Police - to protect and serve

phobicsquirrel

Pregnant Seattle protester miscarries after being kicked, pepper sprayed

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-11-22/wall_street/30427982_1_pepper-spray-pregnant-woman-police-hits

Just when one thought it couldn't get uglier, it does. What's next, firing live rounds in the crowd! I think the GOP should be all up in arms I mean a fetus has been killed!

jasonusa1

#1 - An 84-yo person can kill/hurt/whatever to you no differently than a 21-yo
#2 - What in the world was this 19-yo girl doing getting all up in the middle of this crap if she was pregnant?

I'm sure neither of these two (amongst the many others) were just sitting around singing ****-bay-yah (sp?). I'm not saying that any of this was right or wrong, but yeah, let's just always point out the negative against the police etc.

phobicsquirrel

jasonusa1:

#1 - An 84-yo person can kill/hurt/whatever to you no differently than a 21-yo
#2 - What in the world was this 19-yo girl doing getting all up in the middle of this crap if she was pregnant?

I'm sure neither of these two (amongst the many others) were just sitting around singing ****-bay-yah (sp?). I'm not saying that any of this was right or wrong, but yeah, let's just always point out the negative against the police etc.

So it's the rape was the woman's fault analysis? I mean yeah it's the protesters fault. I mean this woman was homeless and joined in and tried to leave when the police started moving in but it shouldn't matter. Police are out of control. I've been to these down here in portland and even the other day when the police did their eviction and the people were not attacking the militarized police at all. They the occupiers were being attacked. There's a video of most of these peaceful occupiers getting brutalized. Let's not forget that this brutality from the police started in Oakland when multiple people got hurt including a Iraq Veteran of multiple tours almost got killed by the Ghestpo police.

Vulchor

jasonusa1:

#1 - An 84-yo person can kill/hurt/whatever to you no differently than a 21-yo
#2 - What in the world was this 19-yo girl doing getting all up in the middle of this crap if she was pregnant?

I'm sure neither of these two (amongst the many others) were just sitting around singing ****-bay-yah (sp?). I'm not saying that any of this was right or wrong, but yeah, let's just always point out the negative against the police etc.

I think having the job they do, with the power they have....it is VERY important to point out the negatives of the police. Any coverup or failing to do so is quite a potential danger to the safey and liberty of anyone affiliated with that area.

Vulchor

Also Jason----while I can see what your saying about the pregnant girl......I think she should be able to go to a rally or demonstration without the concern of pepper spray...or AT LEAST kicks to the gut, no?

Again I can see the argument, but its similar to the "she got raped because she dressed that way" arguement. Emotionally it seems true, logically-----not as much.

phobicsquirrel

There's a nice fellow!

Vulchor

LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL----Just read Squirrels retort and he used the same argument I did (or vice versa)-----very nice my woodland friend.

jasonusa1

No I'm not saying that all. Obviously a woman being raped is not her fault.
What I am ultimately saying is that I find posts like this semi-humorous. See.. I notice my uncle making posts like this too on a fairly daily basis.. the only difference with his are that they referencing some officer (young/old whatever) that was killed in the line of duty writing somebody a traffic ticket, or something else equally abysmal. Now what I find humorous is that everybody wants to point out the crap like the above (which in the grand scale of things is a crock of s*it (not these particular actions, but the "movement" itself) by a bunch of people looking for a finger to point, who in fact got their *fire* lit by some big-wig left-wing ad company in Canada) while forgetting (or just not caring?) about what good is actually done.

Vulchor

You kinda lost me at the end there I have to admit----but the rest I would say of course it is a travesty when an officer dies----HOWEVER, it is a hazard and potential danger of the job. Not saying it shoudl happen, but it can happen.

It is sad and can be reported, but not as newsworthy in my opinion as a "bad cop". The difference being that a cop being killed is something that again...can go with the territory unfortunately. When you take the oath to protect and serve however, and you do the exact opposite of this or you are found to be abusing the power you were given-----that IS NOT something that should be associated with the possibilites of the job.

jasonusa1

Agree to both. I def believe that anybody in a role of "power" (for lack of a better word) should be held to the highest level of scruting. Whether that be a police officer, fireman, politician, president etc etc. But at the same time, I have the issue with not enough people point out the good things that are done, or commissurate with the bad things that happen on a daily basis.

I don't think the question of "being allowed" to organize and demonstrate should even be brought forth. Of course you should. Amongst many others, it is one of the many rights that unfortunately many people take for granted. But at the same time, if you are going to sit here and tell me all of these "protests" are 100% completely and unequivacally peaceful, I don't buy it - so of course force will be used and force is felt comfortable. If I am an officer, and ANYBODY comes at me for whatever reason that I then feel I may not be able to make it home to my family that evening, the last thing I am going to do is stop and say, "hey, you look like you may kill me, but first I need to know if you are pregnant or have any other pre-existing conditions that I should be made aware of first so that I may preceed accordinglt."

Just my 0.02

jasonusa1

Vulchor:

It is sad and can be reported, but not as newsworthy in my opinion as a "bad cop".

And this is why at the end of the day you and I my friend will not see eye-to-eye in this matter. But to each their own, and that is ok.

laker1963

jasonusa1:

Agree to both. I def believe that anybody in a role of "power" (for lack of a better word) should be held to the highest level of scruting. Whether that be a police officer, fireman, politician, president etc etc. But at the same time, I have the issue with not enough people point out the good things that are done, or commissurate with the bad things that happen on a daily basis.

I don't think the question of "being allowed" to organize and demonstrate should even be brought forth. Of course you should. Amongst many others, it is one of the many rights that unfortunately many people take for granted. But at the same time, if you are going to sit here and tell me all of these "protests" are 100% completely and unequivacally peaceful, I don't buy it - so of course force will be used and force is felt comfortable. If I am an officer, and ANYBODY comes at me for whatever reason that I then feel I may not be able to make it home to my family that evening, the last thing I am going to do is stop and say, "hey, you look like you may kill me, but first I need to know if you are pregnant or have any other pre-existing conditions that I should be made aware of first so that I may preceed accordinglt."

Just my 0.02

If you are saying that the cop has the right to hurt or assault someone in order to save himself from being assaulted, how do you sqaure that with your earlier statement about the persons right to be there demonstrating in the first place? Sure the cop doesn't want to become a victim in the situation by doing his job. A preemtive assault in order to save yourself from being assaulted? You can't be serious.

You mention about being an officer and having someone "come at you", but is that what happened here? changing the parameters of the actual situation in order to defend a position is a little hard to swallow.
For the record I am NOT anti cop. I am always pro people... and that cop is a people too.

jasonusa1

laker1963:

jasonusa1:

Agree to both. I def believe that anybody in a role of "power" (for lack of a better word) should be held to the highest level of scruting. Whether that be a police officer, fireman, politician, president etc etc. But at the same time, I have the issue with not enough people point out the good things that are done, or commissurate with the bad things that happen on a daily basis.

I don't think the question of "being allowed" to organize and demonstrate should even be brought forth. Of course you should. Amongst many others, it is one of the many rights that unfortunately many people take for granted. But at the same time, if you are going to sit here and tell me all of these "protests" are 100% completely and unequivacally peaceful, I don't buy it - so of course force will be used and force is felt comfortable. If I am an officer, and ANYBODY comes at me for whatever reason that I then feel I may not be able to make it home to my family that evening, the last thing I am going to do is stop and say, "hey, you look like you may kill me, but first I need to know if you are pregnant or have any other pre-existing conditions that I should be made aware of first so that I may preceed accordinglt."

Just my 0.02

If you are saying that the cop has the right to hurt or assault someone in order to save himself from being assaulted, how do you sqaure that with your earlier statement about the persons right to be there demonstrating in the first place? Sure the cop doesn't want to become a victim in the situation by doing his job. A preemtive assault in order to save yourself from being assaulted? You can't be serious.

You mention about being an officer and having someone "come at you", but is that what happened here? changing the parameters of the actual situation in order to defend a position is a little hard to swallow.
For the record I am NOT anti cop. I am always pro people... and that cop is a people too.

No, those are two completely different things. Somebody protesting/demonstrating etc and somebody else (whether that be an officer or whomever else in this capacity) doing when they feel is best in order to protect themselves as well as those around them are completely different. Would it still be assault if he wasn't a cop? Or better yet, would you even care about this if it wasn't done by a cop?

Again, I'm not saying the course of action taken was/is right or wrong. I wasn't there and thankfully, was not the one put in the predicament to have to decide which course of action to take. I am simply saying that yes he is a cop, but like you pointed out, he is also a "person." Only pointing out the bad will never result in anything good.

Finally, this was the last comment I will be making regarding this subject (or at least in this post). Being that we will not be able to sit down and have a beer and cigar together afterwards, I would prefer to end now before I say something that will not be quite understood as it is supposed to be taken (which believe me, with me, it will). My wife says I make no sense when her and I argue.. God knows what sense I make when I type.

wwestern

You've hit another of these situations squirrel.... just like being anti war will be skewed as "You hate the military you unamerican piece of ***!" being anti police brutality will be skewed to "You just hate cops and don't respect that they keep you safe!" It's all bullshit tactics to try to silence you, tyranny is much easier to impose if you can silence opposition.

Kinda funny how one party likes to demonize the other for using these Saul Alinsky type tactics, yet they use them just as much.

Rhamlin

I'm sorry ,while I truly feel for the people that are being harmed and I've been hearing a lot about assaults and rapes and theft that is being conducted by the protestors against their fellow protestors. I have no sympathy for them. I do not support them or their cause even though my tax dollars are. I firmly stand by the police to use what means they must . This may make me unpopular here but I am sick of looking at the shantytown camped outside one of our local banks.
That's just how I feel about it and I will not argue the point whether I am right or wrong.

kuzi16

man.. its gotta be scary as one man facing a crowd of rowdy pissed off protesters that have a history of rape, violence and disease following their group on a national scale with only a can of pepper spry. I for one would not be able to handle myself well in that situation.

that being said, a cop SHOULD be able to decide when the appropriate time to use self defense measures as such.

im not saying it is right, but i for one feel that the police are scared in this situation. the police are outnumbered.

a scared police officer is not someone i want to come face to face with.

again, i am not a cop and i have never been to or even driven past an "occupy" protest so i have no real idea what is going on.

i just feel that there are mistakes being made by individuals on both sides of this situation.

lumping all cops or all protesters into one group or another is irresponsible at best.

kuzi16

phobicsquirrel:

! I think the GOP should be all up in arms I mean a fetus has been killed!

or maybe the left should be celebrating. i mean, maybe she way TRYING to have an abortion...
ha!

[Deleted User]

I didn't read the link, but I have occupy about 200 feet from my work and I pass by them on the way to the PO. I was raised that you don't lie to cops and you do what they ask you to do. If you're told to disperse, then disperse. Otherwise, you risk exposure to getting some smack down. I don't care if you're peaceful, move your ass or get pepper sprayed (UC Davis). I tend to err on the side of the cops here for the most part.

kuzi16

kuzi16:

phobicsquirrel:

! I think the GOP should be all up in arms I mean a fetus has been killed!

or maybe the left should be celebrating. i mean, maybe she way TRYING to have an abortion...
ha!

of course that is a joke... dont take it too seriously.

this is an interesting article. i wish the article would have interviewed more than just the woman. i feel that there is a lot of info missing.
i will give her the benefit of the doubt that she was screaming that she was pregnant. i actually believe that she was. i would be too if i was a pregnant woman there. other questions that this article didnt ask or answer:
1) was the rest of the crowd screaming also? she coulda been drown out.
2)could there be other causes for the miscarriage? i mean, was she one of the drug users?
3) how much warning did the crowd actually have?
4) was the cop interviewed? where is his point of view? i hesitate to believe that he would have been so violent if he had that info
5) what was the reason that the police were moving in? was there violence previous to this that would cause them to try and disperse the crowd?
6)did the crowd refuse to move when prompted? police have a ton of regulations that they have to carry out. did they follow that regulation and this was a last resort?
7) What is the cop's (the individual) background? does he have a history of violence or abuse of power? if so...
8) why was he put into that crowd situation where there was a high chance of conflict?


i feel that there is WAY more going on all sides of this to jump to any conclusions.
either way, it should be looked into on a very serious level.

Amos_Umwhat

laker1963:

A preemtive assault in order to save yourself from being assaulted? You can't be serious.

.

Well, it worked on Saddam, didn't it? ;/

Just kidding!

I must say, while I agree that the protesters have a right to protest, in peace, and I also agree with some of what they stand for, or what some of them stand for, anyway, it's probably about time to wrap it up and find another means of protest. At least, try not to make a permanent home of it, other people have rights to go about their business without the harrassment.
Also, regarding "peaceful protests", it's funny how when folks were protesting back in the '60s, and violence broke out, it later was reported to be the FBI, or Secret Service, who incited the violence in order to sway public opinion.

laker1963

Amos Umwhat:

laker1963:

A preemtive assault in order to save yourself from being assaulted? You can't be serious.

.

Well, it worked on Saddam, didn't it? ;/

Just kidding!

I must say, while I agree that the protesters have a right to protest, in peace, and I also agree with some of what they stand for, or what some of them stand for, anyway, it's probably about time to wrap it up and find another means of protest. At least, try not to make a permanent home of it, other people have rights to go about their business without the harrassment.
Also, regarding "peaceful protests", it's funny how when folks were protesting back in the '60s, and violence broke out, it later was reported to be the FBI, or Secret Service, who incited the violence in order to sway public opinion.

I won't comment on the protestors rights to protest on public grounds. Everyone has an opinion on that.

Amos you mention the FBI or Secret Service being found to be involved in violence in order to sway public opinion. A few years ago there was a labor protest going on in Quebec and there were a couple of undercover cops who were trying to incite violence at this rally. At one point one of them picks up a rock and is going to throw it at the police line when he is actually stopped by other protestors. Then the other protestors notice that these two guys are wearing the exact same boots... police issued boots. When the crowd started to harrass these guy's and accuse them of being cops, they are suddenly surrounded by the police and the two are "taken into custody" for their own protection.
Like I have stated, I am NOT anti cop. However if there are people out there who refuse to believe some of the tactics used by the police and or politicians to control people in these types of situations, then then indoctrination process is almost complete. It appears the time is now for some people to refuse to look at, analyse, and or criticize the powers that be. Just follow orders and don't raise a fuss. That doesn't sound like the type of behaviour the founding fathers of your country believed in. Sure sounds like the type of arguement used today by our sorely lacking "leadership".

fla-gypsy

Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.

wwestern

laker1963:

I won't comment on the protestors rights to protest on public grounds. Everyone has an opinion on that.

No such thing. Just land they let you rent and land they don't, and if you don't pay that rent they will seize your *** and put you out on your dead ass.

laker1963

fla-gypsy:

Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.

Always have to go the low road eh Gypsy? NOBODY until now has tried to make this a political party thing. Good on you. (shaking head)

laker1963

wwestern:

laker1963:

I won't comment on the protestors rights to protest on public grounds. Everyone has an opinion on that.

No such thing. Just land they let you rent and land they don't, and if you don't pay that rent they will seize your *** and put you out on your dead ass.

I could not agree more with you Wes. But then I am a raving socialist LMAO.

wwestern

laker1963:

wwestern:

laker1963:

I won't comment on the protestors rights to protest on public grounds. Everyone has an opinion on that.

No such thing. Just land they let you rent and land they don't, and if you don't pay that rent they will seize your *** and put you out on your dead ass.

I could not agree more with you Wes. But then I am a raving socialist LMAO.

Went to Cuba to get pointers from Fidel huh?

fla-gypsy

laker1963:

fla-gypsy:

Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.

Always have to go the low road eh Gypsy? NOBODY until now has tried to make this a political party thing. Good on you. (shaking head)

What? No sense of humor at all? Everything will be OK. Why always so serious?

laker1963

wwestern:

laker1963:

wwestern:

laker1963:

I won't comment on the protestors rights to protest on public grounds. Everyone has an opinion on that.

No such thing. Just land they let you rent and land they don't, and if you don't pay that rent they will seize your *** and put you out on your dead ass.

I could not agree more with you Wes. But then I am a raving socialist LMAO.

Went to Cuba to get pointers from Fidel huh?

Funny you mentioned that Wes. It was the first socialist country I have ever been to. The people said everything they felt, nobody was looking over their shoulder. There certainly was no feelings of repression in Cuba. I know that may not be the case in other communist countries or in other times. but in Cuba it felt no different then when I was in Mexico.

laker1963

fla-gypsy:

laker1963:

fla-gypsy:

Egad!! and all this in the utopia that is Obamaland.

Always have to go the low road eh Gypsy? NOBODY until now has tried to make this a political party thing. Good on you. (shaking head)

What? No sense of humor at all? Everything will be OK. Why always so serious?

Iguess like tastes in cigars... everyone has their own sense of what's funny. Also this is hardly only going on in the US. I know some here don't look at things outside of the US as it is of no importance to them, but this movement is worldwide, and has no more to do with Obama then with every single GOP member in the US, Congress and Senate.

Amos_Umwhat

Speaking of socialist countries, anyone read the "Patriotic Millionaires" news? These guys, millionaires, have the weird notion that the people who have the most money should pay the most taxes. To paraphrase one of them, The system isn't broken, it's working just fine for those who designed it. Socialism for the top One Percent. They can risk whatever they want, because the taxpayer HAS TO bail them out.

So, if you've been to the U.S., you've been to a socialist country, it's just that you have to be in the top 1% to benefit!

wwestern

Amos Umwhat:

Speaking of socialist countries, anyone read the "Patriotic Millionaires" news? These guys, millionaires, have the weird notion that the people who have the most money should pay the most taxes. To paraphrase one of them, The system isn't broken, it's working just fine for those who designed it. Socialism for the top One Percent. They can risk whatever they want, because the taxpayer HAS TO bail them out.

So, if you've been to the U.S., you've been to a socialist country, it's just that you have to be in the top 1% to benefit!

Plenty of people who contribute nothing, benefit far more than those who contribute the most. This is plain and simply an economic war on the middle class. Poor get all types of welfare, corporations get bailouts, the middle class get screwed.