Forum Post: Pepper Spraying Protesters
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 27, 2011, 9:30 a.m. EST by toonces
(-117)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
It seems to me that OWS protesters are getting upset that pepper spray is being used on protesters who do not obey the police officers who ask them to move. The protesters are forcing the police to use more aggressive measures to get the protesters to comply with their requests. The protesters are breaking the law and then crying "foul" when they suffer the consequences of their actions. You would think if the protesters wanted to work within the system, they would comply with the requests to move.
It appears the OWS movement does not want to operate within the law. It appears to me the OWS movement is operating with a mob mentality. The demands of OWS look to me as if they are looking to destroy a civilized society to force change rather than work within the law to voice their concerns and try to build support for their views to legislate change legally.
It's called civil disobedience by direct action in the hopes to cause a revolution.
yes, but you see when we fail to submit to arrest, we are losing our credibility. Have you read Dr. King's "Letter from Birmingham Jail"? He is clear on this point: Civil Disobedience requires that we have the courage to face the law because we are focused on a greater injustice.
If we can't face a charge for "blocking the sidewalk"... how the heck are we fit to "change the world"???
Ghandi went much further when he gave this advice to the Jews:
""I would like you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions...If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourselves, man, woman, and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them."
For direct action to work, you have to be willing to become a martyr for your cause.
please stop bringing up Hitler. the comparison is so out of wack that I don't want to respond to it.
no one is dragging anyone to an oven or gas chamber. you're getting arrested for "blocking the sidewalk" and something tells me the case will be dropped before you get to court. at the very worst you will pay a fine. if you can't accept that kind of punishment, what kind of martyr are you??
my main point though is that it's not going to work out like you seem to be dreaming it will. this post is perfect example of how your "martyrdom" is completely lost on the 99%. you may be a hero with your friends, but that doesn't do much for our cause.
I don't support Occupy in any way shape or form. I'm wondering why you assume that I do? I don't believe direct action is the right tactic to use in North-America. Are you new here?
my bad. I get confused sometimes because I read threads but don't keep track of names.
so why don't you support OWS? do you think all is well in the USA?
Born & bred in Ohio, travelled all over America, and lots of Europe and been as far as India. Currently live in the Pacific Northwest, though I'm in Paris for a few months. There's an OWS thing here too! Or at least there was (??).
Not supporting Occupy does not implicate that I think everything is rosy in America. This is the biggest logical fallacy that runs on these boards.
My main objection with Occupy is that it is not a transparent movement. I wrote many posts about this. You can search the forum. I also post under the name of Glaucon.
well that strikes me as a fairly petty complaint, though I'm not sure what you mean. i suppose I'm not aware of all the secret OWS meetings going on and the secret OWS funds.
i suppose i'm operating on the assumption that OWS is simply everyone that has seen enough from our currently entrenched plutocrats and we're willing to hit the streets to make it clear that it must end.
That's a big assumption. Movements can be shaped in many forms. I don't agree with the one Occupy is using, and I don't agree with their confrontational tactics. I don't believe a revolution is necessary, nor really possible. America is not Egypt, we have different problems. Occupy needs to cut the cords with its many foreign inspirations and become more localized. Everything about Occupy is foreign made for foreign socio-economic-political contexts. Anarcho-communism, Arab Springs, "Days of Rage", Russian communist inspired posters, etc... I'm also bothered by the fact that Occupy claims to be non-violent, but continues to associate itself with violent protests of the past like "Days of Rage" from Chicago, 1969, and is currently increasing the violence in its imagery. I believe the movement wants to use direct action to eventually turn to violence and start a civil war. This is a waste of time. It won't happen. Occupy was a good wake up call. They did their job well. Now, it's time to start working on solutions, not worrying about what strikers are doing in China, what protesters are doing in Egypt, and, Occupy's new pet project, saving the animals. We already have Amnesty International, PETA, etc... We need people focused on the particular problems faced by America.
I may be a victim of my own hope an optimism. Hope springs eternal. I fell in "love" with OWS when I first heard about it because they picked The most symbolically appropriate place and the tactic was to simply claim public space which also symbolically expresses the NEED to RE-Claim our Re-Public.
there are connections to a world wide push back and here in Europe they are facing a similar "bailout of the banks on the backs of the people" situation. But is it really surprising that 2 decades of the excesses of globalization should inspire a global protest? (though obviously the situations in the Arab world are different).
and why not Civil Disobedience? I see that as the American way! Gandhi stole it from Thoreau. Dr. King got it back from Gandhi.
We'll see what happens next. The upcoming port occupations should be interesting. If Occupy doesn't die before 6 months time, I predict violence will begin next summer.
I believe you are right, Thrasymaque, the goal has been for OWS to fail and for people to go home. But then what? There is still all of the anger that surrounds these unresolved issues. All it would take was one clearly unjust incident to make this bottled up rage, ignite.
Then the government sends in the police and military.
We have to make sure this doesn't happen! We need a Constitutional Convention. Please join the 99 Declaration, started by Michael Moore. It may need to be pared down, but if we can work together, we will prevail!
why? because you think OWS will look for it or because those in Power with get panicky?
Both. Occupy is inspired by the Arab Spring protests which have so far toppled the governments of three countries. Occupy hopes for the same. They want a revolution. They don't want to enter into political discussions with the government. The US government will never let Occupy take the country without a fight; especially not against anarcho-communists. Occupy knows this, and that's why they are preparing the protesters by demonizing the police through the use of violent posters and by comparing them to the military in Egypt and other regimes. Personally, I don't think it will go much further. Occupy has already lost a lot of wind in its sails. Americans followed the movement at first because they agreed with the problems that were raised, but Americans are not anarcho-communists, most are weary of these people. Occupy will have served as a first wake up call. Perhaps another protest which will be more political in nature will follow. Hopefully, they'll tackle the real problems we are facing instead of camping in parks. Occupy will never topple the government like the protesters did in Egypt. There's no revolution up ahead. Not any time soon.
I'm not buying that OWS was inspired by the Arab Spring. why makes you think that? these Arab countries are fighting dictators and cultures that do not recognize basic Rights and civil liberties.
but you seem to think the USA is a dictatorship too, and that OWS is pitted against its enemy, the US government.
That's a pretty dire perspective. Are things really That bad?
I think... I hope! what OWS is saying is that "We the People..." ARE the "US government". Or at least, "Hey politicians... YOU work for US". I hope this basic principle of our Democracy and Constitution has not been so obscured by the current corruption of it as to place "the US government" in opposition to the American people.
The usual criticism of OWS is that it doesn't represent the American people any better than our current politicians do. That's the battle we need to win. OWS has to do a better job representing the concerns of the people than Congress is currently doing.
You would think that'd be easy!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street#Origin
Excert: "The rhetoric, imagery and tactics of OWS are partially inspired by the Arab Spring protests such as those in Cairo's Tahrir Square.[16] Immediate prototypes for OWS are the British student protests of 2010, Greece's and Spain's anti-austerity protests of the "indignados" (indignants), as well as the Middle Easts' Arab Spring protests. These antecedents have in common with OWS a reliance on social media and electronic messaging to circumvent the authorities, as well as the feeling that financial institutions, corporations, and the political elite have been malfeasant in their behavior toward youth and the middle class.[17] Occupy Wall Street, in turn, gave rise to the national Occupy movement in the United States."
I'm not going to ask you to trust Wikipedia because it's not considered academic, but you can use that page to pick up some names of people and protests to further investigate the matter if you wish. Just read up on how Occupy started.
When did I write that makes you think this?
What is the end goal of the "revolution" the civil disobedience is working to cause?
Is it possible this "revolution" could have negative consequences?
I hope the goal is to end the "legalized bribery" that results in our elected representatives not actually representing us, but representing their corporate donors.
This is a naive question. All revolutions have positive and negative consequences. All change does.
[Removed]
Forget the pepper spray; rubber bullets and tear gas should be used.
It did look to me like the police were in need of a much more effective pepper spray.
I think they should switch to Bear mace
But then again, I CANNOT SEE so sorry for my ridiculous post!!
It appears you would have done very well in Nazi Germany.
The mere existence of law is not it's own justification. If the apologists of "law and order" cannot provide a compelling ethical rather than bureaucratic argument as to why people should "obey the law," then they are under no obligation to do so.
When has pepper spraying and baton beating been the answer to non-compliance?
Just in case you didn't know - i know that due to budget cuts in school sometimes things get left out - i will go ahead and post it for you:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
You see OP - WE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE THERE! And that may not be convenient for you or the police or the Mayor but Too Freaking Bad
Evey, you're not reading that far enough. PEACEABLY ASSEMBLE also means that you do not disrupt the peace. E.G. you can't infringe on other people's rights. When OWS blocks a sidewalk or road, invades and takes over a subway or a port, they are infringing on other people's rights. This makes other people mad they can't go for a walk in the park with their kids or they can't go to work. So the police can come in and take back their rights that OWS stole. (this is their job.)
While I HATE to use Westboro as an example, they DO assemble peaceably..they block no roads and no sidewalks, and they infringe on no one else's rights, so the cops can't do a damn thing about them, they ARE being Constititutional...but then, they have lawyers in the family who are experts at it. One person's rights end where another person's rights begin. And that is not something that OWS is being clear about as it leads its members closer and closer to violence.
I guess I'll start by saying there are lawful laws, and then there are laws that are un-Constitutional...
There are laws that it is okay to break, and in fact, there are laws that DEMAND we take 'passive resistance' against.
"...assembling (on public property), to petition government..." is NOT a crime, nor is it something you deserve to be pepper sprayed or hit with a stick for doing...it is in fact a Constitutional Right.
When authorities use violence against those who present no danger and are in fact only passively occupying public space, then those authorities are WRONG.
That is my space too, you do not have the right to occupy space that I pay for. If you want to occupy, find someone who supports your cause and occupy their space with their permission.
First, if you like to use the space also, I've only found the OWS'ers to be very welcoming, so by all means show up and use the space also. Second, 'you' didn't pay for public space, We did.
I do not believe there is a "Constitutional right" to assemble on public property any more than there is a right to assemble on your neighbors property without permission. OWS wants to assemble there, but the majority of the people want that public property to be publicly accessible for all to enjoy.
Perhaps they should find someone who supports the OWS agenda who will allow them to occupy their property.
Thankfully, you'll never sit on any bench with even a modicum of judiciary weight. You are comparing private property use to public property that everyone is entited to...?
Then you go onto to make a completely unsupported statement, purportedly speaking for the majority of people...?
Perhaps you should pull your head out of your ass, do a little reading and come back when you have something substantative to offer???
Yes, the public has a say in how public property is used.
"Perhaps you should pull your head out of your ass, do a little reading and come back when you have something substantative to offer"
I guess the OWS crowd gets a little testy when challenged... Surprise, surprise, surprise. Seems like it might be the MO of OWS mob.
:)
Actually, you are WRONG. 'The Public' doesn't get to decide who or how Public Property is used. If Nazis want to use a public park next to a Jewish center, 'the public' doesn't get to decide they don't get to use it, just because 'most' of them DON'T like Nazis...
So long as the Nazis are 'peacably assembling', they have a Constitutional Right to be there.
You sir, lack the understanding of public property uses, and I'd like to encourage you to do a little research and return when you know what the hell you are talking about.
With all due respect.
Why do they issue permits to use public property if we can just go and camp out on it?
Some parks require permits, some cities require march licences, and some require neither.
NEITHER can be applied in a discriminatory manner. This means that no one can be denied use of this property, so long as the assemblies are not for-profit endeavors.
Again, do some research, and KNOW what you are talking about, before opening your mouth.
I do know what I am talking about. They don't issue permits to camp out on public property indefinitely.
I realize that you would like to appear knowledgeable, but casting insults rather than discussing the issue intelligently does nothing to further your cause, in fact, it just reinforces the notion that OWS is nothing more than a bunch of inconsiderate, loser hoodlums that have nothing better to do than to intimidate others into silence. From what I have seen, OWS are bullies who are more intent on shutting down free speech than engaging in it.
I never said anything about OWS favoring free speech. In fact, I take great umbridge with the treatment 'I' have received as a strong opinionated leader-ish person. This has NOTHING to do with 'the People's RIGHT' to freely assemble on public property to petition the government for redresses.
This is where you lack both insight and understanding. You simply can't tell people that they have assembled too long, on property THEY paid for. If a city enacts a code that require permits, then OWS better them, or the city will have legal recourses.
There are faaaaar more people who want them gone that also pay for that property.
'They' don't get to decide who uses public property...that's what makes it "public property"...
You're right, the OWS mob does not get to decide who uses public property... That's what makes it public property.
Now that we are in agreement, don't spare the pepper spray, officer..
See... OWS-ers! this is what I was talking about!
I agree with everything except one thing. I don't think the protestors should obey the police orders to move. That's why it's a protest you know, and the strategy is to "occupy".
But, when "we" do refuse to move, I agree that we should be arrested. I would even insist on it. OWS protestors should submit WILLINGLY to arrest and cooperate with police that are arresting them because police have a duty to arrest people breaking laws.
If OWS protestors cooperated while being arrested would that change your thoughts on the use of pepper-spray? Or do you still think police have a right to use force to clear the protestors without making arrests?
Toonces, the issue is one of excessive force. If the police want to arrest OWSers they can. They are dedicated to non violence. The problem is that the police are using pepper spray as torture to discourage them. This is something that every decent person should object to.
yes... exactly... thank you! every decent person will object as soon as it is clear that OWS protestors are not resisting arrest.
Bravo to all of my heroes down on the front line who Have been arrested. Bravo as well to those who were pepper-sprayed Just for refusing to be intimidated, bullied or "ordered" about. Thank you thank you.
I suggest being pro-active and INSISTING on being arrested before they even have a chance to pepper-spray you. of course they might do it anyway but "we" have to remain in the right always.
if I get pepper-sprayed I am going to INSIST on being arrested.
Liked with a caveat on the insisting on arrest part. Otherwise great comment.
yeah... I'm being a little dramatic. : )
thanks!
Unfortunately, pepper spray is what getting arrested looks like. When you don't move from the sidewalk you are blocking by force of numbers, and the cops can't lift you bodily because there are too many of you and you have linked arms, its used as a compliance tool. There is case law that pepper spray is permitted in civil disobedience, but there is also case law that pepper spray is not, it depends on your state. Every cop has to get sprayed with pepper spray before they can carry it. It washes off. It stings, but courts like it better than broken arms trying to move people by physical force.
When you break the law, you are going to get arrested. SIT. GO LIMP.
Do not touch the cop (they can think you are reaching for their gun and they can seriously hurt you or kill you to keep you away from it.--its their right and their responsibility to keep you away from it.) Do not antagonize.
OWN your arrest. its a choice you're making, wear it proudly if you're choosing it.
It is not excessive force if the protesters choose to be peppered sprayed. They were warned that the "public" wanted their "public space" sprayed with pepper spray to clear up a pest problem. The police were doing their job to clear a public area that was no longer available for use by the majority of the people who pay for its upkeep.
Perhaps the OWS crowd could move to a private property of someone who supports their cause.
Since when do the police represent anyone but the special interests that control the govt?
'the "public" wanted their "public space" sprayed with pepper spray to clear up a pest problem.'
This is dehumanization at its worst. One is reminded of the language of the Rwanda genocide where they talked about killing cockroaches. Take your hate somewhere else.
Whaaaa... It is not hate. It is not dehumanization. It is stating the obvious. The OWS crowd was tolerated on public property for a while, but after a some time, the OWS crowd begins to infringe on the rights of the majority.
The majority has the right to inform the OWS crowd that they will need to vacate the property.
The police informed the crowd they were to leave.
The police informed the protesters of the consequences of remaining on the public property.
The OWS mob refused to comply with the request of the police (majority).
Te OWS actions resulted in the consequences of their disobedience.
At the point they were sprayed (after refusing to leave public space after being informed of the consequences of their action), they were being pests.
I correctly described the problem and subsequent removal as remediation of a pest problem.
The laws are not on the side of the 99%; they have been carefully crafted to serve the interest of a very few elite people. Therefore I do not see why I should follow them. These elites do not even follow their own laws for christsakes...
I would love to see the definition of "the 99%".
You could not even get 99% to agree that the United States is the greatest engine for freedom and prosperity the world has ever seen.
Logical fallacy: two wrongs don't make a right.
And being a movement of non-violent pussies won't make it right. These elites are just laughing at the occupy camps behind their stockpiles of weapons. If we truly want to get shit done we need to follow our constitution and assert our rights--and get shit done.
This why I am not on the streets yet. I probably wouldn't last very long as I'm being beaten by fifteen cops, and my fellow occupiers stood around doing nothing about it.
[Removed]