zlacker

[parent] [thread] 22 comments
1. TimSch+(OP)[view] [source] 2020-06-12 04:13:36
I'm up north about the same distance. Only bad days have been this Sun/Mon with all the gas/flash-bangs and the sheriff's plane flying loops over the city until the wee hours of the morning.

Since the police cleared out, everything has been much MUCH nicer around here.

replies(1): >>ashton+83
2. ashton+83[view] [source] 2020-06-12 04:50:23
>>TimSch+(OP)
As someone who has never been to Seattle, I am shocked by how bad your police department appears to be. Even the LAPD behaved ... well, less bad from what I’d heard.

Flash bangs? Those are for assaulting buildings, not crowd control.

replies(3): >>sterli+Sm >>mcv+E61 >>loeg+PL1
◧◩
3. sterli+Sm[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 08:58:21
>>ashton+83
I mean, it's par for the course across America during protests. It's important to remember "less than lethal" doesn't mean safe - I saw a photo of a dude who's eye was.. exploded by a tear gas canister. Forget where that was but it was not Seattle.

If anything's weird about the Seattle PD, it could be they remember the 1999 WTO protests and want to crush them this time. But overall they all seem to be around the same -- very low -- standard

replies(2): >>crafti+XX >>asdff+KE1
◧◩◪
4. crafti+XX[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 14:40:55
>>sterli+Sm
The other issue I've noticed with the less-than-lethal ordnance use is that in order to be non-lethal, they need to be used according to manufacturer guidelines. I've used rubber coated bullets, bean-bag guns, and flashbangs. The police are not using them according to non-lethal guidelines. Example:

Rubber coated bullets have explicit instructions to be aimed at shin height or below. This is because everything below the knees doesn't have large masses of non-muscular soft tissue, reducing the chances of permanent injury. These rounds are designed to hit the ground first, lose some velocity, and skip into crowds, causing pain but not debilitating injuries. I haven't seen a SINGLE video of police using them like this. It's absolutely insane.

replies(1): >>JoeAlt+hY
◧◩◪◨
5. JoeAlt+hY[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 14:42:57
>>crafti+XX
I imagine its because all their other training, all their range practice, is to shoot at center of mass three times in a burst. Hard to change in the heat of the riot.
replies(3): >>ashton+9Z >>camero+0h1 >>crafti+Rl1
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. ashton+9Z[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 14:48:00
>>JoeAlt+hY
That might explain misapplication during a riot, but it does not explain cases where police appear to deliberately target peaceful protestors or single out individuals like the press. In those scenarios they are either incompetent, deliberately aiming to wound, or too angry to think clearly. None of those are a good explanation.
◧◩
7. mcv+E61[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 15:28:09
>>ashton+83
I think over the past few decades, there's been a movement towards increasingly aggressive use of some police weapons. Using tear gas to disperse a crowd is also needlessly aggressive. When I was a kid, Dutch police used water for that. And only when it was an actual riot. I've seen videos of police tasering someone who wasn't the least bit violent, but simply uncooperative. That's not what tasers are for. But if someone is violent, they get shot immediately, rather than tasered.

Police have all these weapons, and they want to use them, instead of first trying more constructive, peaceful methods.

replies(4): >>ashton+wc1 >>kf+bi1 >>AuryGl+XB1 >>asdff+UD1
◧◩◪
8. ashton+wc1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 16:05:20
>>mcv+E61
Tasers a great example of the problem of "less lethal" tools.

The theory is that tasers are a (edit: partial) replacement for firearms for cops. The reality is that approximately 0% of cops are willing to draw a taser if they suspect that someone else has a firearm; they go for their firearm too.

Instead tasers have replaced other methods of de-escalation and containment, which is very bad if you're not a cop. Combine this with cops being called out for people experiencing mental health crises, and this is a recipe for disaster.

◧◩◪◨⬒
9. camero+0h1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 16:29:43
>>JoeAlt+hY
I would say this is spot on from what I've heard. When emotions are this high ( look at the cops faces when they are exposed ) there's nothing but muscle memory.

I took a class on active shooter scenarios where they focused on that "be careful how you train" aspect with the illustration that a police officer ( no idea where ) once responded to a call where an armed man pointed a pistol right at the cop close range. The cop quickly disarmed the man, but then returned the firearm to the man, whereupon the man shot him dead.

In drilling the technique he used to disarm the man, police would practice in pairs, taking turns disarming each other from the draw. This meant that two officers would stand facing each other, pistols in holsters. One officer would draw, the other would disarm, hold the weapon pointed at the first officer for a beat, then return it to the first officer in order to draw his or her own weapon.

Then when you start to hear about corrections departments sending officers for crowd control... the animal instincts and things these guys are trained for is so volatile.

replies(2): >>ashton+4j1 >>crafti+ln1
◧◩◪
10. kf+bi1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 16:35:16
>>mcv+E61
A lot of less lethal crowd control is about imagery and perception. Water can’t be used on crowds in America because it was used against crowds in the civil rights era so comes with a historic connotation of racism even though in reality it’s safer and more reasonable than CS gas.
replies(1): >>ashton+Hi1
◧◩◪◨
11. ashton+Hi1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 16:38:21
>>kf+bi1
That’s a great point. I’m sure CS gas will soon become associated with this round of police violence and soon have similar issues.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
12. ashton+4j1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 16:41:07
>>camero+0h1
I think it’s worth asking why the cops are so angry at these protestors. We didn’t see this level of police anger and misconduct during the protests over the lock down, but during these protests the cops appear to be furious in a way I have never seen before.
replies(1): >>leetcr+bU1
◧◩◪◨⬒
13. crafti+Rl1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 16:54:34
>>JoeAlt+hY
That's fair, and understandable. But at the same time, I don't think it absolves them of misconduct. "I'm used to shooting at the body and the head, so I shot the protesters in the body and the head because I panicked" doesn't really hold up to any kind of scrutiny. I know in the military, that kind of excuse would be noted in the court martial paperwork, but not have any impact on judgement or sentencing.

If they choose to use these weapons and tactics, they are responsible for how they use them. In a situation where the officers are in danger of physical harm, they are fully within their rights to go against usage policies to protect themselves. But in the vast majority I've seen, these officers have been shooting at unarmed protesters, not rioting mobs. It's simply illegal, a violation of the Constitution, and a chargeable offense.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
14. crafti+ln1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 17:02:07
>>camero+0h1
> I would say this is spot on from what I've heard. When emotions are this high ( look at the cops faces when they are exposed ) there's nothing but muscle memory.

I think that's an understandable point of view but, frankly, one of the key points of training (military experience only, but I know police do similar) is to force people to learn how to think and act correctly in high stress situations. If you're in direct engagement with someone trying to hurt you, you do let the training take over. But if you're just scared, or nervous, or some kind of emotional, the point of high stress training is to teach how to remain calm, controlled, and analyze the situation. Civilians may not get that, having not gone through it, but that really is the point.

> I took a class on active shooter scenarios where they focused on that "be careful how you train" aspect with the illustration that a police officer ( no idea where ) once responded to a call where an armed man pointed a pistol right at the cop close range. The cop quickly disarmed the man, but then returned the firearm to the man, whereupon the man shot him dead.

To me, this screams of a notional anecdote to reinforce the idea to train properly, not of an actual occurrence.

◧◩◪
15. AuryGl+XB1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 18:26:25
>>mcv+E61
High pressure water can cause injuries, especially eye injuries. I believe tear gas is relatively benign other than possibly for asthmatics. Fully agree with you on the tasers though. They should be just one step below using a gun, not “I’m lazy and don’t want to deal with this person.”
replies(2): >>ashton+pH1 >>loeg+TM1
◧◩◪
16. asdff+UD1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 18:37:47
>>mcv+E61
Police used tear gas on my college campus after we were celebrating winning the national football championship. If the army did that, it would be a war crime.
replies(1): >>madeng+Wq3
◧◩◪
17. asdff+KE1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 18:43:16
>>sterli+Sm
I don't know why we have these less than lethal rounds if they are proven time again to be so damaging. Paintball guns leave welts and bruises just fine and don't maim you in the process. Take 30 paintballs to the upper body and you will be begging for mercy.

The complaint from police, especially with tasers too, boils down to that this needs to be strong enough to stop someone on meth with hulk strength. Police already have much more effective tools for this: Horse cop and lasso.

◧◩◪◨
18. ashton+pH1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 19:01:45
>>AuryGl+XB1
Police usage of CS gas killed a woman this week, she was young (22) with no history of asthma.

Tear gas is not benign, it is nasty stuff that has already killed people. Some preliminary research points to it potentially damaging the lungs of people who are exposed to it for a long time, possibly permanently.

◧◩
19. loeg+PL1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 19:30:21
>>ashton+83
LAPD was handling the protests extremely badly to begin with as well. They may have calmed down sooner than SPD did. As far as major west-coast city police departments, both LAPD and SPD have handle things somewhat better than the Portland Police Bureau (PPB).
◧◩◪◨
20. loeg+TM1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 19:35:10
>>AuryGl+XB1
I don't think OP said "high-pressure."

On tear gas, CDC has https://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/riotcontrol/factsheet.asp :

  People exposed to riot control agents may experience some or all of the following symptoms
  immediately after exposure:
  
  * Eyes: excessive tearing, burning, blurred vision, redness
  * Nose: runny nose, burning, swelling
  * Mouth: burning, irritation, difficulty swallowing, drooling
  * Lungs: chest tightness, coughing, choking sensation, noisy breathing (wheezing),
    shortness of breath
  * Skin: burns, rash
  * Other: nausea and vomiting
  
  Long-lasting exposure or exposure to a large dose of riot control agent, especially
  in a closed setting, may cause severe effects such as the following:
  
  * Blindness
  * Glaucoma (a serious eye condition that can lead to blindness)
  * Immediate death due to severe chemical burns to the throat and lungs
  * Respiratory failure possibly resulting in death
Coughing and shortness of breath are especially nasty during the COVID pandemic. And none of blindness, glaucoma, immediate death, or respiratory failure sound especially fun.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
21. leetcr+bU1[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 20:07:11
>>ashton+4j1
is this a rhetorical question? the protestors are calling for anything from decreasing police department funding to abolishing it altogether. I'm sure there's a diversity of viewpoints within the movement, but to a cop it looks like a big crowd of people trying to eliminate their job. this certainly doesn't excuse their actions, but it's not hard to see why this would be upsetting.
replies(1): >>ashton+M42
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
22. ashton+M42[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-12 21:08:07
>>leetcr+bU1
My gut instinct is that the “abolish the police” crowd, however you define it, got much louder after the violent reprisals. My belief is that a lot of cops attacked when the protests were more about anger over police brutality in general and George Floyd’s murder in particular, which hints to an even darker motivation than keeping their jobs.

And if they thought brutal reprisals were a good plan to keep their jobs ... oh boy. They did not plan that out well. The level of sudden radicalization against the police has been breath taking.

◧◩◪◨
23. madeng+Wq3[view] [source] [discussion] 2020-06-13 13:15:48
>>asdff+UD1
I’m sure there is more to the story than “celebrating”.
[go to top]