zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. anigbr+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-06-02 18:47:33
You wrote a crowd of evil persons [rioting] and threatening to kill perfectly innocent children.) so you cannot say you are not playing the 'think of the children' card. It really seems like you are just trying to take over control of the conversation and make it run in the direction of normalizing the use of force.

So unlike many (most?) HNers I have actual personal experience with it.

Why are you assuming HNers are not politically active? I've been tear gassed 6 times since last Friday and this is not my first rodeo. I have a bunch of use gas grenades sitting on my desk whose manufacturers I'm tracing right now.

Your military training experience is good as far as it goes, and I have heard similar stores from many police officers, but it seems to me you are overlooking many factors. You were selected for physical fitness and toughness before being admitted to military training and you knew that however unpleasant the experience that it was a controlled setting supervised by experienced people with full medical facilities and personnel available if anything went wrong.

Imagine yourself part of a small crowd of people of mixed experience, age, mobility, and physical health. Some are prepared with masks or respirators, eye protection, and full-body clothing, others are in casual wear like shorts and t-shirts. You and they are standing on the sidewalk around an intersection, occasionally someone shouts an opinion or a few people chant something but mostly people are quiet. Halfway down each block is a line of police in riot gear with gas masks. At an order from their sergeant a grenadier on one street fires two or three small CS gas grenades toward where the street meets the intersection. People run or walk briskly away from that line of police and around the corner. Most are OK although a few are not handling it well and need help breathing or rinsing their eyes. Next the police farther up that street fire a couple of grenades at the street, causing the crowd to change direction. Some run across the street, if they can. The police on the 3rd and 4th streets repeat the process and now about half the crowd is off the sidewalk and in the intersection. Police throw a larger combination CS gas grenade into the middle of the intersection which explodes with a 175 dB bang, a bright flash of light, and a much larger and thicker cloud of CS gas. While everyone is variously indisposed, the lines of police move from down each block right up to the intersection, penning the crowd in from all sides. Than a recorded message is played declaring an illegal assembly because so many people have departed the sidewalk.

The stated cause for this action was that some minutes earlier, when 2 streets were still open down to the next intersection, an unknown person drove up to and through the intersection, dinged another car, and down the street at a dangerous speed before making a sharp turn and driving away. It's unclear to me why this was considered the fault of the people standing on the sidewalk. This happened about 36 hours ago in the Bay Area. Here are two short videos captured early in the process.

https://twitter.com/LCRWnews/status/1266987708854923265

https://twitter.com/LCRWnews/status/1266988367905910784

You can always make up a scenario where a given approach or tool is the most economical and appropriate. It's a good diversion from the unpleasant facts of widespread inappropriate deployment that are happening now.

replies(1): >>eitlan+b8
2. eitlan+b8[view] [source] 2020-06-02 19:25:51
>>anigbr+(OP)
> You wrote a crowd of evil persons [rioting] and threatening to kill perfectly innocent children.) so you cannot say you are not playing the 'think of the children' card.

It is easy to attack me when you cut away half my words an all the context.

Look at what I am actually writing, and what it is a reply to:

>>> oicu812 3 hours ago | parent | flag | favorite | on: The business of tear gas

>>> The article states, "It also lives in a legal gray zone, due to international treaties that allow it to be used in domestic law enforcement but not in war."

>> geogra4 3 hours ago [–]

>> Right - that seems horribly wrong. It shouldn't be allowed for law enforcement either. reply

> -4 points by eitland 3 hours ago [–]

> Do you have a suggestion for a better way to achieve the same results?

> (Of course we can discuss if most of the uses of tear gas are wrong, but lets for a moment think that we have a moment were we need to chase away a crowd of evil persons riotong and threatening to kill perfectly innocent children.)

Can you see it now?

I'm trying to ask an honest question, if someone has a better solution instead of using tear gas.

To clearify that I don't want to support the actual use of tear gas in this situation I'm creating a hypothetical situation where (in the hypothetical situation) an angry mob of evil people are attacking innocent children.

At no point am I suggesting that you are an evil mob. At no point am I playing the "think of the children card" but it seems someone managed to post one comment that derailed the question "what should we use instead of teargas" into this mess.

>> So unlike many (most?) HNers I have actual personal experience with it.

> Why are you assuming HNers are not politically active? I've been tear gassed 6 times since last Friday and this is not my first rodeo. I have a bunch of use gas grenades sitting on my desk whose manufacturers I'm tracing right now.

Have my respect. I do really respect people who care enough to go out and face that stuff and I know you are probably angry, but don't be angry with me for something I didn't write!

Also - and this just feels stupid now - but my actual words still stands and it is not just based on a technicality:

Most HNers -unlike you- know nothing about CS except what they see on the news.

replies(1): >>anigbr+ol
◧◩
3. anigbr+ol[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-02 20:31:10
>>eitlan+b8
I'm not attacking you, I'm citing what you wrote. Nor did I accuse you of suggesting I was part of an evil mob. I think you're reacting to feeling dogpiled on and have got invested in defending a piece of rhetorical ground that is not worth holding. It happens.

I also think you might be underestimating the breadth of experience on HN, even if many people choose not to go into detail about their priors.

[go to top]