zlacker

>>epista+(OP)
I feel like some upfront setting of expectations would really, really be helpful here. If you're planning to arrest people after curfew, explain that in clear terms: "Our curfew is at 8pm, so we will start asking groups to disperse at 7:30. At 8pm, no large assemblies will be permitted, and police will begin arresting people in large groups at that time. We understand some people will engage in civil disobedience, and if they are cooperative with the police, they will be arrested peacefully. If any protesters start taking action that endangers police (e.g. throwing bricks or running at police unexpectedly), they will be met with force and arrested. Because it can be difficult for police to determine the perpetrator of violence, additional crowd control tactics such as tear gas may be used, so we strongly encourage you to self-police and prevent any violence towards police. After 8pm there will be a 30 minute grace period for those who are not gathered in groups but are in the process of heading home. At 8:30pm, anyone who remains on the street will be detained."

I think it would really help both in terms of outcomes as well as the perception of police if they gave this kind of clear description of what's going to happen. As it stands now, the curfews aren't enforced with any kind of regularity, so they just cause confusion.

>>awille+t8
I agree, in general, that clear expectations lead to better outcomes. But what you've described is dystopian:

- curfew: a curfew is an extreme tactic that deprives many people of their civil liberties without due process. There are legitimate reasons for curfews to exist at times, but dispersing peaceful protest is not one of them.

- use of tear gas: this is (quite literally) prohibited under the Geneva protocol even in times of war.

- "difficult for police to determine": this suggests that because the job is difficult, the police have leeway to indiscriminately punish whomever is nearby.

Again - I understand why you'd make the argument you made, but the fatal flaw is that it is founded on an utterly dystopian premise. The response from police across the country is unjustified, and a rank violation of everything that Americans supposedly hold dear.

>>drewbu+Tl1
Sure, I don't disagree with any of this - especially with the almost entirely peaceful protests the last couple of days, curfews are entirely inappropriate. My point is only to say that if they're going to use them, communicating expectations would lead to better outcomes.

But yeah, 100% same page, especially with regard to tear gas.