Quote:
Originally Posted by MTI
Yes, I do. If the protestors were "resisting arrest" it creates a risk of harm to the officers, and reasonable force is justified to prevent injury. Where was the "risk of injury" to the LEO at the campus scene? Further, where are the circumstances that would warrant any use of force, certainly non-lethal, by the LEO? Was property at risk or physical harm to others imminent?
An apparently poorly trained officer made a bad decision at the scene of a peaceful demonstration, that's what I see. It's not much different that the actions of Inspector Anthony Bologna (yes, I think that's his real name) who pepper sprayed a group of women at OWS in NYC, when they were confined to a police holding area.
Aklim, still no position on whether the students were being placed under arrest and resisting? No comment about the police objective?
|
What was the better path for removing them? We've covered this and you ignored the most important question. How do you know there was not a risk of injury to the LEO? Circumstances are simple- they are breaking the law and were asked to move so they would not be breaking the law. They refused. The best path we have seen - non lethal force which causes temporary discomfort.
The complainers need to quit crying about temporary discomfort of law breakers.