Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 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:

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?

 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.

 CptJake wrote:
Does Rule #1 apply to Mods?

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.

 Manchu wrote:

 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

 kronk wrote:
Also, who looks like the bad guy when they're drug away?

That really depends on how they are drug away. There is a thing called proportionality.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

What makes you think he's not distinguishing them? o.O

Reading his posts:

 Jihadin wrote:
Then I'm a jack booted Bully NCO protecting my interpreter when we get mobbed by locals.

o.O

 CptJake wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Manchu wrote:

 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:

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.

 Alfndrate wrote:
The crowd was being more antagonistic than the people in the pathway.

That's an excellent point. We have a lot of people saying Pike was right because of what the people he didn't assault were doing.

You forgot Manchu I know the difference. Soldiers and police are two different animals unless one is of both professions.

Getting hard to tell the difference in some locations.

Why did NYPD come to mind.....

 Jihadin wrote:
I know the difference.

Your post ITT does not reflect that.

 Jihadin wrote:
Soldiers and police are two different animals unless one is of both professions.

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.

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

 Manchu wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
I know the difference.

Your post ITT does not reflect that.

 Jihadin wrote:
Soldiers and police are two different animals unless one is of both professions.

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.

Well technically thats not correct either. You're forgetting MP/SPs and police/peacekeeping duties performed by soldiers as well in active areas.

 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.

 Jihadin wrote:
who's been bitten by a zombie

Great.

Great

How else am I going to derail our mutual destruction of the thread

Whether or not police should act like soldiers and treat citizens as enemy combatants is pretty on-topic, my good man.

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.

Sounds good to me. You get 100 points in my book.

 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).

I still want my water cannon

Man. I wish I lived as sheltered a life as some of you.

 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?

 Manchu wrote:

 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.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Seaward wrote:

 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.

Here endeth today's lesson.

 Seaward wrote:

 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.