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.

CT GAMER wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:
Well Frank Miller is a giant tool, so that isn't a surprise...

Man, this can't be said enough.

The dude made interesting things that other people turned into really good interesting things.

But the man himself is inSANE.

If you look up Jingoism in the dictionary you will find his picture. Some of his post 9/11 interviews in which he advocates all manner of atrocities against non-western peoples was an eye-opener to his degree of crazy.

Who's Frank Miller?

Comic/graphic novel artist. Most notable for "Sin City" and "300".

Kanluwen wrote:Comic/graphic novel artist. Most notable for "Sin City" and "300".

I liked the movies. Marv was awesome.

Kanluwen wrote:

youbedead wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

HudsonD wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:
posse comitatus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

So, if I get it correctly...
Using Marines and Navy troops for law enforcement on US soil is strictly forbidden
Using Army and Air Force troops for law enforcement on US soil is strictly forbidden, unless the congress authorizes it.
That's it ?

That's BASICALLY the cliffs notes of it yeah.

Though it would be a very bad idea to send a military unit to college to quell a protest, given it worked out so well last time

You mean that one time at Kent State?

You are aware that prior to that it was done with no real issues, and there were a few instances afterwards where it was done without the same consequences. Kent State was a powderkeg situation--and to this day, there remains an unsubstantiated report of the National Guardsmen having been shot at. I'd very much suggest you read into the history and timeline of Kent State before shooting your mouth off.

That word has a meaning.

Also are you seriously suggesting that given that is the instance that people remember that it would be wise for a politician to call in the national guard to quell a college protest. It doesn't matter that if it went off without a hitch that's a career ender.

Except what you're missing is that there were a lot of threats leveled against the college and the town of Kent even before the shootings.

But if you want to focus on one particular aspect, by all means go for it.

Key set of words. National Guard.
Established under Title 10 and Title 32 of the U.S. Code, the Army National Guard is part of the National Guard and is divided up into subordinate units stationed in each of the 50 states, three territories and the District of Columbia operating under their respective governors.[3] The Army National Guard may be called up for active duty by the state governors or territorial commanding generals to help respond to domestic emergencies and disasters, such as those caused by hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes.[3]
With the consent of state governors, members or units of the Army National Guard may be appointed, temporarily or indefinitely, to be federally recognized armed force members, in the active or inactive service of the United States.[4][5] If federally recognized, the member or unit becomes part of the Army National Guard of the United States,[6][7][8] which is a reserve component of the United States Army,[6] and part of the National Guard of the United States
Army National Guard of the United States units or members may be called up for federal active duty in times of Congressionally sanctioned war or national emergency.[3] The President may also call up members and units of state Army National Guard, with the consent of state governors, to repel invasion, suppress rebellion, or execute federal laws if the United States or any of its states or territories are invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation, or if there's a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the federal government, or if the President is unable with the regular armed forces to execute the laws of the United States.[9] Because both state Army National Guard and the Army National Guard of the United States relatively go hand-in-hand, they are both usually referred to as just Army National Guard

Posted that to make sure everyone on line on the role of the National Guards

On November 6, 1962, Ohioans voted Rhodes into the governorship with 59% of the vote.[2]

Rhodes served two terms as governor, and he also was a "favorite son" Presidential candidate who controlled the Ohio delegation to the Republican National Conventions in 1964 and 1968, before retiring in 1971. He ran for the U.S. Senate in 1970 and narrowly lost, to U.S. Representative Robert Taft, Jr., the primary election, which was two days after the events at Kent State.

Rhodes oversaw the last two (by electrocution) pre-Furman executions in Ohio,[3] which were both in early 1963, before Ohio resumed executions in 1999.

At a news conference in Kent, Ohio, on Sunday May 3, 1970, the day before the Kent State shootings, he said of campus protesters:


"They're worse than the Brownshirts, and the Communist element, and also the Night Riders, and the vigilantes. They're the worst type of people that we harbor in America."[4]

Since the Ohio Constitution limits the governor to two four-year terms, when Rhodes initially filed to run again in 1974, his petitions were refused by the Secretary of State. Rhodes sued, and the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the limitation was on consecutive terms, thus freeing him to return to office by narrowly defeating incumbent John Gilligan in an upset in the 1974 election. He served two more terms before retiring again in 1983. During the energy crisis of the winter of 1976–77, Rhodes led a 15-minute service, in which he "beseech[ed] God to relieve the storm."[5] The next year, January 1978, amid a blizzard which dropped 31 inches of snow onto Ohio and killed 60 people in the Northeast, Rhodes called the storm "the greatest disaster in Ohio history."[5]

Think it didn't end his carreer.

Don't branch out on the snow storm saying it was an act from God or something.

National Guard side

Yet the declassified FBI files show the FBI already had developed credible evidence suggesting that there was indeed a sniper and that one or more shots may have been fired at the guardsmen first.

Rumors of a sniper had circulated for at least a day before the fatal confrontation, the documents show. And a memorandum sent to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover on May 19, 1970, referred to bullet holes found in a tree and a statue — evidence, the report stated, that “indicated that at least two shots had been fired at the National Guard.”

Another interviewee told agents that a guardsman had spoken of “a confirmed report of a sniper.”

It also turned out that the FBI had its own informant and agent-provocateur roaming the crowd, a part-time Kent State student named Terry Norman, who had a camera. Mr. Norman also was armed with a snub-nosed revolver that FBI ballistics tests, first declassified in 1977, concluded had indeed been discharged on that day.

Then there was the testimony of an ROTC cadet whose identity remains unknown, one of the pervasive redactions concealing the names of all the FBI agents who conducted the interviews and of all those whom they interrogated. Although presumably angry over the demonstrators’ destruction of the campus ROTC building, the cadet’s calm, precise firsthand account nonetheless carries a credibility not easily dismissed.

Before the fatal volley, the ROTC cadet told the FBI, he “heard one round, a pause, two rounds, and then the M-1s opened up.”

The report continued that the cadet “stated that the first three rounds were definitely not M-1s. He said they could possibly have been a .45 caliber. … [He] further stated that he heard confirmed reports of sniper fire coming in over both the National Guard radio and the state police radio.”

The cadet also told the FBI he observed demonstrators carrying baseball bats, golf clubs and improvised weapons, including pieces of steel wire cut into footlong sections, along with radios and other electronic devices “used to monitor the police and Guard wavelengths.”

Separately, a female student told the FBI she “recalled hearing what she thought was [the sound of] firecrackers and then a few seconds later [she] heard noise that to her sounded like a machine gun going off, but then later thought it may have been a volley of shots from the Guard.”

Absent the declassification of the FBI’s entire investigative file, many questions remain unanswered — including why the documents quoted here were overlooked, or discounted, in the Justice Department’s official findings.

At a minimum, the FBI documents strongly challenge the received narrative that the rioting in downtown Kent was spontaneous and unplanned, that the burning of the ROTC headquarters was similarly impulsive and that the guardsmen’s fatal shootings were explicable only as unprovoked acts.

The FBI files provide, in short, a hidden history of the killings at Kent State. They show that the “four dead in Ohio” more properly belong, in the grand sweep of history, to four days in May, an angry, chaotic and violent interlude when a controversial foreign war came home to American soil.

Heads will roll.

Regardless of how fun it might be to watch fellow citizens, or in this case students, subjected to unnecessary police force, here is another link for your reading pleasure.

http://m.cnn.com/primary/_S7ipzm-iMbkbywDWx7

What is WRONG with those cops? Why the HELL would they do that to people who are peacefully protesting? Cops are not supposed to be getting people to fear them, they are here to protect us from the kind of people who would do things like spray pepperspray into peaceful students! WE ARE THE FUTURE DAMMIT!

Sorry. My feelings for this whole situation cannot be contained in a forum post. I just think that was a totally despicable thing to do and they should be punished for it, not just put on administrative leave or whatever half ass punishment they were given. That was assault, and they know it.

You also cannot separate your feelings from logic.

When it comes down to it, pepper spray is the "appropriate response" for this situation. Pepper spray is not simply a deterrent, it's also a way to control a situation.

This was not assault, like one can (quite rightly, depending on how the whole thing plays out) claim for the Anthony Bologna incident.

GalacticDefender wrote: who are peacefully protesting?

As it's been stated before..illegally protesting, as well as blocking a walkway,
is UC a public school system/college?

Doesn't really matter if it's public or private.

Blocking the walkway or camping out without explicit permission to do such is illegal.

Kanluwen wrote:You also cannot separate your feelings from logic.

When it comes down to it, pepper spray is the "appropriate response" for this situation. Pepper spray is not simply a deterrent, it's also a way to control a situation.

This was not assault, like one can (quite rightly, depending on how the whole thing plays out) claim for the Anthony Bologna incident.

While I agree the logic of my rant was questionable (it was a rant), but if some guy in a park came up to a little girl with pepper spray and sprayed it all over here face, would that be considered assault (Really, would it? I'm not sure. It would definitely be illegal)

Also pepperspray presumably hurts really, really bad. The way that guy sprayed them was in the manner in which one would kill weeds. No regard for humanity. And that situation did NOT look very controlled. And if we have the right to free speech, but every square inch of public land is restricted to protestors, that isn't really free speech, now, is it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Huffy wrote:

GalacticDefender wrote: who are peacefully protesting?

As it's been stated before..illegally protesting, as well as blocking a walkway,
is UC a public school system/college?

Walk around them. Take an extra fifty steps out of your way. I'd do it gladly.

GalacticDefender wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:You also cannot separate your feelings from logic.

When it comes down to it, pepper spray is the "appropriate response" for this situation. Pepper spray is not simply a deterrent, it's also a way to control a situation.

This was not assault, like one can (quite rightly, depending on how the whole thing plays out) claim for the Anthony Bologna incident.

While I agree the logic of my rant was questionable (it was a rant), but if some guy in a park came up to a little girl with pepper spray and sprayed it all over here face, would that be considered assault (Really, would it? I'm not sure. It would definitely be illegal)

If "some guy" came up to a little girl with pepper spray and sprayed it all over her face, it would be considered assault. Depending on the age of the little girl, it very well might be considered to be a more serious charge of assault.

Also pepperspray presumably hurts really, really bad.

It doesn't so much "hurt" as it makes you really freaking uncomfortable. Have you ever handled chili peppers and accidentally rubbed your eyes? Think of that--but about 5x worse and at the same time you're having a really bad coughing fit because of choking on that pepper you just ate.

The way that guy sprayed them was in the manner in which one would kill weeds.

The "way that guy sprayed them" is the way in which one would in fact spray someone with lower grade pepper spray. You'll notice that at least two of the individuals did not actually seem to be affected, despite being sprayed head on.

No regard for humanity.

The fact that they weren't shot, beaten, or tasered suggests otherwise.

And that situation did NOT look very controlled.

It was pretty controlled once the pepper spray got involved. The whole point was that the officers were trying to go further into the quad to remove students who were "squatting" on the premises and had established tents to sleep in overnight. Those students were warned--twice over the two preceding days that such activity was unacceptable

And if we have the right to free speech, but every square inch of public land is restricted to protestors, that isn't really free speech, now, is it?

"Freedom of speech" is not directly related to expression of speech in public areas. There is a limit as to what is acceptable in a "free for all" setting.
The most common example is, of course, that of hate speech or rhetoric designed to incite a crowd to violence.
"Freedom of assembly" does not allow for setting up a hovel in a public space. It also has been interpreted to not include for protests which "interrupt" the general flow of activity, unless one obtains permits and the like.

Huffy wrote:

GalacticDefender wrote: who are peacefully protesting?

As it's been stated before..illegally protesting, as well as blocking a walkway,
is UC a public school system/college?

Walk around them. Take an extra fifty steps out of your way. I'd do it gladly.

Not relevant. The officers were acting under lawfully handed down orders. The "Good Faith" exemption is in play for this example--unless it can be proven that Pike was acting of his own accord--and the fact that those officers are now being hung out to dry likely means we'll see the officers' union prepare a legal pimpslap for the college.

Kanluwen wrote:Doesn't really matter if it's public or private.

Blocking the walkway or camping out without explicit permission to do such is illegal.

Eh, not on most college campuses, if you are a student. Though, generally, the administration can require to disperse an assembly for just about any reason.

Really, universities tend to be pretty flexible regarding protests, for example US just didn't want tends or sleeping bags, but the protest itself was allowed to continue 24/7; which can be easily accomplished with a rolling schedule of demonstrators.

Like I said when OWS first took off, these guys really suck at protesting.

No argument on that part Dogma.

GalacticDefender wrote:
Walk around them. Take an extra fifty steps out of your way. I'd do it gladly.

Alternatively, the protesters could assemble to the side, which is what they should have done if their intention was not to allow themselves to be arrested (which is certainly a valid tactic, when executed correctly.).

@Kanluwen

BTW I wasn't questioning the legality of the situation. I'm sure it was all perfectly legal in some way or another. Though I still think it was the wrong thing to do and could have been handled better. For instance, a different spot for protesting could have been proposed or something. I think pepperspray should be used for violent people, not for getting someone who is sitting on the ground trying to hide their eyes to move out of the way. The cops weren't in danger, so they didn't have to resort to a weapon (pepper spray is a weapon as far as I'm concerned)

In what manner would you recommend people protest issues? The internet works pretty well, but there is only so much you can do sitting at home behind a screen.

1000th POST YEEE HAWWW


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

GalacticDefender wrote:
Walk around them. Take an extra fifty steps out of your way. I'd do it gladly.

Alternatively, the protesters could assemble to the side, which is what they should have done if their intention was not to allow themselves to be arrested (which is certainly a valid tactic, when executed correctly.).

Yeah, I agree. Though I think the cops still might have pepper sprayed them even if they weren't directly blocking anything.

GalacticDefender wrote:
In what manner would you recommend people protest issues? The internet works pretty well, but there is only so much you can do sitting at home behind a screen.

For one, organize, organize, organize. Organization is key to a good protest, because it helps prevent idiots from ruining what you're trying to do by acting like, well, idiots. It also helps to give the movement an identity, which keeps people coming back when they start to lose that immediate feeling of interest.

Second, don't go out of your way to mess with the police. It doesn't help your image, unless the police really are oppressive, and you get thrown in jail to boot.

Third, if the police really are oppressive, or the policies they are enforcing are, its alright to allow yourself to be arrested but, again, its all about doing it right. Don't resist, when they try to put you in handcuffs, comply with instructions, and let them do their jobs. When you resist arrest, or refuse to comply with an order, you're going to get pepper sprayed and, at least in the US, that isn't going to help your image outside of the group that already agrees with you.

Dogma pretty much nailed it.

Organization is key, as is having a sense of identity for the movement.
"Messing with the police" is also not a very good idea, as it is more often than not going to be damaging to the movement.
Treating the police as simple automatons, as we see in these cases most often as not is also not a very good idea. Whatever you may think of the laws, police are still people.

They are still fallible, but the difference is that if you or any of your fellow protesters slip up the police will be able to do a lot of things that will really screw you guys up.

Charges have been dropped against all 10 protesters who were arrested. University to pay for hospital bills of 11 people. UC Prez weighs in with support of full independent investigation.

The plot thickens.

http://m.cnn.com/primary/_Wdi5be-idOvbxqfxd9

Total Leadership Failure.

GalacticDefender wrote:What is WRONG with those cops? Why the HELL would they do that to people who are peacefully protesting? Cops are not supposed to be getting people to fear them, they are here to protect us from the kind of people who would do things like spray pepperspray into peaceful students! WE ARE THE FUTURE DAMMIT!

Sorry. My feelings for this whole situation cannot be contained in a forum post. I just think that was a totally despicable thing to do and they should be punished for it, not just put on administrative leave or whatever half ass punishment they were given. That was assault, and they know it.

I noticed you still haven't answered, what would you have done if you were the poice ordered to clear the scum, er protesters?

We are the future? Well in that case:
"Go back to your own time. The future is not what it used to be."
-G Kar

The thing I'm not sure whether to laugh at or just shake my head at is the interviews of the people who got sprayed...

I mean, yeah, getting sprayed can be kind of traumatic...I've been hit in the face wit the stuff before and it is nowhere near my definition of fun...

But whenever I hear the account of the people who were sprayed they treat it like it was a bloody massacre and the cops just waltzed up and opened fire on the group like you see the bad guy nazi/communists/terrorists you see in movies...

Nobody died...nobody needs the drama...

Kanluwen wrote:Doesn't really matter if it's public or private.

Blocking the walkway or camping out without explicit permission to do such is illegal.

Well if its private, as in my property you might get a load of buckshot after I called 911 saying I was being threatened.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihadin wrote:Total Leadership Failure.

Its California Jake, its California.

ACK....no need for UCMJ CptJake I was referring to UC Davis Chain of Command

People are already camping out in tents in front of Best Buy and all the other big box stores, in order to be first in line for Black Friday.

Since they are camping illegally and blocking sideways, by the logic of many in this thread they should get some pepper spray in the face and somebody better be getting those water cannons out of storage....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting article on pepper spray use:

“I can’t get into the head of people using it in New York and Davis and around the country, but it seems that rather than turning to other tactics, they turn to the simple tool,” said Geoffrey Alpert, a professor of criminology at the University of South Carolina. “There’s an overreliance on technology.”

.........................

Indeed, while law enforcement scholars unanimously acknowledge that, on a per-violent-incident basis, pepper spray results in fewer injuries than direct physical violence, research suggests that having pepper spray could lead to higher numbers of violent incidents.

In one analysis, criminologists found that police use of force rose by 33 percent in Concord, North Carolina following the approval of pepper spray as a law enforcement tool. After an arrestee died in custody after being sprayed, pepper spray use was restricted; use-of-force incidents then fell by 57 percent, even though arrest rates rose by almost 4 percent.

“This suggests that the use of spray may not necessarily be an alternative to force, but provides officers with options to use more force — perhaps unnecessarily. In other words, if it is there, they will use it,” wrote that study’s co-authors, criminologists Paul Friday and Richard Lumb of the University of North Carolina.

That the number of times police used force seemed disconnected from threats to public order led Friday and Lumb to hypothesize that having pepper spray could change how officers behaved.

“Do officers become more assertive in suspect confrontational situations when they are ‘armed’ with an additional tool? Does the possession of OC spray unreasonably increase the sense of self-confidence and security and thereby create a self-fulfilling prophecy of threat?” they wondered. “While OC spray, when used, reduced injuries, does its mere possession increase the potential for physical force being used?”

Don't be a dumbass. Its only illegal if its against permission of the property owner.

d-usa wrote:People are already camping out in tents in front of Best Buy and all the other big box stores, in order to be first in line for Black Friday.

Since they are camping illegally and blocking sideways, by the logic of many in this thread they should get some pepper spray in the face and somebody better be getting those water cannons out of storage....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Interesting article on pepper spray use:

“I can’t get into the head of people using it in New York and Davis and around the country, but it seems that rather than turning to other tactics, they turn to the simple tool,” said Geoffrey Alpert, a professor of criminology at the University of South Carolina. “There’s an overreliance on technology.”

.........................

Indeed, while law enforcement scholars unanimously acknowledge that, on a per-violent-incident basis, pepper spray results in fewer injuries than direct physical violence, research suggests that having pepper spray could lead to higher numbers of violent incidents.

In one analysis, criminologists found that police use of force rose by 33 percent in Concord, North Carolina following the approval of pepper spray as a law enforcement tool. After an arrestee died in custody after being sprayed, pepper spray use was restricted; use-of-force incidents then fell by 57 percent, even though arrest rates rose by almost 4 percent.

“This suggests that the use of spray may not necessarily be an alternative to force, but provides officers with options to use more force — perhaps unnecessarily. In other words, if it is there, they will use it,” wrote that study’s co-authors, criminologists Paul Friday and Richard Lumb of the University of North Carolina.

That the number of times police used force seemed disconnected from threats to public order led Friday and Lumb to hypothesize that having pepper spray could change how officers behaved.

“Do officers become more assertive in suspect confrontational situations when they are ‘armed’ with an additional tool? Does the possession of OC spray unreasonably increase the sense of self-confidence and security and thereby create a self-fulfilling prophecy of threat?” they wondered. “While OC spray, when used, reduced injuries, does its mere possession increase the potential for physical force being used?”

Yeah best buy would need to complain and you know they won't. They love the camping.

Camping for freedom/injustice/whatever ---- bad.

Camping for profit --- good.