Shared publicly  - 
 
UC Davis Campus Police Lieutenant John Pike (530-752-3989 japikeiii@ucdavis.edu) pepper-sprays 30 peacefully sitting demonstrators at point blank range today.

[Edited to add: If you're planning to comment about how this is a good thing, or to gloat about "hippies getting theirs," or to wish acts of violence on either the demonstrators or the cops, you'll be deleted and blocked. Don't even bother.]

[Edited again: comments closed. For all of you who were discussing like educated grownups, I apologize. This is why we can't have nice things. Wasn't G+ supposed to be where the savvy people hang out?]
291
355
Galen Zhu's profile photoBjörn Bolz's profile photosirius chris's profile photoMarcello Giovanni Papa's profile photo
144 comments
 
no honor in that. should be fired and held accountable for his actions in a court of law. and thanks for posting his contact info - i sent him a wonderful email.
 
have you seen a picture taken at either davis or berkeley, students sitting with linked arms on the right of the picture while a cop swings a baton on the left? i could have sworn i saw it on the way to celeste langan's blog about her arrest, but i haven't been able to find it again.
 
as +Nancy Clifford mentioned on the related video i posted earlier - this douche makes tony baloney "look like a lightweight."
H Vandagriff
+
39
40
39
 
Peaceful demonstrators who refused to disperse upon command <-- that's why they got sprayed. Now, that was their choice, and I'm glad they could make that choice, mind you - but the officer isn't 'abusing' them, he's attempting to enforce the law with as little force as possible. They are being disobedient to prove a point. Either way, it was their decision to provoke enforcement of the law, and I don't think it's very fair to be all righteously indignant when Lt. Pike is (a) complying with his department's use of force policy (he's a Lt., he'd know the policy), and (b) enforcing laws enacted by the politicians that jurisdiction voted for...point being, use of force is one of the most misunderstood topics in law enforcement. Pepper spray hurts, but it won't kill you. He's making the best, less injurious choice - and compared to some stuff we've seen, he's pretty calm about it. Does it look bad? Yeah, but only if you don't know about use of force, which evidently most of you do not. Could it be worse? OH YEAH, it could be. Oakland was a lot worse. By far.
 
+Heather Vandagriff: throw the cuffs on if they're breaking a law - absolutely no need for the spray - does it really look like they're resisting? no. there's a time and place for pepper-spray - this does not meet the requirements.
 
Jeezzz.... Some people act like they are applying for a job at Fox news.
 
+Heather Vandagriff Police officers should not be allowed to use force on citizens that are not causing harm on others. Their job is to protect and uphold the law - not to inflict physical punishment on citizens who pay their salaries and are causing harm to no one. What right do the police have to make peaceful protesters disperse anyway? We have a Constitutional right to peaceful assembly. That "policy" is bogus and does not uphold the rights in the Constitution, and in my book Constitutional rights trump policy.
 
+マケッズアントニオ Use of force policies are different everywhere - generally, most cops try to avoid hands-on, because that's a one-to-one solution. One cop to one demonstrator. Not a good choice in a crowd situation.

+Jordan Arseno Again, putting cuffs on them isn't because they're resisting arrest, clearly they are not resisting arrest in the photo above. No, they want to be arrested. Generally (and this doesn't include everywhere) the cops have what's called a "Use of Force Policy", and in it, again GENERALLY, they're allowed to move one level higher than the situation with which they're dealing. The fastest, and most effective way to deal with a crowd with the least amount of injury is, in fact, to spray them thereby incapacitating them for awhile, and then arrest them. This is a much (by far) choice than full-blown tear-gas/smoke canisters/rubber bullets - which while they're CALLED less-than-lethal, can in fact be lethal in certain circumstance. After the spray, the officers there would stand these guys up, using pressure points if need be, cuff 'em, and arrest them.

+Nancy Clifford Not trying to apply for Fox as those bastards make me physically ill. I just have a different perspective, and again, I know for folks who don't have my perspective that photo looks awful. But Oakland was more dangerous, and a worse more asinine response from a policing perspective.
 
I guess it's a question of when pepper spray is appropriate. I am concerned that officers making a tactical choice are making a strategic error. This picture probably made as many new recruits as it depicts. I think this is why Seattle's mayor has decided to review the deployment of pepper spray.
 
+Heather Vandagriff you said policy is to " to spray them thereby incapacitating them for awhile, and then arrest them." That would only be necessary if they were resisting. They had no need whatsoever to incapacitate them.
 
+Sass Linneken You generally will find zero argument from me, or any other present or former law enforcement officer that you and every other American citizen have a right to peaceably assemble and redress the government with grievances. The difference is that the uniformed cops are being told what to enforce (in the case of NYC and Oakland) by politicians who are using them to be the 'bad guys'. Cops will be paying the price for that choice for years, as you all can already tell because you're so very angry at them. It's a bad situation. Very bad. The restrictions enacted by politicians on your civil rights are laws just like the other laws cops enforce...and they are not allowed to pick and choose which they can and can't enforce.

To all of you: I know this won't assuage your indignation. I don't expect it to, but maybe if we all give each other some perspective it'll help a little? It can't hurt, really. But regardless - we are all Americans, even if we disagree.
 
Actually +sass linneken they are law ENFORCEMENT officers. They enforce the laws that our elected politicians passed. En(force)ing them requires force sometimes. It is not a right to loiter 24/7 for any reason. You need permits, permissions etc. I'm not happy he sprayed them by any means...but disobeying a lawful order is a crime. That's why it's not civil obedience...doing it that way would just (unfortunately) be ignored.
 
Yes, they were - but they were still non-compliant...and after being given a lawful order, refusing to comply is breaking the law. It's their choice, and I'm so very proud that they chose to stay, because it's an issue that I personally feel very strongly about, but, noncompliance has consequences. Getting sprayed is the best of these possible consequences, in my own opinion.
 
+Heather Vandagriff Of course we're angry with them, we have a Constitutional right to assemble - what they are doing is not Constitutional, we have a right to be angry. Further they have no right - politicians or police officers to enact policy that enables violence against peaceful citizens. Even our president agrees, remember his speech on the rights of Egyptians to protest? You say normally you'd give zero argument - why does a policy that explicitly states it is lawful to disperse peaceful assemblers make you feel differently? It's a bogus policy that contradicts the rights granted in our founding documents.

With that said, I completely respect your difference of opinion and I always enjoy hearing from people I don't necessarily see eye to eye with, so I appreciate you explaining your views.
 
+Sass Linneken In a perfect world, you'd be right, but I've had grown men go batshit nuts when they get cuffed, and you never know which of them is going to; women fight just as hard as men sometimes. There's no "warning sign", either. The incapacitance involved isn't for punishment purposes, it's to ensure the safety of the officers, and anyone else who might get hurt by someone who, shall we say, doesn't react well.
 
+Katrina Blackstone Do you really think loitering is an egregious enough offense to warrant the use of pain inducing chemicals? If the people were not resisting arrest what need was there to use such force? that's the problem here. I am not arguing that officers don't have a right to use spray when needed - I'm arguing that this was not a time when it was.

+Heather Vandagriff I didn't know being non-compliant warranted violence - I thought it warranted arrest.
 
+Heather Vandagriff They were preemptively protecting themselves then, and I think that's wrong. If a protester had become violent then it would be warranted but they didn't, so in my view it was unnecessary. In their haste to make sure no one got hurt, they hurt people.
 
+sass linneken I don't know the full circumstances as I was not there. A photo while worth 1000 words is never the full story. And I blieve there are many sides to a story but the truth lies somewhere in the middle of most accounts.
 
+Sass Linneken "Loitering" isn't the crime being committed. The crime being committed is refusing to obey the lawful command (most likely to disperse) - (and there IS the debate for the courts as to whether the command given was lawful or not) of a law enforcement officer. Again the purpose of the spray is to ensure the safety of both the officers and the crowd.

+Jordan Arseno I don't mind you disagreeing. S'fine. Things may be different there, here's hoping it is.
 
+Heather Vandagriff I hear what you're saying - they broke a law - but that's what handcuffs are for. As for ensuring safety - no one was putting anyone in danger, have you seen the video? The protesters were sitting with their heads down - there was no one needing protection, and that's my problem. They are saying they did it to keep people from being hurt but the only ones hurting people were the cops. Check out the video: Police pepper spraying and arresting students at UC Davis
 
+John Dempsey Sorry if you feel I'm overstating but I find a blatant disregard for Constitutional rights horrifying. I also find spraying painful chemicals into the faces of college kids who are peacefully sitting with their heads down horrifying too because I was taught all the way through school that we have a right to peacefully assemble. I don't buy in to comparison debates - I'm talking about America, and American rights being trampled on. I personally find it horrifying.
 
+John Dempsey: specification is barely necessary - her words speak for themselves; sympathy with this officer, or the belief that his actions are justified is IMO dead-backwards.
 
+Jordan Arseno Again, alternative perspective, yes. And you're free to disagree with me. But I haven't lied to you, and won't.
 
What risk existed in simply letting these students stay where they were? Were they blocking the path of a fire engine heading to put out a blaze? No, this was a brutal and thoughtless act, putting petty adherence to a pointless law before the harm caused by deliberately hurting students. Shameful and unconscionable.
 
+Heather Vandagriff It makes no sense because it shouldn't make any. I don't pay these people to inflict pain on me for sitting with my head down. They have handcuffs for a reason. If they haven't even tried to use them and are pulling out the spray there's a problem there, and I would never aim to even want to make sense out of how anyone thinks we could tout ourselves a free country while proclaiming it a-ok to pepper spray people who are posing no threat to anyone.
 
+Tony Sidaway In my own opinion - ZERO risk in letting them stay where they were. And the better choice! But some politician somewhere fears what Occupy stands for, and insists it be met with force. Absolute insanity, in my personal opinion. Whether their civil rights are being violated (personally I believe they are) is a matter for the courts, and the only way to GET to the courts is to get arrested.
 
Which can be done without having to be pepper sprayed first - happens all the time.
 
+Sass Linneken (Just a minor point - the Constitution says inalienable rights - they're everyone's rights, not to be taken away by government...ANY government anywhere, not just the U.S. We base our public foreign policy on it, and then hypocritically abuse our own citizens, which is utter bullshit.) Again, I know you're seeing it one way, and I see it differently, but there's stuff we do agree on.
 
My point to him was that I'm not talking about Syria, I'm talking about America and American citizens. And yes, I see that we do. thanks for the convo!! :-D
 
Getting swabbed isn't a delivery method protestors are likely to encounter in a real-time on the ground situation. ROFL
 
+Jim Clark Peacefully assembling on a university sidewalk is hardly blocking someone into their home, firstly. Secondly, "what it took" wasn't pepper spray as these people weren't resisting arrest. If you think blocking a walkway calls for violent force then I guess we just see the meaning of the word freedom differently.
 
Whether they stayed or not, they were posing a threat to no one by sitting with their heads down. Pepper spray was excessive force in this case. And just so we're clear - my stance is not that pepper spray is never called for - only that it wasn't here.
 
Right but I'm not debating whether or not they were acting unlawfully - though via the Constitution we do have a right to peaceful assembly (which doesn't exclude on sidewalks) - I'm debating, however, whether or not the amount of force used was justified, especially in a country that says it's free. In this case that amount of force was clearly not called for, plain and simple.
 
Sass, "excessive force" would be defined legally in that department's policy, and likely would be something more like what you saw in Oakland - potentially lethal alternatives on peaceful citizens is definitely excessive force. Kicking a prone compliant suspect is excessive force. Shooting a misdemeanant in the back is excessive force. I'll shut up now.
 
Heather, pepper spraying a group of citizens sitting peacefully with heads down when you haven't even tried to cuff them yet is also excessive force - especially in the "land of the free."
 
Sass, I'm not talking opinion - I'm talking policy. Your opinion of the policy can (and we'd agree, you and I that it should) affect that policy.
 
Jim, who was struggling with them? You said you saw the video. The protesters were sitting on the ground with their heads down. An alternative to using the spray would be to first try to use cuffs - if a struggle ensued then the use of spray would be warranted. I don't believe in preemptive strikes...
 
Right but that policy has no right to even be policy - it contradicts the rights in the Constitution, which in my opinion makes it null and void. It is a bogus policy.
 
I understand, but changing the policy isn't going to happen unless people challenge it, and the police UPHOLD it, which is what you see happening.
 
I disagree Jim - how does knowing they're going to be hurt give the cops a right to hurt them? Were they asking for it knowing what the cops have been up to lately? No doubt! Does that mean it was an appropriate use of force? Absolutely not.
 
The Nazis were just following orders too. And no, I'm NOT comparing the cops to Nazis - but this is similar defense of these actions you are using.
 
Jim, I'm more optimistic than that. I agree with Margaret Mead who said " Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
 
LOL! I wasn't calling you a Nazi dude...I was making the point - using the argument of "just following orders" is not very compelling.
 
+Sass Linneken And I'm telling you, I clearly see parallels with the closing of German society under the Nazis. It's obvious to those paying attention. Arrests of journalists, etc., etc. It's happening.
 
Well, I guess we'll just see how effective these protests end up. Perhaps this time next year we'll all be living in a utopian dream :-D haha
 
+Toxic Reverend He's a fucking hero. Every inch of him. I've seen the photos. And arresting him made every cop there think twice, I assure you. Bless him.
 
A couple of unconstructive and unamusing commenters have been deleted and blocked. I'm all for criticism of OWS, when appropriate, but I have little patience for the Fox News variety of said criticism, and zero for the "lefter than thou" sort. The rest of you: welcome. Carry on.
 
Incidentally, +Heather Vandagriff, the reason there was the swab case referred to by +Toxic Reverend - Lundberg v. County of Humboldt - was that Humboldt County deputies and the Eureka, CA PD did in fact swab seated protestors several times on several occasions. The practice was found to be unconstitutional.

In 1997, Amnesty International said of the swabbing "In this instance, the spray was clearly abusive as it was not used to protect officers or others but was applied in a calculated and deliberate way to inflict pain as a way of gaining compliance in cases of demonstrators who posed no threat." Obviously, the same could be said of today's police action in Davis.
 
Taking Democracy to the world!!!
 
It would be good if people knew what they were talking about before they jump to judgment or follow some news rag that does it's best to 'paint' a picture rather than tell the truth. The active ingredient in pepper spray is 'capsaicin' which mainly comes from chili fruit (jalapeno, habanero, etc.). Capsaicin when it comes in contact with the tongue (such as eating a jalapeno) tricks the mind into thinking it is 'on fire' when actually it is not, the same affect happens when it comes into contact with the eyes. The effects wear off within a short amount of time depending upon how much capsaicin is on the skin.

The right to peaceful assembly in protest does not allow a group of protesters to occupy/takeover/disrupt private property/business or violate the rights of others. [Even the article admits these students were in "civil disobedience". They were breaking the law!] The use of pepper spray, although extremely uncomfortable, is possibly the most non-violent way for police to enforce the law. The police have been vilified all over the country by dishonest reporters and news agencies for the use of pepper spray on law breakers to enrage the ignorant of our society. Attacking the police, as many of you have done, for doing a most difficult job is unconscionable of you! We should not be so gullible to get all 'up in arms' about a biased and agenda driven report such as this one.

Personally, more power to the protesters in their cause to affect change in the political quagmire of corruption. But if they break the law (federal, state or local) they should be prepared to face the consequences of their actions and not whine about it. I do not support how these people are protesting, but I understand why they are protesting.
 
Identify this "officer" and arrest him for felony assault with a painful substance and potentially blinding weapon, add the charge of Contempt of Citizen.
 
Turn the law against the cult members of the cult of government. First assert your rights. When the cult members of the cult of government, whomever they are, obstruct your rights or use force arrest them with your Power of Citizens Arrest when you witness them committing a felony crime. The cloak of sovereign power doesn't protect the individuals from crimes they commit. Consult a lawyer and learn your powers of Citizens Arrest so that you can Apply It Wisely and know the risks. Inform the officers that you are arresting them for felony assault and that they need to accompany you to the police station to be charged. If they refuse inform them that they will also be charged with resisting arrest. If they assault you inform them that you're adding an additional felony assault charge. DO NOT USE FORCE. Collect information preferably on video tape. Have multiple witnesses, the more the better. Consult a lawyer and have one present at the police station when you lay the charges later. If any officers or person at the police station obstructs your process then arrest them for obstructing justice. Move up the ranks and into the prosecutors office if necessary. File the charges in court. Arrest the judge if necessary (it was done in England in early 2011 by the way). USE THE LAW AGAINST THE CULT MEMBERS OF THE CULT OF GOVERNMENT. OCCUPY THE LEGAL SYSTEM.
 
30 charges of Felony Assault against UC Davis Campus Police Lieutenant John Pike (530-752-3989 japikeiii@ucdavis.edu). Collect up the videos and witnesses and victims and together press charges against this horrifically wayward non-public servant who is blatantly abusing the trust placed into him to uphold the law. The law doesn't permit such violence and force to be used, and if it does that law is invalid and must be repealed and nullified and invalidated. If John Pike was acting under orders arrest whomever ordered him for conspiracy and so on. Arrest the officers collaborating with John Pike in this aggressive operation. Use the law against these alleged officers aka government cult thugs.
 
The amazing thing about this whole situation is that there are 100s of people just standing around and taking pictures!!!
 
Organize and collect the evidence and witnesses of every felony assault against people by the "police" government thugs. Press charges including if necessary using Citizens Arrest if the prosecutor won't act on these egregious felony crimes, and also arrest the prosecutor for obstruction of justice.
 
How do you know if this is felony assault? If you or I did the act of pepper spraying people on the street in the full view of the police (or not) we'd be arrested for it. That's one way to know it's a felony assault. No man is above the law and the cult member of the cult of government can't hide behind sovereign immunity for their crimes. Prosecute them. Stop thinking they are your friends, they are not. They are cult thugs from organized armed gangs who thrive on violence, evidently.
 
So this is the "land of the free home of the brave"? The self satisfied expression on his face is appalling; you can tell he feels totally righteous about this casual brutality.
 
Plotting murderous revenge against "fat boy here in this picture" isn't a wise move. Arresting him and prosecuting him for felony assault is a much saner strategy than revenge for if you use revenge you're no different than those who use violence to solve political problems and you become the problem +Chuck Homsy. Also threatening murder against a cult member of the cult of government in an online forum is pure idiocy dude as you just incriminated yourself as a plotter of murder.
 
The email address of the UC Davis chief of police (Annette M. Spicuzza) is amspicuzza@ucdavis.edu. A webform to contact UC Davis Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi may be found at http://chancellor.ucdavis.edu/contact.php ... Be polite, but let them know how you feel about the action of Lt. Pike.
 
i don't know what is more red the pepper spray or that guys mustache
 
Heather, keep drinking the koolaid and believing the crap. you're assuming politicians voted in are in fact working for the better of the country. You are also assuming police and politicians are never wrong. you are like so many others that need someone to tell them what to do or you feel lost. sitting peacefully to make a point is why so many rights have been given now days due to the protests of the 60's. but i guess all the african americans of the 60's were wrong for their peaceful demonstrations against segregation and discrimination? whatever, the government is abusing their power. no one is provoking anything other than exercising their right to assembly. move to china if you want communism.
 
I love how in this modern age, there appears to be more media snapping pics than there are subjects in the pics.
 
As an observer, putting in a word for Heather. The way I am understanding her posts, they are quite logical in nature, and balanced.

I do think that police and politicians have terribly mishandled the Occupy movement. Mayors have overlooked opportunities to be regarded as heroes of the people, by treating protesters with respect.
 
+Heather Vandagriff have you ever been hit in the face with CS gas? I have. Have you ever taken an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America and the laws under it? I have. Have you ever had training in what constitutes a violent act and when and where the use of force is justified? I have.

I can assure you he has breeched his fiduciary duties.
I can assure you it is an act of violence.
I can assure you he is breaking the law.

If a citizen cited the the following;


Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law

This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/federal-statutes


United States of America Constitution
Article I

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.

Then if that citizen sprayed at least 15 officers in the face with CS Gas when they did not comply with the law no one would question if it was wrong, an assault, an act of violence and that the individual should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Or would you have us believe that it is the right of the citizen to "soften up the officer" to make them "more compliant" prior to placing the officers under citizens arrest for violation of the above stated laws?

Assault is assault. It is an act of violence. You can try to soften it by using the phrases "use of force", and "failure to comply" but it does not change the facts. You state that this officer must have known what he was doing. I agree. UC Davis Campus Police Lieutenant John Pike had a choice. He made a bad one. He broke the law.

Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. This officer must have been aware of these two laws as stated above as well. Officers take an oath to defend the Constitution. Department policies, local regulations, state laws and unlawful orders that violate the law and the Constitution are not justification for breaking the law to enforce those policies, nor do those policies, regulations, or orders supersede, circumvent or abridge the rule of law.
 
@chevis avant: Never direct your anger at the bullet, pay attention to the trigger-man. The policeman is just the bullet. The trigger-man is the one who authorized the use of pepper spray, the one who demanded the students be arrested and the ground be cleared. All it takes is one lone individual to act violently against that policeman, and the moral high ground will be lost by all who support the students.

It is imperative for all supporters of the students to make sure the anger is directed at the employers of the police and absolutely no violence, no physical retaliation against the policeman.
 
They are treating these protests like riots! And if they don't stop, their will be real riots! Think about Occupy Oakland....that went down the drain when police officers started throwing flash grenades and keeping people back for no reason. They hit someone and fractured their skull for Pete's sake! And then they threw flash grenades at the people who tried to help! These people are starting riots for a reason.
 
this police officer should be charged. Give him a badge and they think they can abuse and torture peaceful protestors, shame, shame, shame
 
Let this shameless act be recorded for history!!
 
Anyone who has watched instant replay knows that something which appears definitive from one angle looks very different from another. I agree that this looks like police state brutality. That's what makes it an impressive photograph. I question, however, why Google decided to distribute it internationally, along with the author's characterization of "point-blank" and the officer's contact information. They do not accept normal journalistic responsibility to confirm facts or gather background. With a few keystrokes they have people calling for arrest, conviction and draconian punishment. I'm not sure this is responsible behavior, given the power they hold.
 
he shud be fired & charged!! Totally acceptable!!
 
I like how he holds the can in the air before he sprays everyone just like how a professional wrestler holds a folding chair in the air to rile a crowd before he hits someone with it.
 
While I agree that pepper spray exists for a reason and is infinitely preferable than the use of a firearm, the folks justifying the use of this pepper spray seem to be completely oblivious to the only form of evidence we have available to us regarding this incident: this photo.

Of all the myriad and appropriate uses of pepper spray situations like this can garner, I can't possibly imagine any of them being represented by the extreme lack of action by the people being sprayed in the photo or by the insane casual approach the officer in question displays while spraying people.
 
I don't know whats going on in this photo accept these people are being pepper sprayed. What is the context here? I would like to know that before making a judgement.
 
My question is this: was this pepper spray, which can be bought of the counter and is very uncomfortable but does wear off after a short period of time or police grade mace which is 10 times more powerful than typical pepper spray and much more debilitating? Either way I believe this to be a significant over-reaction but much worse if it is police grade mace.
 
thats the democracy of the authority................not the people..............
 
This is why we have a dislike for the police
 
"This is the use of chemical agent on non violent offenders. This is a military response to a situation that is fundamentally non violent in which Americans were expressing their views and their values. Using tear gas on this group in this situation is just plain wrong." - Norm Stamper, the former police chief of Seattle.

Norm Stamper who recently wrote an article for The Nation magazine titled "Paramilitary Policing from Seattle to Occupy Wall Street." "Trust me, the police do not want to be put in this position. And cities really need to ask themselves, is there another way to handle this kind of conflict?" Wexler says. Stamper notes, "There are many compassionate, decent, competent police officers who do a terrific job day in and day out. There are others who are, quote, 'bad apples.' What both of them have in common is that they 'occupy,' as it were, a system, a structure that itself is rotten. And I am talking about the paramilitary bureaucracy."
 
It is also a violation of Law, & of the Procedures of the Police dept.. If he is not truly disciplined and/or arrested; The Director of Security, the Chief of Police and the Chancellor of the University should be forced to resign. Further, the County Attorney should bring Criminal Charges or be force to resign...,
 
I have worked with law enforcement a lot over the years they do put up with a lot of crap but with the Occupy movement I keep hearing fools trying to get them off when they do over step the bounds and stomp on human rights by saying "what they have to deal with on a daily basis" thing is, that is their job, and it is NOT to walk all over human rights. If they cannot do their jobs with out being abusive in tough situations then they need to go work at mcdonalds. I know many officers who would never do such a thing.
Kosso
 
People who "see nothing wrong" with this picture have some issues which are not welcome in the world I live in.
 
+Thomas Milligan You haven't experienced it have you? I am far from being a "hippy" I wouldn't be out here in Afghanistan if I was. I know right from wrong and I know most officers are good, but we really must slam down on those who abuse their power and walk on human rights.
 
We have been desensitised. Not long ago this outrage would have been instantly recognised as subhuman behaviour, now some debate the reasoning for deployment as if that was any consequence. Psychopaths amongst us try to defend the indefensible and we debate them instead of calling for help to have them taken to a padded cell. Thousands of incidents like this took place across the world today and they'll continue until we demand that it stops. We are all as guilty as every one of those Police Officers.
 
+Doug S. That being said, there's still no reason to tolerate this kind of stuff if its at a peaceful protest.
 
So disgusted by this that it's difficult to express the proper words. Never thought I would see in this day and age real time reminders of times I've come to believe we've progressed from :/
 
what a bitch! when you dont respect peaceful protestors then you shouldnt be treated with respect.
 
But if they react violently then the first amendment no longer applies("...right to peacably assemble,..."), and the police can take them all away as accomplices.
 
Wonderful poise and technique. Though I find the arm a bit wooden in posture I will still give this an 8 out 10 for fascism.
 
+Heather Vandagriff Curious if you've had Use of Force training? I have, and this is a violation of Use of Force. There is a progression of force that you use before you get to non-lethal force. You start with something we call "verbal judo", then progressing upwards until lethal force is needed. You can't just pepper spray someone because they don't listen to you. That's not how it works.

This video doesn't show the before, but judging from the demeanor of the officers, it looks like they were using this as a dispersal tool, not an apprehension tool, which pepper spray is. This tool should be used when "hands" cannot get the job done. These kids were not advancing on officers, and they were not a threat to them (as demonstrated by the officers relaxed stance).

Pepper spray and tasers are used to subdue a suspect when compliance is necessary for an arrest. Use of these tools means that the incident has taken a violent turn, and the suspect is resisting PHYSICALLY, and hands cannot restrain the suspect. These students were sitting, and non-violent, therefore pepper spray was an abuse of force for this situation.

Looks to me like they were in the park and there was no hurry to move this crowd. They could have given it some time. If you looked at the OccupySF B of A incident earlier this week, you'll see how these officers should have handled them.

It used to be if you got sprayed, you'd get an ambulance and you were getting arrested. Now, no medical treatment is offered, and more times than not nobody goes to jail.

They are using a sledge hammer to turn a screw. It's the wrong tool.

Acts of civil disobedience should be handled differently than a regular situation. Yes it's breaking the law, but it has a purpose, and is in fact legal under the documents this country was founded on.

Disclaimer: I am NOT a police officer - I am a civilian volunteer who has had the opportunity to go thru SOME of the police training.
 
+Phil Bowyer Only five or six times as an officer and as a corrections officer. Maybe I don't understand a thing about it.

Theoretically and hypothetically - what, exactly, would you all expect to happen when you don't obey the law? Do you want cops who just ignore violations? Seriously?
 
Good thing about threads like these is that it's easy to pick the morons you don't want in your stream.
 
First of all, the "law" the students were breaking that ended up getting the cops called was failure to comply with the chancellors order to disperse (and thus it became trespass). The cops were called, and when the students peacefully sat there and "failed to comply with the orders of a law officer," they were subjected to riot level pepper spray and arrest tactics. Being in the military, having been a security officer for the Dept of the Army, and lately having been in the wrong place at the wrong time I've been subjected to varying levels of pepper spray, the riot spray they use is one of the most potent kinds. It makes your common store bought self defense spray look (and feel) like cinnamon candy.

All pepper sprays contain Oleoresin Capsicum (basically extracted purified capsaicin) of various concentrations. There is a measurement called the Scofield Heat Unit (SHU). The SHU scale is calculated based on the capsaicin content of a pepper, and though it is a relative scale, it's one of the best available at this time. A jalapeno rates between a 5,000 and an 8,000 on this scale, the habanero rates between a 100,000 and a 150,000, and what is commonly called "the hottest chili pepper in the world" (it is known to cause severe chemical burns to the mouth and throat and has actually been the cause of several deaths over the years), the Trinidad Scorpion Butch T pepper rates a 1,463,700 on SHU scale. Standard Police pepper spray rates between a 5 to 5.3 MILLION SHU on the scale and riot control pepper spray rates between an 8.6 and 9.1 MILLION SHU. Also, capsaicin is further activated by water and, as it is an oil that absorbs into the skin, the effects can linger for days. While I respect the police, and appreciate the difficulty of the job they have, there were much more effective and non-violent ways to handle this than to spray a chemical that is capable of severe bodily harm indiscriminately into the faces of non-violent people.

The bystanders should be applauded for the non-violent methods they used to remove what had become a threat (a.k.a. the Police) from their campus, and the chancellor SHOULD be forced to answer for his actions and orders. The police officer who started spraying indiscriminately should be forced to answer for his actions, as to me (having actually been in his position before) his actions were unwarranted, and seemed to be an unnecessary escalation of force. For lack of a better way to put it, he was "spoiling for a fight," and when the students failed to give him one he tried forcing one on them.

Take a look at the very beginning of the video, he is parading himself, holding up the pepper spray all but saying "Looky what I have! I'm gonna use it! Ha ha!" Rule one about pepper spray, you give one warning, then you use it. You do not give the potential target(s) a chance to prepare and you definitely don't give any bystanders a chance to interfere. You warn once, then spray. Rule two is you only use enough to affect your target(s). He sprayed indiscriminately affecting bystanders who were not in violation of the law, and continued spraying long after coating the heads and shoulders of his intended targets.

While the video didn't show any fighting, rioting, or police beating on people with batons and Asp's, the officers actions were nothing short of assault on a peacefully gathered group, and an abuse of power.
 
+Kyle Etzel That's why it's called civil disobedience and should be followed up with proportional response. This is not proportional response.
 
+Jim Munro You said it. My block list has doubled with this one thread. Mainly through adding people who have only a very recent history here and fewer than 10 people in their circles. Astroturfing, I'm thinking.
 
the average tuition at uc davis is 14k-43k so they can sit anyplace they want
 
Lieutenant, you're going to need a bigger can!
 
Peaceful violation of the law and criminal trespassing is still VIOLATION OF THE LAW and TRESPASSING. These police officers offered several warnings to these students to disperse and comply with the LAW. When the refused, they stopped being peaceful protesters and became criminals. The police have NO choice at this point but to use a non-permanent, non-invasive method to subdue the protesters, i.e. pepper spray. Once the criminals are chemically subdued they are then arrested, like the criminals they are.

The right of the people to gather for protest does not entitle them to criminal trespassing or any sort of violation of personal property. It does not make them immune from the law. This group may look peaceful, because the photos and video leave out the part where they stubbornly continue to BREAK THE LAW. One can peacefully walk into a convenience store and steal whatever they want... its still criminal. One can peacefully steal millions from clients like Bernie Madoff did... its still criminal. Criminal actions must be dealt with or the rule of law is lost. If the police had walked in and carried them off fighting, they would have been charged with beating them mercilessly. Pepper spray SUBDUES, it allows the police to work outside of danger with CRIMINALS who might otherwise become violent. They did the right thing here, and I back them completely.

What SHOULD be criminal is posting the phone number and email of the officer in an attempt to incite others to harass him. Shame on you Chris Clarke. You reveal yourself as a horrible human being to do such a thing. Congrats on that.
 
this is a good thing, hippies getting theirs
you insensitive intolerant to critic bastard :)
 
+Joshua Sawlaw MD: That phone number and email address are publicly available and work-related. The fact that you think my action sharing public contact info for this officer is heinous, but that his actions were completely okay, speaks volumes about the kind of person you are.
 
Just because it's Peacefully DOESN'T Make it lawful.
Pepper spray and tear gas has been used in unlawful protest since it was invented.
Peacefully breaking the law is still breaking the Law. It was handled correctly
 
This photo reminded me of Kent State, Ohio.
 
What happened to freedom of speech? What happened to the right to peacefully assemble? I now what happend the patriot act and the many other laws established by the last three preside tan have sprigged away our constitutional rights little by little.