discourse is going to go all that well.
That said, if you're breaking the law and the cops repeatedly tell you to stop, and then repeatedly inform you they're going to OC spray your ass if you continue to refuse to stop, and then do in fact OC spray you, that ain't police brutality. Nor is it the start of our descent into the Third Reich. It's pretty mild, all things considered.
Seaward wrote: A "debate" where we've compared a cop who pepper sprayed people to an architect of the Final Solution
I must have missed that particular post. It seemed as if some posters rightfully compared the excuses of nazi war criminals, i.e. "just following orders", to a comment made by (i believe) hotsauceman1.
Seaward wrote: That said, if you're breaking the law and the cops repeatedly tell you to stop, and then repeatedly inform you they're going to OC spray your ass if you continue to refuse to stop, and then do in fact OC spray you, that ain't police brutality.
It was totally uncalled for. The protesters were not violent and simply carrying them away, arresting or fining them would have been enough to deal with that particular situation. And if the police officers felt overly threatened by those harmless protesters in that situation than they are severely lacking in proper training and are not fit for that kind of assignment (yet). I wonder what they would've done if some of the protesters started to be violent. Just shoot them or get a car (or tank) to run over them?
Frazzled wrote: You're forgetting MP/SPs and police/peacekeeping duties performed by soldiers as well in active areas.
MPs fit into a larger mission that has no correlation in civil society.
Er...no. Further, most MPs become cops once they leave. Same for the fire fighter units in the AF and Navy. The Tank commanders have definite civilian applications in the area of traffic control.
"Peacekeeping" is a matter of threatening war. We can talk about the abuse of the military by the executive if you want but I reckon we'd end up agreeing once again and ending the world once and for all..
Thats not how it works in Bosnia and a host of peacekeeping operations.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seaward wrote: Man. I wish I lived as sheltered a life as some of you.
I'll have you know I got a very nasty boo boo yesterday. It hurt like hell until the ambulance crew came and-in conjunction with lifeflite- put a bandaid on it. Plus I got a lolly pop. That was close. I could have died.
Haight wrote: You keep tossing out anecdotal one liners like this, which add little to the debate. Care to proffer an actual opinion substantiated by some fact, rather than being the kid who's too cool for school ?
A "debate" where we've compared a cop who pepper sprayed people to an architect of the Final Solution, and some college students whining about tuition hikes to the civil rights movement, didn't start with a basis in fact, so I'm not so sure your sudden attempt at a switch to substantive discourse is going to go all that well.
That said, if you're breaking the law and the cops repeatedly tell you to stop, and then repeatedly inform you they're going to OC spray your ass if you continue to refuse to stop, and then do in fact OC spray you, that ain't police brutality. Nor is it the start of our descent into the Third Reich. It's pretty mild, all things considered.
Seaward has a point. Fortunately people with actual points have no place in this thread. Out with you out!
Minx wrote: I must have missed that particular post. It seemed as if some posters rightfully compared the excuses of nazi war criminals, i.e. "just following orders", to a comment made by (i believe) hotsauceman1.
HR reps have used that exact excuse before, too. Comparing them to the Nazis for doing so would be just as uncalled for, because, as I'm sure you're aware, while the Nazis may well have pepper sprayed people (and banned Casual Friday, for that matter), they also went the extra mile and killed millions of people. You see, "just following orders" actually is a valid excuse when the order's lawful. Pepper spraying criminals or banning Casual Friday? Lawful. Genocide? Unlawful.
Haight wrote: You keep tossing out anecdotal one liners like this, which add little to the debate. Care to proffer an actual opinion substantiated by some fact, rather than being the kid who's too cool for school ?
A "debate" where we've compared a cop who pepper sprayed people to an architect of the Final Solution, and some college students whining about tuition hikes to the civil rights movement, didn't start with a basis in fact, so I'm not so sure your sudden attempt at a switch to substantive discourse is going to go all that well.
Actually I was merely comparing the use of sit ins because another poster said sit ins were useless. I'm sure the kids on campus had probably looked to the Civil Rights Movement and saw that sit ins were a useful means of peaceful protesting.
Minx wrote: I must have missed that particular post. It seemed as if some posters rightfully compared the excuses of nazi war criminals, i.e. "just following orders", to a comment made by (i believe) hotsauceman1.
HR reps have used that exact excuse before, too. Comparing them to the Nazis for doing so would be just as uncalled for, because, as I'm sure you're aware, while the Nazis may well have pepper sprayed people (and banned Casual Friday, for that matter), they also went the extra mile and killed millions of people. You see, "just following orders" actually is a valid excuse when the order's lawful. Pepper spraying criminals or banning Casual Friday? Lawful. Genocide? Unlawful.
No one was compared to the Nazis. Some posters just illustrated the problems of that particular excuse in combination with unlawful actions.
Alfndrate wrote: Actually I was merely comparing the use of sit ins because another poster said sit ins were useless. I'm sure the kids on campus had probably looked to the Civil Rights Movement and saw that sit ins were a useful means of peaceful protesting.
You weren't the only person to reference the civil rights movement.
Accepting what the man tells you to do, Easy! Unless you're in a group that we approve of (ie. not "whiny" college students) like Veterans or True American Heroes, in which case you should stand up to the jackbooted oppression of the gubbermint!
Alfndrate wrote: Actually I was merely comparing the use of sit ins because another poster said sit ins were useless. I'm sure the kids on campus had probably looked to the Civil Rights Movement and saw that sit ins were a useful means of peaceful protesting.
You weren't the only person to reference the civil rights movement.
No, but I do believe I was the first to do so in this thread . And I weighed the options because I knew that the Civil Rights Movement was far more important than college students complaining about tuition hikes amongst other things, but I did feel that the idea that sit ins weren't useless should have been brought up
Not at all. Be prepared to fight for your right to party or whatever these useless Californians wanted. Just be prepared for the consequences of your actions when you box police officers in and say you won't let them go any where.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Not at all. Be prepared to fight for your right to party or whatever these useless Californians wanted. Just be prepared for the consequences of your actions when you box police officers in and say you won't let them go any where.
Was Hot Fuzz actually boxed in? I didn't see that.
I have watched a video. I didn't see police being boxed in. I saw police trying to clear a protest. There may have been more or after it, hence the question.
The video I watched, at the point Pike broke out the pepper spray the LEOs were withdrawing, and were boxed in by protestors chanting "We won't let you go"
We can talk about the abuse of the military by the executive if you want but I reckon we'd end up agreeing once again and ending the world once and for all.
Thats not how it works in Bosnia and a host of peacekeeping operations.
We can talk about the abuse of the military by the executive if you want but I reckon we'd end up agreeing once again and ending the world once and for all.
Thats not how it works in Bosnia and a host of peacekeeping operations.
Did you even read what you quoted?
MPs are police. You need to reacquaint yourself with what they are.
And again most MPs become police once they leave.
What you SHOULD be talking about is indeed the militarization of the police. I can guarantee the people living in East LA didn't think of police as police. We sure didn't.
.
