Forum Post: When does self-defense begin?
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 4, 2011, 4:39 p.m. EST by TH3W01F
(180)
from Ottawa, ON
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
When does peaceful protest end and self-defense kick in?
In the past week, we have been confronted with a dilemma that makes even the most peaceful of us take pause and wonder, as Riot police shoot protestors with rubber bullets, tear gas and mace.
When does respect for the law stop and self-defence begin? If the cop is being unlawful, and therefore is a crook, shouldn't one consider resisting or even disabling such rogue officer an act of self-defense?
Self-defense, in the law, is specific, in most jurisdictions, defense of self or of others is an affirmative defense to criminal charges for an act of violence. It acts to provide complete justification.
The way things are going, this justification may soon be. All it will take is, one dead protestor, or worse yet, an innocent bystander. We have seen what news that Scott Olsen and Kayvan Sabehgi have wrought.
Imagine a child? Or and elderly person? No. I hope it doesn't come to that. I honestly don't.
But the question is still in my mind, when does respect of the law stop, and self-defense begin?
nonviolent resistance means letting em do anything they want to you. my advise is to have someone filming it tho
I think I'll pass. I'd rather do another type of protest that doesn't involve me getting my butt kicked and not being allowed to fight back. That's just damned ridiculous.
As long as you don't mind the following: One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish a dictatorship. -George Orwell
Slow down, you're reacting instead of acting. In Oakland's Nov 2 protest the black bloc vandals discredited OWS more than the police. OWS needs to stay focused on peacefully changing laws to remove money from politics. We can do that if we eliminate the vandals from protests by prohibiting participants from covering their faces. Proudly wear Guy masks on your back, front or on a banner. If face-covering is allowed, then we'll need to videotape, detain with handcuffs and/or track the vandals with GPS (such as cheap cell phones slipped in their bags). They won't call the cops on you, so they're fair game for target season. Peace towards authority, NOT the vandals.
A citizen's arrest on the vandals is what's required. Use minimal force and there shouldn't be a problem. Combine that with a bounty and the black bloc will run for the hills.
They're like a pack of wolves. When one gets cornered, the rest come chew him free. Watch the video. They're easily identifiable and highly trained in crowd manipulation, so they will be extremely difficult to detain, track or maim (policeman "legal" style).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86XhCwHhwn8
A bounty is a great idea. Call in the bounty hunter.
Nah, hired help is expensive and their ethics questionable. A bounty that aids in the capture of black bloc members is a good incentive towards ousting the black bloc.
Don't worry. The militia has apparently had it with OWS complete inability or desire to handle the problem, and are coming to offer their own protection to the innocent citizens and business owners in Oakland.
Doesn't matter a damn bit if you don't like their ethics either. The communities you are protesting in have "rights" too and you've been demanding your rights over theirs long enough to piss them off.
There is a very fine line when it comes to following "lawful" orders and defending yourself. I've written an article that should help differentiate the two. http://bit.ly/srgB6o
There is also a very fine line between a protest and a riot, and the Occupy movement has been getting closer and closer to that line. A few more vandalized Whole Foods markets and it will all be over. Derailed by anarchists.
Your article is pretty awesome. Thank you for putting so much effort into that. Collecting all of those photos and everything.
That line is getting finer and finer each day. Especially with police chiefs washing their hands and claiming "Those aren't our cops" (Sounds like a parent of a bullying child "not my little jimmy!").
I agree with your article. You go to a protest, this is what will happen. But I won't be surprised if some people grow tired of being beaten up.
Some fights weaken you, and some fights make you stronger. The real question is whether those arrested will make a deal to stay out of trouble or will they go back to protesting.
Or at the very least, try a different approach that actually might be more successful and make riot cops useless and ineffective.
[Removed]
When you have little dicks like the black bloc around you, who probably don't even know what they are protesting, get out of there. Just like the night Olsen was injured and people were throwing stuff at the cops. The police WILL defend themselves if they feel threatened. People will not sympathize when cops react to violence. If people are doing stupid shit, leave.
Religious leader tell us it begins at the moment of conception. We are slow so it took till we got ripped off.
Self defense is best achieved with a camera. You may be gassed, tasered, pepper sprayed, or beat.....and it may all be in vain......but, if you and your movement are known to be just and nonviolent and your suffering is documented, then you have achieved the greatest blow against evil that you, as an individual, can throw.
I'd throw in escape and evade tactics in there for good measure. Sorry getting beaten up is not very healthy. Invest in a good zoom, and stay out of sight.
A police officer who is justifiably protecting him/herself, or other persons, or their property over which they have been given responsibility, may use any necessary force, or threat of force in order to accomplish that end.
It's called....wait for it.....SELF DEFENSE.
A police officer using whatever force he/she deems reasonable and necessary to accomplish a specific police action is NOT being unlawful.
And when they are violating your rights? What do you call it then?
How exactly were they violating your rights?
when they are shooting shit at you during your peaceful protest?
Please show me where your "rights" to block streets, march without permits, camp out inside city limits, ignore police commands, and throw bottles and rocks at law enforcement officers are outlined.
oh yeh i forgot about that part in the constitution that speaks of permits and city limits
So you're admitting that you have no "rights" to do what you've been doing.
who the hell do you think you're talking to? this is buik. you must have confused me with someone who wants to have some kind of idiotic conversation with you.
How exactly were they violating your rights? reply permalink edit delete ↥ ↧ buik (Towson, MD) 1 points 30 minutes ago
when they are shooting shit at you during your peaceful protest? reply permalink ↥ ↧ justhefacts 1 points 24 minutes ago
Please show me where your "rights" to block streets, march without permits, camp out inside city limits, ignore police commands, and throw bottles and rocks at law enforcement officers are outlined. reply permalink edit delete ↥ ↧ buik (Towson, MD) 1 points 20 minutes ago
oh yeh i forgot about that part in the constitution that speaks of permits and city limits reply permalink ↥ ↧ justhefacts 1 points 11 minutes ago
So you're admitting that you have no "rights" to do what you've been doing. reply permalink edit delete ↥ ↧ buik (Towson, MD) 1 points 5 minutes ago
who the hell do you think you're talking to? this is buik. you must have confused me with someone who wants to have some kind of idiotic conversation with you
If you do not wish to have an idiotic conversation with me, stop hitting reply under my posts and being an idiot.
oh hell no!
Could have summed up it with. Don't be stupid. Use that lump three feet above your ass.
Meh, but saying that way lacks character.
It takes common sense to avoid being hammered by the police. I am convinced by hearing some protestors that they live for this, and put their own safety on the line, just so they can yell 'abuse abuse". Rules for Radicals is in full effect with those people. I have been to protests where i joked around with the cops to make them feel comfortable. they are just doing their jobs. Remember cops are trained to feel that anyone can have a gun or a weapon. Large crowds like you said, put them on the edge of their seats. If you are not smart enough to get that, then you aren't smart enough to be protesting and understanding what you are protesting about.
Tell that to Kayvan Sabehgi. He wasn't even involved the protest and the OPD has given him a nice lacerated spleen.
I mean you know their job is getting to them when they can't tell which end is up.
Wasn't even involved in the protest? Let me tell you something. If there is a protests and alot of cops around, the last thing i am going to do is get anywhere near the police. If i am part of the protest or not. You are just asking for trouble. While Kayvan may not have been part of the protest, he used bad judgment for being there. Not that i justify it because i don't know about his case, but some people need to use their brains a little more.
Read the story first.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/04/occupy-oakland-second-veteran-injured
This is not a case of someone being stupid, this is a victim of a crime!
Ok i read the story. Here is my take. First off you said he wasn't involved in the protest, but the story says he was. Secondly he claimed to have been walking 'alone', away from the protest, but when asked to move out of the way, he had nowhere to go, which indicates he was right up close to the police, and surrounded by people. His own story and words are inconsistent. It is a tragedy he was injured so badly, and that he did not get immediate medical care, but he definitely was not some innocent bystander who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
He walked away from the protest, indicating he was going away from this, and the cops singled him out and used excessive force. Unacceptable.
Thats not what the article says from his own words. He said he was walking away alone. So suddenly he was obviously very near the police. Doesn't sound like walking away. Secondly he claimed when they asked him to move, he said, where am i going to go? Clearly he was either blocked in by other people or unwilling to move. Doesn't sound like a person who was walking away alone. A cop tells me to move, he could have said, I am out of here officer. But that is not what happened. Why i doubt the story. Use deductive reasoning to figure out his story is not quite true.
Cop apologists. You are all so very sad people.
And you admit three posts below this reply that your INTENTION is to be a "threat" to the police. That is where you "crossed the line", and they have every right to defend themselves from your threat.
I support the rule of law, and amazingly i have gone without being arrested or beat up my entire life. I have participated in civil action, and organized it peacefully. It is really easy to stay out of the way of the police. People instigate it. When the cop says move, you say, yes sir or maam. Easy. Show them respect and you don't get hurt. Cus and spit at them or disobey their orders you get hammered.
Then you might as well not be protesting at all. Reason: If they left you alone, it's because you're not a threat to them at all.
Do you honestly think that the opposition is just going to "play nice"? Don't get me wrong, there is stupid and there is smart, but just because you had "peaceful protests" that didn't end in beating, don't think that it will stay that way. One day, they may just decide that you're "undesirable". And then WHAT?
This is the whole point of the discussion, What's the limit here? Where and when does it cross the line?
TH3 you are kind of backpedaling now, saying that. You started out saying he wasn't even protesting and that he was walking away. You are walking away from that position now that you have clearly determined his story doesn't hold up. Don't change the argument when you lost the first one.
Do as the cops instruct and there are no problems. It is stupid to rage against them.
What EXACTLY is your position on non-violence?
Please be specific.
As far as protests go, non-violence makes things much easier. But it also helps if both parties are co-operative. My Non-violence ends, when the threat of deadly force begins and is in my general direction.