View Single Post
Old November 28 2011, 01:15 AM   #123
the G-man
Rear Admiral
the G-man's Avatar
Location: to your immediate right
Re: Frank Miller completely loses the plot

sidious618 wrote: View Post
the G-man wrote: View Post
Captaindemotion wrote: View Post
^ So 'not complying' should result in pepper spray, tasers etc as a first option?

What about negotiation, restraint such as handcuffs, armlocks, carrying away, etc?
CBS recently interviewed an expert who explained that most of what you suggest is arguaby more dangerous:

  • Charles J. Kelly, a former Baltimore Police Department lieutenant who wrote the department's use of force guidelines, said pepper spray is a "compliance tool" that can be used on subjects who do not resist, and is preferable to simply lifting protesters.

    "When you start picking up human bodies, you risk hurting them," Kelly said. "Bodies don't have handles on them."

    After reviewing the video, Kelly said he observed at least two cases of "active resistance" from protesters. In one instance, a woman pulls her arm back from an officer. In the second instance, a protester curls into a ball. Each of those actions could have warranted more force, including baton strikes and pressure-point techniques.

    "What I'm looking at is fairly standard police procedure," Kelly said.
The fact that you're defending the pepper spray incident is fairly repugnant. You honestly think the police should be pepper spraying non-violent citizens?
If the police overreact in any situation, they should be disciplined and/or prosecuted. However, according to the expert I cited (and a number of court cases), the use of pepper spray against protesters isn't, per se, excessive force.
the G-man is offline