Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Those ADULTS made a choice to break more that one law. As cited earlier.
They escalated the situation as they engaged in proactive action to obstruct. It does not matter if they were sitting around singing Kumbaya or not.
Your opinion or mine it does not matter the law has spoken.
An individual who, while sitting or standing, has locked arms with another individualis not engaged in passive resistance but is engaged in proactive action to obstruct. That is exactly what they did.
Actually, no. I've read many of your responses on this and other threads. The attitude comes through loud and clear.
And pepper spray was overkill and unwarranted in this situation.[/quote]
I'm officially done with the whole lot of you. Too lazy or stupid to read for comprehension. Continually misrepresent or ignore the arguments actually put forth. And continue to advocate for elevated use of force where it is not warranted, just because you have some sickening hatred for kids who want to be able to afford to educate themselves. It's despicable. Unsubscribing now.
YEA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What did you people expect look at the status line.
Kamran Loghman, who in the 1980s helped the FBI develop weapons-grade pepper-spray, and collaborated with police departments to develop guidelines for its use, recently said: “The use [on peaceful demonstrators including students] was just absolutely out of the ordinary and it was not in accordance with any training or policy of any department that I know of. I personally certified 4,000 police officers in the early ‘80s and ‘90s and I have never seen this before. That’s why I was shocked... I feel is my civic duty to explain to the public that this is not what pepper spray was developed for.”
He expresses "shock and bewilderment" in speaking out against the use of "weapons-grade chemical agents" during peaceful protests, esp the police spraying it down the throats of protesters. Loghman is totally against this chemical on a group sitting peacefully without any threat to police or property.
According to international law--Geneva Convention--use of any chemical agent by any country in the world is not legal in any war.
No matter what you think about the demonstrators, hopefully some here will get the implications of this kind of force on the American public, who could be demonstrating for anything including such things as the right to bear arms, etc.
Kamran Loghman, who in the 1980s helped the FBI develop weapons-grade pepper-spray, and collaborated with police departments to develop guidelines for its use, recently said: “The use [on peaceful demonstrators including students] was just absolutely out of the ordinary and it was not in accordance with any training or policy of any department that I know of. I personally certified 4,000 police officers in the early ‘80s and ‘90s and I have never seen this before. That’s why I was shocked... I feel is my civic duty to explain to the public that this is not what pepper spray was developed for.”
He expresses "shock and bewilderment" in speaking out against the use of "weapons-grade chemical agents" during peaceful protests, esp the police spraying it down the throats of protesters. Loghman is totally against this chemical on a group sitting peacefully without any threat to police or property.
According to international law--Geneva Convention--use of any chemical agent by any country in the world is not legal in any war.
No matter what you think about the demonstrators, hopefully some here will get the implications of this kind of force on the American public, who could be demonstrating for anything including such things as the right to bear arms, etc.
Its not a Chemical agent it was pressurized Tabasco for crying out load.
Its not a Chemical agent it was pressurized Tabasco for crying out load.
Yeah right.
Pepper spray, also known as OC spray (from "Oleoresin Capsicum"), OC gas, and capsicum spray, is a lachrymatory agent (a chemical compound that irritates the eyes to cause tears, pain, and even temporary blindness) that is used in riot control and personal self-defense, including defense against dogs and bears.
This chemical agent was not used in police response to riots or for self defense.
No matter what you think of this movement, the use of chemical agents on peaceful demonstrators is right wing.
If the right wingers were demonstrating for the reduction of government, would you be in favor of using chemical agents to disperse the crowd?
Pepper spray, also known as OC spray (from "Oleoresin Capsicum"), OC gas, and capsicum spray, is a lachrymatory agent (a chemical compound that irritates the eyes to cause tears, pain, and even temporary blindness) that is used in riot control and personal self-defense, including defense against dogs and bears.
This chemical agent was not used in police response to riots or for self defense.
No matter what you think of this movement, the use of chemical agents on peaceful demonstrators is right wing.
If the right wingers were demonstrating for the reduction of government, would you be in favor of using chemical agents to disperse the crowd?
Pepper spray, also known as OC spray (from "Oleoresin Capsicum"), OC gas, and capsicum spray, is a lachrymatory agent (a chemical compound that irritates the eyes to cause tears, pain, and even temporary blindness) that is used in riot control and personal self-defense, including defense against dogs and bears.
This chemical agent was not used in police response to riots or for self defense.
No matter what you think of this movement, the use of chemical agents on peaceful demonstrators is right wing.
If the right wingers were demonstrating for the reduction of government, would you be in favor of using chemical agents to disperse the crowd?
If their demonstration was unlawful, they were impeding the rights of others, and resisted an order to disperse, yes, I would.
Kamran Loghman, who in the 1980s helped the FBI develop weapons-grade pepper-spray, and collaborated with police departments to develop guidelines for its use, recently said: “The use [on peaceful demonstrators including students] was just absolutely out of the ordinary and it was not in accordance with any training or policy of any department that I know of. I personally certified 4,000 police officers in the early ‘80s and ‘90s and I have never seen this before. That’s why I was shocked... I feel is my civic duty to explain to the public that this is not what pepper spray was developed for.”
He expresses "shock and bewilderment" in speaking out against the use of "weapons-grade chemical agents" during peaceful protests, esp the police spraying it down the throats of protesters. Loghman is totally against this chemical on a group sitting peacefully without any threat to police or property.
According to international law--Geneva Convention--use of any chemical agent by any country in the world is not legal in any war.
No matter what you think about the demonstrators, hopefully some here will get the implications of this kind of force on the American public, who could be demonstrating for anything including such things as the right to bear arms, etc.
Ohh goody, we get to call it a war now? Let's name them enemy combatants and send them to Obama's extraordinary rendition camps.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
