Cops shoot protester in the head w/rubber bullet, then laugh [Archive]

LOAH

08-07-2007, 09:52 PM

Hmm, reminds me of Liberty Park back in, I dunno, 2000? '99?

"March South, March South!"

Peaceful people getting barged in on and having their drums broken with nightsticks or getting thumped, themselves while legally assembling in a public park. All because some people defended a guy (by yelling and telling the cop to go away and leave him alone) who was getting his puppy confiscated by a cop for not having it on a leash.

I left when I saw police cruisers start driving up on the lawn. I saw the news report that night and spoke with "my people" at the time, the next week.

A lady getting shot in the head with a rubber bullet without being violent toward anyone is absolutely ridiculous. No charges, no investigation. PLEASE.

The police have a tough job, but they need to remember that they work FOR THE PEOPLE! When THE PEOPLE form a group in protest of something, the police should listen to the message, not try to stop it from happening.

(Sorry...struck a nerve. I'll shut up now.)

Sombeech

08-07-2007, 10:28 PM

Woman: Shoot me! Are you gonna shoot me?

You're damned if you do, damned if you don't.... :haha:

donny h

08-08-2007, 01:42 AM

A lady getting shot in the head with a rubber bullet

I have always heard that cops aren't supposed to aim for the head with less-than-lethal ammunition, people have been killed by getting head-shot with rubber bullets and beanbags, and it's always explained away as a miss, a body shot that went high...

And here we have a bunch of cops downright celebrating a head shot, absolutely loving the fact that it pegged her right in the forehead. If it had killed her, would they have admitted that the aim was intentional?

In this case, they used less-than-lethal not to avoid a physical confrontation, but to mete out on the spot punishment.

They didn't avoid a fight, they avoided having to do the work of a billyclubbing. Of a lady. In a dress. Wielding a piece of paper.

Oh well, she should consider herself lucky, right? 40 years ago in Florida she would have gotten the firehose and dog bite treatment.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

derstuka

08-08-2007, 07:11 AM

Oh well, she should consider herself lucky, right? 40 years ago in Florida she would have gotten the firehose and dog bite treatment.

That would have been funny!

Jaxx

08-08-2007, 08:42 AM

From the little bit that the story shows It looks like she was confronting the police, peacefully...mabey. How do we know what was going on before that with other people and the cops. Mabey they felt the need to stomp out any confrontation with them before it got out of hand. I am one to say shoot the lady ask questions later. If you are with a group of people protesting and some people in the group are getting out of hand, which may be a possibility in the red suit ladies case, you can expect that the cops aren't going to hold a trial.

Udink

08-08-2007, 08:54 AM

you can expect that the cops aren't going to hold a trial.
It's really a shame how many people are uninformed when it comes to their rights. It is not the job of law enforcement to dole out punishments, nor even to "hold a trial." As the name "law enforcement" so vaguely implies, it is their job to enforce the laws, and refer violators to the courts. If an officer fires a shot, even a less-lethal shot at a protester, they damned well should have a good reason, which doesn't seem to be the case in this situation.

Jaxx

08-08-2007, 09:06 AM

I don't think I'm uninformed of my rights. If I am associating and congregating with a group of people and they start to get rowdy and I don't leave then I can only expect the cops to treat me as they would the stupid people in the group.
I don't think that we can really judge what happened by the footage that the lawyer gave the the interviewer to show. That is a small bit showing only things to make her case look better. She is a lawyer she knows not to show her friends throwing rocks at police (not that that happened, just an example)

08-08-2007, 09:29 AM

If she was the mouthpiece and her words and actions began to incite a few people to get out of hand, the police have to take action. She would have been forewarned that if she continued, she would be shot by less than lethal means. Obviously she didn't take heed in those orders and that led her to being shot. A simple protest can turn into a riot at the drop of a dime. Riots lead to injury and property damage at the least. Keeping it peaceful is paramount.

A lawyer being afraid to bring suit? Isn't that an oxymoron :ne_nau: And a shot that far by standing police, using a rubber bullet and actually striking her in the forehead... Wow :eek2: will that person step forward and teach me how to shoot :popcorn:

Rev. Coyote

08-08-2007, 10:11 AM

Those "cops" (I think "pigs" is a more appropriate term) showed themselves as dickless punks suffering from gang mentality. They guy who fired the shot needs his ass whipped.

I especially liked the film the pigs made of themselves later patting each other on the back for taking pot shots at an unarmed middle aged woman. Boy, what MEN! Any one of those guys confronted by himself without his little badge, buddies, and cheap-ass Glock would wimper and beg like a schoolgirl.

Bull Connor would be proud!

NEVER trust a police officer.

donny h

08-08-2007, 11:38 AM

Bull Connor would be proud!

Bingo.

If that lady was inciting a riot then she's commited a crime, so take her into custody for that crime, she wasn't in the middle of an angry crowd, she was standing 15 feet in front of dozens of cops.

Cops playing judge and jury.

08-08-2007, 11:56 AM

she was standing 15 feet in front of dozens of cops
Helloooooooooooooooooooo, they wouldn't need that many cops for just her and they were on the march driving back a crowd. She was just caught in the shallow depth of field in that video camera. And again, we were not there to hear what was being said, we were not here to see what was taking place, just a segmented video clip that was to show the "Poor Fear Suing Lawyer" side of it. Where's the judge and jury? You don't comply, they'll make you and if it results to force, shame on you. It's as simple as listening. What are these parents teaching kids nowadays?

donny h

08-08-2007, 11:57 AM

Some more info on that protest in Florida, I was wrong about it being 'a great shot', the bullet penetrated the sign she was hiding behind and struck her on the top of the head, not the forehead.

So I got that detail wrong, but Broward county bails me out by behaving atrociously in many other ways:

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/11/30/Columns/Miami_crowd_control_w.shtml

http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/story?id=2296783&page=1

http://phoenix_rising.gnn.tv/blogs/17739/Woman_shot_with_rubber_bullets_at_a_protest_in_Mia mi

Oh, the irony, being shot by police for no good reason, and the bullet traveled through a sign that reads "Fear Totalitarianism".

08-08-2007, 12:03 PM

More "She says" and the slanted view of Law Enforcement by the writer, free speech, isn't it great.

Rev. Coyote

08-08-2007, 12:03 PM

Helloooooooooooooooooooo, they wouldn't need that many cops for just her and they were on the march driving back a crowd. She was just caught in the shallow depth of field in that video camera. And again, we were not there to hear what was being said, we were not here to see what was taking place, just a segmented video clip that was to show the "Poor Fear Suing Lawyer" side of it. Where's the judge and jury? You don't comply, they'll make you and if it results to force, shame on you. It's as simple as listening. What are these parents teaching kids nowadays?

I was almost with you on this, but the film clip of the piggy circle jerk told a far different story. These boys seemed to get a real woody taking shots at a fat middle-aged woman. And that's just creepy.

Never trust a cop.

08-08-2007, 12:10 PM

I was almost with you on this, but the film clip of the piggy circle jerk told a far different story. These boys seemed to get a real woody taking shots at a fat middle-aged woman. And that's just creepy
Look at the history of this summit. Look towards Seattle in years pass. Look at the violence and destruction that follows this summit. I would say that the police or sheriff's (whatever these were) had those such visions of this prior summit and would not tolerate such anarchy if they could have helped it. It's your local government that expects the police to keep these protesters in check, that's why they have the funding to put so many of them on the streets during this. With this summit, travels people that aren't there for the sake of free trade, it's for the sake of inciting riots.

Rev. Coyote

08-08-2007, 12:15 PM

Look at the history of this summit. Look towards Seattle in years pass. Look at the violence and destruction that follows this summit. I would say that the police or sheriff's (whatever these were) had those such visions of this prior summit and would not tolerate such anarchy if they could have helped it. It's your local government that expects the police to keep these protesters in check, that's why they have the funding to put so many of them on the streets during this. With this summit, travels people that aren't there for the sake of free trade, it's for the sake of inciting riots.

Oh sure, I'm very aware of the history of this conference. No argument there, to be sure. But it doesn't forgive needle-dick behaviour. Again, I point to the attitudes of these pigs during the circle jerk session on the film.

Never trust a cop.

donny h

08-08-2007, 12:21 PM

You don't comply, they'll make you

We Americans have the constitutional right to peaceably assemble, and petition the government for change. The founding fathers thought this was important enough they made it the FIRST amendment to the constitution, all the other amendments aren't worth spit without the first one.

The protesters are exersizing their rights, rights that are paid for in blood by our relatives, rights that were hard won and should not be taken lightly, and should NEVER be set aside merely because someone disagrees with the message of the protesters.

Another word for protester is patriot.

How would Thomas Jefferson feel about Broward countys actions? John Adams? James Madison? Alexander Hamilton? Would these men support shooting a lady in a dress because they didn't like her?

08-08-2007, 12:21 PM

Oh sure, I'm very aware of the history of this conference. No argument there, to be sure. But it doesn't forgive needle-dick behaviour.
Hmmm, what's that oil company you have issues with in the La Sal area? I cannot remember. The one that wants to set up on all that open land? Little scenario.
You and a bunch of like minded neighbors got together and pulled off a successful stand on that company. You're all standing around at a picnic/victory get together and you start discussing the tactics that seemed to keep them at bay, some of you wouldn't be joking about it?

donny h

08-08-2007, 12:23 PM

free speech, isn't it great.

Yes.

Unless some f****** cop shoots you in the head when you're trying to exersize it.

08-08-2007, 12:31 PM

Would these men support shooting a lady in a dress because they didn't like her?
She was hit by non-lethal force. This had nothing to do with like or dislike. It's a compliant issue I'm sure. Yes, people can protest, but YOU CANNOT INCITE A RIOT. You cannot cause public alarm. Civil disobedience is not tolerated even when dealing with two people, let alone a crowd. When your peaceful protest starts to get out of line, law is there to keep order. If these protests are always so peaceful, there wouldn't be such a strong police showing.

Have you ever been or seen Mardi Gras in LA? Have you seen police take a lax attitude their? Hell, no. Why? Because all bad would happen. I even look at some of the arrests they make and I'm a little taken back by it. But, when I think of the bigger picture it all makes sense.

08-08-2007, 12:33 PM

free speech, isn't it great.

Yes.

Unless some f****** cop shoots you in the head when you're trying to exersize it.
Well, not all speech is free. Just like I said before. Speech has it limits.

Rev. Coyote

08-08-2007, 12:36 PM

Hmmm, what's that oil company you have issues with in the La Sal area? I cannot remember. The one that wants to set up on all that open land? Little scenario.
You and a bunch of like minded neighbors got together and pulled off a successful stand on that company. You're all standing around at a picnic/victory get together and you start discussing the tactics that seemed to keep them at bay, some of you wouldn't be joking about it?

We wouldn't have shot anyone in the face like a bunch of pussies then had a circle jerk over it...

HOWEVER, that's not really what you asked. Yes, if we are successful in chasing the gas company out of La Sal, I will surely raise a toast in honor of the occasion. I'd use Knob Creek Bourbon, neat.

(By the way, the issues with that project have to do with ground water threats; odors; and noise from compression stations.)

Never trust a cop.

08-08-2007, 12:44 PM

We wouldn't have shot anyone in the face like a bunch of pussies then had a circle jerk over it...

HOWEVER, that's not really what you asked. Yes, if we are successful in chasing the gas company out of La Sal, I will surely raise a toast in honor of the occasion. I'd use Knob Creek Bourbon, neat.
:lol8: Hey now :lol8: I know some of your tactics :roflol: One of which is always waving a gun around and if you had non-lethal means, well I just don't know :haha:
Then their could be even other tactics you shared in the ATV arena. Something to do with roofs :lol8: Now, by tactics with that gas company, maybe some of you like minded neighbors might rig up something to cause their machinery to malfunction, one maybe injured and one might not. Would we still be toasting with Knob Creek Bourbon (which I'm not sure I've seen that up here before) when someone got hurt? Oh hell ya, mission was still accomplished :lol8: :lol8: :lol8:

donny h

08-08-2007, 12:49 PM

You cannot cause public alarm.

YES YOU CAN. You can make a crowd as loud and angry as you like.

You cannot incite a riot, which is advocating illegal actions that are likely to imminently occur, anything else is protected speech.

Rev. Coyote

08-08-2007, 12:49 PM

Now, by tactics with that gas company, maybe some of you like minded neighbors might rig up something to cause their machinery to malfunction, one maybe injured and one might not. Would we still be toasting with Knob Creek Bourbon (which I'm not sure I've seen that up here before) when someone got hurt? Oh hell ya, mission was still accomplished :lol8: :lol8: :lol8:

Monkeywrenching, while a romantic idea, never works as well as using legal means (appeals, lawsuits, appeals, appeals, appeals, public comment periods, lawsuits...). Plus, the ones who get hurt from that stuff are usually contractors -- people working doo-doo jobs for pee-pee money. It never gets to the people who foisted these idiot projects in the first place.

PS -- You and I should not be allowed on the same message boards. Far too fun, and I'm sure we're pissing everone else off.

CarpeyBiggs

08-08-2007, 01:07 PM

PS -- You and I should not be allowed on the same message boards. Far too fun, and I'm sure we're pissing everone else off.

I'm just glad someone else gets to keep him occupied, now that you're back... :lol8:

08-08-2007, 01:07 PM

YES YOU CAN. You can make a crowd as loud and angry as you like.

You cannot incite a riot, which is advocating illegal actions that are likely to imminently occur, anything else is protected speech.
Really, Hmmm.

Just found this from Utah Code -- Title 76 -- Chapter 09 -- Offenses Against Public Order and Decency

76-9-102. Disorderly conduct.
(1) A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if:
(a) he refuses to comply with the lawful order of the police to move from a public place, or knowingly creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition, by any act which serves no legitimate purpose; or
(b) intending to cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he:
(i) engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous, or threatening behavior;
(ii) makes unreasonable noises in a public place;
(iii) makes unreasonable noises in a private place which can be heard in a public place; or
(iv) obstructs vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
(2) "Public place," for the purpose of this section, means any place to which the public or a substantial group of the public has access and includes but is not limited to streets, highways, and the common areas of schools, hospitals, apartment houses, office buildings, transport facilities, and shops.
(3) Disorderly conduct is a class C misdemeanor if the offense continues after a request by a person to desist. Otherwise it is an infraction.

PS -- You and I should not be allowed on the same message boards. Far too fun, and I'm sure we're pissing everone else off.
It's all about the fun :lol8:

donny h

08-08-2007, 01:59 PM

lawful order of the police to move from a public place

It is not lawful of the police to ask you to move along because you are protesting, it is legal to protest on public property, refusing an unlawful order to disperse is not civil disobedience, merely exersizing your rights.

makes unreasonable noises in a public place

Protesting is not unreasonable noise, if law enforcement gets the power to decide that protests are unreasonable noise, then no protests could take place, ever. See 1st amendment.

intending to cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm

Intending to cause public alarm is not the same as saying things that the public finds alarming. See 'yelling fire in a movie theatre'.

08-08-2007, 03:32 PM

You skipped a few.

donny h

08-08-2007, 04:11 PM

You skipped a few.

I only responded to the lines in bold, and I missed one:

makes unreasonable noises in a private place which can be heard in a public place

Protesting is making noise in a public place, not a private place, there is no right to protest on private property, yet another supreme court ruling.

Utah isn't the best example for you to use, this state isn't exactly a bastion of free speech, just because Utah has laws on the books doesn't mean they would stand up to a legal challenge, it's happened here before.

It's not complicated: The people have the right to peaceably protest for change, in a public place. I'm not gonna' copy and paste the first amendment here, because every single one of you should all ready know what the damn thing says.

CarpeyBiggs

08-08-2007, 04:17 PM

Donny H, haven't you spent much time in the Political Arena? Talking sense to JP just doesn't work.... I applaud your valiant efforts though. :roflol:

With this post, I meant no offense to JP, or any other person who believes shooting women in dresses with rubber bullets is respectable. That crowd would be a nasty crew to tick off. I'd hate to get capped myself.