Brave and corageous cops open fire on moms and children

[longitude]

Media blackout: California cops open fire on women, children, babies and release dog


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MST4RhWdlMQ


Only in the US and A.

[peanutz]

LOL I love the title.

Watching video now.

[masterhapposai]

Media blackout: California cops open fire on women, children, babies and release dog


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MST4RhWdlMQ


Only in the US and A.

hopefully no lock on this thread. this has to be spread around the internet because of the blackout.

if there's a riot over this, you can't blame them

[Rainne]

Those are women?

[trixstar]

whats a media blackout?

[charlotte1983]

wow ... that's just sad

[jimmy-j]

what a disgusting abuse of power shooting in on kids

[menaknow]

And the cops wonder why people don't trust them...

That is really messed up.

EDIT:

But I have to agree with some of the posts however. This was individuals protesting after a shooting. They should NOT have brought their kids to the protest area. No matter how "non violent" a protest can aim to be, it just takes 1 idiot to throw rocks and have officers retaliate.

Again I am not saying the officers response was justified, especially the dog attacking someone. But if the protestors were throwing rocks and other hard objects, what did they expect the cops to do? Put a target on there head with the words aim here?

Of course they are going to try to break the situation up before it gets more out of hand.

[iEyeCaptain]

OP: you missed the bit about the rioting over a cop shooting an unarmed man who died.

The guns and cops were in response to protesters throwing rocks and other hard objects at non-riot-police cops (i.e. no body protection) after their station was overrun by protesters.

How would you respond to someone throwing rocks at you? Politely ask them to stop? Video does not show the rock throwing. Save your outrage for something else. -_-

Those were rubber bullets.

[Shaner]

When a riot breaks out, everyone in attendance is going to get caught up in the use of force that will follow, this unfortunately includes children. That's why parents need to get children the hell away from situations like this. What kind of parent "confronts" police with their children present? Even if the parents of those kids didn't participate in the riot, simply being at a riot puts you at risk because the police will respond with force and that force will be directed at everybody that is present.

[gdog799]

firstly those arent real bullets, but fake rubber ones.

secondly, they attacked the police first.

[Ottomaddox]

My police dog loves the taste of hippies. They don't find it that groovy, though.

[longitude]

When a riot breaks out, everyone in attendance is going to get caught up in the use of force that will follow, this unfortunately includes children. That's why parents need to get children the hell away from situations like this. What kind of parent "confronts" police with their children present? Even if the parents of those kids didn't participate in the riot, simply being at a riot puts you at risk because the police will respond with force and that force will be directed at everybody that is present.

I agree with you Shaner.

But I believe cops acted recklessly in this case.

[ItechJester]

OP: you missed the bit about the rioting over a cop shooting an unarmed man who died.

The guns and cops were in response to protesters throwing rocks and other hard objects at non-riot-police cops (i.e. no body protection) after their station was overrun by protesters.

How would you respond to someone throwing rocks at you? Politely ask them to stop? Video does not show the rock throwing. Save your outrage for something else. -_-

Those were rubber bullets.

so it's ok to shoot rubber bullets at kids? it's ok to unleash an animal trained to attack in the vicinity of children?

a couple protesters throwing rocks does not permit the police force to act and retaliate in a dangerous and reckless manner. they are highly trained, well equipped individuals that are expected to react in a manner which serves and protects the public.

they reacted in a reckless manner. peaceful protesting is protected under the charter.

[whampoa]

so it's ok to shoot rubber bullets at kids? it's ok to unleash an animal trained to attack in the vicinity of children?

a couple protesters throwing rocks does not permit the police force to act and retaliate in a dangerous and reckless manner. they are highly trained, well equipped individuals that are expected to react in a manner which serves and protects the public.

they reacted in a reckless manner. peaceful protesting is protected under the charter.

And what Charter is that?

[ishfish]

What kind of parent "confronts" police with their children present?

One who thinks they can use the child as a shield.

[joeyjoejoe]

I'm glad I'm back from LA. This kind of nonsense could spark riots all over SoCal.

[Xpwmata]

Media blackout: California cops open fire on women, children, babies and release dog
Only in the US and A.

Are you sure about that?

[ItechJester]

And what Charter is that?

look up freedom of speech. if you would like me to spell it out for you, you can send me tuition money via paypal first. pm for my paypal.


not all people purposely bring children to these events. it's psychology 101, when a crowd gathers, others in the area naturally gravitate to see what is going on (ie rubbernecking on the highway). not everyone in the crowd knew what was going on, and they likely wanted to see what was happening. any cop would know this. you don't attack a crowd because of a few bad apples.

[Ottomaddox]

look up freedom of speech. if you would like me to spell it out for you, you can send me tuition money via paypal first. pm for my paypal.


not all people purposely bring children to these events. it's psychology 101, when a crowd gathers, others in the area naturally gravitate to see what is going on (ie rubbernecking on the highway). not everyone in the crowd knew what was going on, and they likely wanted to see what was happening. any cop would know this. you don't attack a crowd because of a few bad apples.

Oh please, really?

[steve-0101]

Kinda hard to take anything Perd Hapley says seriously.

[webdoctors]

moms' with children' are extremely dangerous. Visit a mall during X-Mas season to see what I mean.

[willdacanucker]

Only in the US and A.

I guess you were not living in Toronto when that G-20 fiasco was about.

[appleb]

I found it funny how the cops were offering to buy video footage from anyone who recorded this.

[mrperfect]

I would probably get attacked for this but its just my opinion but I have seen it several times that some kids are very spoiled and behave in a very rude way and this type of behavior is further encouraged by their parents. To be honest I have no idea what the parents were doing there with the kids, what were they expecting when throwing rocks at the police? Some young kids are absolutely reckless and do things that are way out of the line because they know nothing will happen to them.
If the crowd was indeed creating ruckus and throwing rocks at the police, then responding back with bean bullets was an appropriate call in my opinion...

[Mr.Sea]

That dog broke off its leash. The officer that chased it, looked very panicked to get control of the dog.

[neutral]

As savage and thuggish as this attack was, it illustrates an even more important point. The police are there not to serve the people, but to serve the interests of elites. If your voice isn't in lock step with theirs, this, and worse await you. They are trained to be mindless drones, losing any sense of right and wrong.

[steve-0101]

That dog broke off its leash. The officer that chased it, looked very panicked to get control of the dog.

I was thinking the same thing.

[express.items]

I would probably get attacked for this but its just my opinion but I have seen it several times that some kids are very spoiled and behave in a very rude way and this type of behavior is further encouraged by their parents. To be honest I have no idea what the parents were doing there with the kids, what were they expecting when throwing rocks at the police? Some young kids are absolutely reckless and do things that are way out of the line because they know nothing will happen to them.
If the crowd was indeed creating ruckus and throwing rocks at the police, then responding back with bean bullets was an appropriate call in my opinion...

+1

Not sure if the first (with real live bullets?) shooting which hospitalized the guy was reckless or not... he was running away, etc. But regardless, the residents started this riot/protest, gathering and harassing the police. I think what they did was appropriate, the dog got carried away (it's fault), but the officer in charge went right after it to pull it away. If he "unleashed" it freely on the crowd, why would he be pulling the dog away?

[ishfish]

If the police had not taken some action it is reasonable to assume the protesting crowd would grow,...the group mentality of invincibility would become stronger...

Perhaps what the police did was engage in prevention.

[willdacanucker]

That dog broke off its leash. The officer that chased it, looked very panicked to get control of the dog.
Now that you mentioned it, that looks exactly right. I did not see that before.

[Forhad]

I think he was drunk.

[whampoa]

look up freedom of speech. if you would like me to spell it out for you, you can send me tuition money via paypal first. pm for my paypal.


not all people purposely bring children to these events. it's psychology 101, when a crowd gathers, others in the area naturally gravitate to see what is going on (ie rubbernecking on the highway). not everyone in the crowd knew what was going on, and they likely wanted to see what was happening. any cop would know this. you don't attack a crowd because of a few bad apples.

I don't remember Americans give a damn about Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

[iEyeCaptain]

look up freedom of speech. if you would like me to spell it out for you, you can send me tuition money via paypal first. pm for my paypal.


not all people purposely bring children to these events. it's psychology 101, when a crowd gathers, others in the area naturally gravitate to see what is going on (ie rubbernecking on the highway). not everyone in the crowd knew what was going on, and they likely wanted to see what was happening. any cop would know this. you don't attack a crowd because of a few bad apples.

Does freedom of speech include the right to throw rocks at non-riot-gear wearing police?

What actions would you take when someone is throwing rocks at you?

If the protesters were peaceful and the police still did this, I sure as hell would have a problem with it.

"A few bad apples". The police station was overrun with protesters. How would you define that as "a few"?

Stop the internet tough guy act. Police are humans too and the fact that they aren't running away already makes them one step ahead of the average Joe.

[goodguy90]

look up freedom of speech. if you would like me to spell it out for you, you can send me tuition money via paypal first. pm for my paypal.


not all people purposely bring children to these events. it's psychology 101, when a crowd gathers, others in the area naturally gravitate to see what is going on (ie rubbernecking on the highway). not everyone in the crowd knew what was going on, and they likely wanted to see what was happening. any cop would know this. you don't attack a crowd because of a few bad apples.

What you are saying is flawed for 2 reasons:

1. The Canadian charter doesn't apply in the states, although I'm sure they have some sort of an equivalent law.

2. True, otherwise uninvolved people tend to gravitate out of curiosity towards public gatherings, but it's not very reasonable to assume that most would actually enter the crowd, especially if they happen to be in the area with their children. If anything, curious bystanders tend to observe the unraveling of events from a distance, not dive straight in.

[jimmy-j]

Oh please, really?

example toronto g20. people showed up just to show up and see how things would be handled. not everyone downtown was "protesting".

[goodguy90]

It's always interesting to see the manipulation these sorts of stories go through as they get passed from one media outlet to another. By the time most people hear of these incidents, the string of events have been successively mutilated by who knows how many people, and questionable accounts of the story begin to arise. As somebody already pointed out, considering the fact that the officer ran after the dog, it's not hard to realize that chances are, the dog wasn't intentionally unleashed.

[uweschiffke]

I can't believe some of the anti-police sentiment here. I guess many of you don't remember the LA riots of 1992 where these mobs grabbed innocent people out of trucks and threw concrete blocks onto their heads while lying unconscious. I guess the cops did remember and decided to quell the uprising before it got outta hand. They were not out of line IMO .

[dakota2001]

Dumpster fires, and rock throwing are not dangerous elements to have your children around?
I'm not taking sides, but you see a hostile situation, you get your kids away from it as fast as possible.

[virgilaug]

Why is this relevant? All those people should have had their citizenship checked. Freaking illegals causing crime.

[zz000ter]

I can't believe that some of you are actually supporting shooting rubber bullets
into a crowd which includes very small children!

Do you know what a rubber bullet could do to a small child?

[Ghiness]

Kinda hard to take anything Perd Hapley says seriously.

Lol when I saw him I instantly though of Perd Hapley but wasn't aware it was actually him though : o.

[steve-0101]

Lol when I saw him I instantly though of Perd Hapley but wasn't aware it was actually him though : o.

Seems odd that a newscaster would take on a role like that, makes him seem less credible don't you think? As I was watching it I was thinking "is this real or a clip from Parks and Rec? Where's the joke?"

[IamToronto]

look up freedom of speech. if you would like me to spell it out for you, you can send me tuition money via paypal first. pm for my paypal.


not all people purposely bring children to these events. it's psychology 101, when a crowd gathers, others in the area naturally gravitate to see what is going on (ie rubbernecking on the highway). not everyone in the crowd knew what was going on, and they likely wanted to see what was happening. any cop would know this. you don't attack a crowd because of a few bad apples.

Fundamental freedoms

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.

freedom of speech? i guess 2b, but not really..
freedom of protest? does not exist.
dont get it twisted, son..

[starboy869]

What kind of parent "confronts" police with their children present? Even if the parents of those kids didn't participate in the riot, simply being at a riot puts you at risk because the police will respond with force and that force will be directed at everybody that is present.

The same kind of parents that shut the dvp down a summer or two ago about the tamil tigers. The children were right out front btw.

[Dragon120]

The same kind of parents that shut the dvp down a summer or two ago about the tamil tigers. The children were right out front btw.

i remembered that...it was on Mothers Day.

[starboy869]

I can't believe that some of you are actually supporting shooting rubber bullets
into a crowd which includes very small children!

Do you know what a rubber bullet could do to a small child?

Would tear gas be better? How about a firehose? Crowds using children as a weapoon to do what they want and feel they're above the law.

[iEyeCaptain]

I can't believe that some of you are actually supporting shooting rubber bullets
into a crowd which includes very small children!

Do you know what a rubber bullet could do to a small child?

Do you know what a sizable thrown rock can do to an adult human's skull?

[Heero01]

As savage and thuggish as this attack was, it illustrates an even more important point. The police are there not to serve the people, but to serve the interests of elites. If your voice isn't in lock step with theirs, this, and worse await you. They are trained to be mindless drones, losing any sense of right and wrong.

I agree. Police are nothing but uneducated over paid thugs. They are lazy unless you are rich. I can only hope that the police force goes through a strict reforming. We need to ensure idiot power tripping officers and no longer able to abuse their power.

[freeloader1969]

When a riot breaks out, everyone in attendance is going to get caught up in the use of force that will follow, this unfortunately includes children. That's why parents need to get children the hell away from situations like this. What kind of parent "confronts" police with their children present? Even if the parents of those kids didn't participate in the riot, simply being at a riot puts you at risk because the police will respond with force and that force will be directed at everybody that is present.

Is it wrong for a community, that includes children, to confront police? Hell no. The only real problem here was the cops. Maybe it's about time for protesters to respond to the police with equal force then. No more bottles and rocks if you know what I mean.

[iEyeCaptain]

Is it wrong for a community, that includes children, to confront police? Hell no. The only real problem here was the cops. Maybe it's about time for protesters to respond to the police with equal force then. No more bottles and rocks if you know what I mean.

Are you suggesting we shoot and beat the police?


I agree. Police are nothing but uneducated over paid thugs. They are lazy unless you are rich. I can only hope that the police force goes through a strict reforming. We need to ensure idiot power tripping officers and no longer able to abuse their power.

Suggestions on how you plan on going about doing that are welcome.

[freeloader1969]

+1

Not sure if the first (with real live bullets?) shooting which hospitalized the guy was reckless or not... he was running away, etc. But regardless, the residents started this riot/protest, gathering and harassing the police. I think what they did was appropriate, the dog got carried away (it's fault), but the officer in charge went right after it to pull it away. If he "unleashed" it freely on the crowd, why would he be pulling the dog away?

I'm certainly hoping that you aren't aware of the whole story. The man they were chasing was shot in the buttocks and then shot in the head while he was on his knees.

[freeloader1969]

Are you suggesting we shoot and beat the police?



Suggestions on how you plan on going about doing that are welcome.

It's coming to that. They can't be trusted to serve the public anymore. They're a pack of thugs that live by their "code". I don't trust a single police officer anymore.

[Simaahoy]

I can't believe that some of you are actually supporting shooting rubber bullets
into a crowd which includes very small children!

Do you know what a rubber bullet could do to a small child?

Why are there small children there in the first place? Especially where a shooting happened?

[freeloader1969]

why are there small children there in the first place? Especially where a shooting happened?

Ever heard of using children as shields? Because that is way worse and police did there jobs..

nvm.

[express.items]

I'm certainly hoping that you aren't aware of the whole story. The man they were chasing was shot in the buttocks and then shot in the head while he was on his knees.

Regardless of what happened with the man they chased/shot - the neighbourhood decided to protest and harass the police, then it's an issue that the police dispersed the crowd? Or is it the amount of force used, what else would they use - nerf guns?

[Syne]

Does freedom of speech include the right to throw rocks at non-riot-gear wearing police?

What actions would you take when someone is throwing rocks at you?

I'd arrest the person throwing rocks at me.

Cops need to target the bad apples and get them out of the protest group, then leave. If the police would change their mentality from 'us vs. them' to a tactical mentality of removing the rot from the fruit, then we would see different outcomes in these incidents every time.

I certainly hope that everyone appreciates protesting and camera phones as legitimate ways to curtail police brutality and abuse of power.

[starboy869]

However the thing is instead of the police going after one it's now 50.

I'm glad (rolls eyes) to see there's people here has no issues in using their own children as a pawn in breaking the law and who cares what happens to them mentailly. Welcome to Toronto $1.25 pop.

[freeloader1969]

Regardless of what happened with the man they chased/shot - the neighbourhood decided to protest and harass the police, then it's an issue that the police dispersed the crowd? Or is it the amount of force used, what else would they use - nerf guns?

You mean to tell me that you didn't see the use of excessive force there?

[Andro]

US is so obese it's not even funny.......almost everyone in that video needs to go on a diet ASAP.

[tomjose]

Kinda hard to take anything Perd Hapley says seriously.

LOL damn, that IS Perd Hapley!
NEver knew he was a real reporter

[express.items]

You mean to tell me that you didn't see the use of excessive force there?

I don't see the use of excessive force on the crowd, which is the topic at hand. Do you have a better way to disperse the protest? Manually cuffing each protester won't work.

[bullionaire]

First, who take their children and babies to a protest? Stupid parents are stupid. They most likely tried to use their kids as a human shield and as such should all be fined for child neglect. Second, throw the book at the *****s who threw rocks. Cops don't need to take that kind of crap.

That said... fire those fat asses that fired rubber bullets with babies and toddlers around. That was even stupider than bringing kids to the site because cops should be trained to handle such a situation. Also, suspend those that offered to buy videos from the bystanders for attempted destruction of evidence.

In reality, they're all gonna be put on a paid leave of absence and return to work thanks to their union.

Just curious though, why does everyone speak broken English in that neighbourhood?

[Engi-Nir]

oh please...defending public stupidity.....

[masterhapposai]

First, who take their children and babies to a protest? Stupid parents are stupid. They most likely tried to use their kids as a human shield and as such should all be fined for child neglect. Second, throw the book at the *****s who threw rocks. Cops don't need to take that kind of crap.

That said... fire those fat asses that fired rubber bullets with babies and toddlers around. That was even stupider than bringing kids to the site because cops should be trained to handle such a situation. Also, suspend those that offered to buy videos from the bystanders for attempted destruction of evidence.

In reality, they're all gonna be put on a paid leave of absence and return to work thanks to their union.

Just curious though, why does everyone speak broken English in that neighbourhood?


This is the most reasonable post in the thread by far. Its both sides faults.

[Agafaba]

I'd arrest the person throwing rocks at me.

Cops need to target the bad apples and get them out of the protest group, then leave. If the police would change their mentality from 'us vs. them' to a tactical mentality of removing the rot from the fruit, then we would see different outcomes in these incidents every time.

I certainly hope that everyone appreciates protesting and camera phones as legitimate ways to curtail police brutality and abuse of power.

I think the issue is that individual police officers could be attacked from every angle if they run into a crowd to go after one or two individuals.

[goodguy90]

I'd arrest the person throwing rocks at me.

Cops need to target the bad apples and get them out of the protest group, then leave. If the police would change their mentality from 'us vs. them' to a tactical mentality of removing the rot from the fruit, then we would see different outcomes in these incidents every time.

I certainly hope that everyone appreciates protesting and camera phones as legitimate ways to curtail police brutality and abuse of power.

It sounds nice on paper but is far too idyllic. It may be somewhat practical for acute gatherings but something like that would simply not be efficient with large crowds.

[Syne]

I think what really makes this in poor taste was the fact that they were protesting the police officers for excessive violence, and the police officers reacted with the very same thing they're being protested about.

[express.items]

I think what really makes this in poor taste was the fact that they were protesting the police officers for excessive violence, and the police officers reacted with the very same thing they're being protested about.

How would you have resolved the situation? How much force would you use?

[kamilio]

How would you have resolved the situation? How much force would you use?

The whole point of having a professional police force is so we don't have to deal wih mob rule. Officers are trained on how to handle these type of situations and those officers handled it horribly.

I am no expert but if I was leading that group of officers I would retreat and call up for reinforcements and assemble the riot squad . People protest about police brutality and the officers go ahead and brutalize women and children. That's what happens when you have the dumbest kids in high school joining the force. None of my friends who got A's wanted to become and officer - it was always the dumb kids who had the 60 average and spiked pot at lunch that talked about becoming officers.

[Cafe_333]

Is it wrong for a community, that includes children, to confront police? Hell no. The only real problem here was the cops. Maybe it's about time for protesters to respond to the police with equal force then. No more bottles and rocks if you know what I mean.

You mean to tell me that you didn't see the use of excessive force there?There is nothing wrong with a protest as long as it is conducted peacefully. This was clearly a protest that escalated into a hostile riot, forcing the police to disperse the crowd. I doubt anyone in the crowd was an innocent onlooker either. As other posters have said, innocent bystanders with children would watch from the outside. They would not join a screaming crowd especially when there is a stand off with the police in front. The protesters were wrong to bring their children in the first place. If the only debate here was the excessive use of force, I don't see any other alternative they had.

Police disperse riots through the use of tear gas, water canon, or rubber bullets. While all 3 forms of riot control has been shown to inflict serious injuries, only tear gas and water canon are inflexible and indiscriminate when deployed - making rubber bullets favorable. And it doesn't look like rubber bullets were randomly fired into the crowd either. It looked as though police officers were aiming it in close proximity with their shotguns.

So if the only real problem here is the police as you put it, please explain how else can the police disperse a riot? They cannot single out violent protesters either. As another poster have said, police officers could be attacked from every angle if they run into a crowd to go after individuals. The safety of the police officers has to be considered. I am sure they warned the crowd several times to leave or be forcibly removed. They chose not to comply leaving the police no other choice but to use rubber bullets.

[Peckerwood]

If this is the same incident as I was informed upon, it started with a couple of cops chasing down three suspects who they spotted in an alley. Two got away and one was shot and killed.

This community has apparently been the brunt of continued police brutality and racial profiling for years. Hence the resistance that finally boiled over.

The people had been outside when they saw the cops shoot the man from behind...many of whom had gathered awaiting the ambulance and more police that showed up. In turn many were upset and belligerent towards the police that were there, while demanding answers. Tempers flared and some bad apples started throwing rocks etc...cops returned fire with rubber bullets and even releasing a dog on a lady who was holding a kid.

The police could have handled it better but chose not to.

The people could have handled it better but chose not to.

S*** happens

[Syne]

There is nothing wrong with a protest as long as it is conducted peacefully. This was clearly a protest that escalated into a hostile riot, forcing the police to disperse the crowd. I doubt anyone in the crowd was an innocent onlooker either. As other posters have said, innocent bystanders with children would watch from the outside. They would not join a screaming crowd especially when there is a stand off with the police in front. The protesters were wrong to bring their children in the first place. If the only debate here was the excessive use of force, I don't see any other alternative they had.

Look, people who brought children obviously had no idea that the protest would get out of hand. They came to lend their support, and having young children, naturally brought them along. Nobody goes to a protest thinking to put themselves in any danger. You rally, you protest, you go home. Most protests go off without a hitch. You're making excuses for police firing rubber bullets into a crowd full of women and children. Take a step back and think about what you're saying. A person in their community was murdered and they are looking for answers, and your automatic go-to response is that they're stupid for bringing their children..

I'm sorry, but this apologist crap needs to stop. People are going to asenine lengths to defend the actions of the police. These are the same people who see a half dozen officers relentlessly clubbing a guy on the ground writhing in pain, while screaming "stop resisting!" and make the same stupid apologies like, "The guy shouldn't have done teh crime" or "they're just doing their job." The type of stuff that makes you think these people are relishing in the pain and suffering of others.


So if the only real problem here is the police as you put it, please explain how else can the police disperse a riot?

You know what, even if I had a genius solution, that problem isn't mine. They are the ones trained to deal with this. They are the ones who have vowed to serve and protect the public. It's not my responsibility, or freeloader's responsibility to tell them anything more than, "just fix it". They have a gym memberships and high school diplomas. I'm sure they can figure it out.


They cannot single out violent protesters either. As another poster have said, police officers could be attacked from every angle if they run into a crowd to go after individuals. The safety of the police officers has to be considered. I am sure they warned the crowd several times to leave or be forcibly removed. They chose not to comply leaving the police no other choice but to use rubber bullets.

You're only sure of that because that's what you want to believe.

[ovechkin1]

what happens when you protest a shooting in the U.S? You get shot.

[M1K3Z0R]

Basically:

Police let people carry on, someone gets hurt
"OMG! POLICE DON'T DO ENOUGH! LAZY ***** WHO EAT DOUGHNUTS ALL DAY"

Police intervene
"OMG! POLICE BRUTALITY! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!"

Authority figures (Police, Customs, Revenue Canada, Politicians) will always be subject to these attitudes, people expect that their way is the correct way and that laws should favour their situation in every situation. Yes there are bad apples, but those types can be found everywhere, even in the areas that the media doesn't care about.

[wilsonlam97]

#gladtobecanadian

[gman]

First, who take their children and babies to a protest? Stupid parents are stupid. They most likely tried to use their kids as a human shield and as such should all be fined for child neglect. Second, throw the book at the *****s who threw rocks. Cops don't need to take that kind of crap.

That said... fire those fat asses that fired rubber bullets with babies and toddlers around. That was even stupider than bringing kids to the site because cops should be trained to handle such a situation. Also, suspend those that offered to buy videos from the bystanders for attempted destruction of evidence.

In reality, they're all gonna be put on a paid leave of absence and return to work thanks to their union.

Just curious though, why does everyone speak broken English in that neighbourhood?

Hmmm! I take buying the video means buying a copy of the video.

[wilsonlam97]

The parents made a stupid decision and the police made an even stupider decision.

#gladtobecanadian

[Cafe_333]

Look, people who brought children obviously had no idea that the protest would get out of hand. They came to lend their support, and having young children, naturally brought them along. Nobody goes to a protest thinking to put themselves in any danger. You rally, you protest, you go home. Most protests go off without a hitch. You're making excuses for police firing rubber bullets into a crowd full of women and children. Take a step back and think about what you're saying. A person in their community was murdered and they are looking for answers, and your automatic go-to response is that they're stupid for bringing their children..

You're only sure of that because that's what you want to believe.

If you took the time to understand the context of my post, then perhaps you would have understood the context that it is indeed stupid for any parent to put their children in any potential harm's way. Yes i think it is stupid to bring children to a protest. It makes no difference whether it was a peaceful protest. As with any protest, there is the possibility of it going out of hand, especially when the people involved are very angry. That is why I and many other posters here agree it is stupid to bring children to a protest. The police also recognizes the potential of any protest going out of hand, and as such is why there is always a police presence even at peaceful protests.

The protest in Anaheim however was not a peaceful protest - at least not by the time the police opened fire. If it were peaceful, there would only be a handful of police officers monitoring the crowd from the outside. This was not the case. It may have started peaceful, but the second it escalated, parents should have taken their kids out of harm's way. It is their failure to do so that makes them stupid. The police station was overrun; An armed police line formed; A stand off ensued; The crowd was warned to leave; The crowd began to riot throwing rocks at police. If after all that and you still haven't left with your kids, not only are you an incompetent parent, but also stupid for putting your kids in danger.

Now the debate here is whether or not the use of force was excessive, and I argued that it wasn't. No I am not making excuses for the police firing into a crowd of woman and children. I am saying they acted appropriately. The current methods of crowd control is not only widely established and adopted all over the world, but there's simply no other humane alternative. Rubber bullets are much more preferable to tear gas or water canons, and preferred over risking a massive melee with rioters that can endanger the safety of police. This is also why they would never run into a crowd of rioters to apprehend specific individuals. But it seems you think they should because you disagreed when I made this statement and that it's only true because 'that's what i want to believe'. What a joke. Take a step back and think about what you're saying. rofl.

[kingrukus]

Meh they deserved to be shot. They should have used real bullets and hand grenades to ensure the problem doesn't happen again.

[Syne]

You people do realize that children can't consent to being hit by rubber bullets, right? Saying parents are stupid doesn't change that fact. Call it a conundrum all you want, blame the parents if you want, but at the end of the day these kids are present and the adults exercising force have to take their welfare into consideration, even if the parents don't. This isn't the type of thing you can pass the buck on. Everyone involved needs to be mindful, especially the ones strapped with the heavy artillery.

[stevenvv]

@1:17 never knew dogs can scratch people with their teeths.

[Agafaba]

You people do realize that children can't consent to being hit by rubber bullets, right? Saying parents are stupid doesn't change that fact. Call it a conundrum all you want, blame the parents if you want, but at the end of the day these kids are present and the adults exercising force have to take their welfare into consideration, even if the parents don't. This isn't the type of thing you can pass the buck on. Everyone involved needs to be mindful, especially the ones strapped with the heavy artillery.

Their parents consented to having their children hit by rubber bullets, even though trying to use a child as an excuse to be immune to retaliation is pretty low.

[vero95]

@1:17 never knew dogs can scratch people with their teeths.

you learn things every day
the majority of people know it

[ItechJester]

Fundamental freedoms

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.

freedom of speech? i guess 2b, but not really..
freedom of protest? does not exist.
dont get it twisted, son..

again, i am not here to educate anyone. please send me a pm for my paypal first if you want a lesson. thanks homie

[laptop-tech]

When a riot breaks out, everyone in attendance is going to get caught up in the use of force that will follow, this unfortunately includes children. That's why parents need to get children the hell away from situations like this. What kind of parent "confronts" police with their children present? Even if the parents of those kids didn't participate in the riot, simply being at a riot puts you at risk because the police will respond with force and that force will be directed at everybody that is present.

Those people do it on purpose, so that they have children acting as human shields. this way, they can cry later on TV saying "my poor little baby...".

The video I saw shows police responding to a small riot organized by aggressive people using children as human shields. Nothing else.

[longitude]

Those people do it on purpose, so that they have children acting as human shields. this way, they can cry later on TV saying "my poor little baby...".

The video I saw shows police responding to a small riot organized by aggressive people using children as human shields. Nothing else.

:facepalm:

[IamToronto]

again, i am not here to educate anyone. please send me a pm for my paypal first if you want a lesson. thanks homie

you obviously dont have anything to add to the discussion which is why you keep deterring. why would i pay you to tell me nonsense? you obviously dont know how our system works. do you know what the first line of the charter is? haha..

what a waste of forum space

[tomjose]

Fornicate the constabulary!!

[Cafe_333]

You people do realize that children can't consent to being hit by rubber bullets, right? Saying parents are stupid doesn't change that fact. Call it a conundrum all you want, blame the parents if you want, but at the end of the day these kids are present and the adults exercising force have to take their welfare into consideration, even if the parents don't. This isn't the type of thing you can pass the buck on. Everyone involved needs to be mindful, especially the ones strapped with the heavy artillery.Then by your logic everyone who riots can easily use children as human shields if the police must take their welfare into consideration. Yeah right. When a protest turns violent, it is defined as a riot which is not only unlawful, but can potentially endanger the safety of people and property. The police will intervene to suppress the riot and disperse the crowd with the appropriate use of force - and that's exactly what they did. Did you really expect them to simply stand there as they were being pelted by rocks because they had to be "mindful to the welfare of woman and children"? Or perhaps you would have preferred to gas the children? rofl.

[Syne]

If someone is throwing a rock at you, you either arrest that person or get out of the way. You don't start shooting into a crowd, Rambo style.


Their parents consented to having their children hit by rubber bullets, even though trying to use a child as an excuse to be immune to retaliation is pretty low.

You can't consent on behalf of a child to being hit by bullets. The caregiver does not have that legal power. There are lots of things that children cannot consent to, that an adult can't just walk in and say, "Yeah, it's OK to do this because it's my kid". Subjecting children to violence is one of them.

Again, if you want to blame the parents for this, that's fine.. I don't care - but police still have to take the crowd's constitution into consideration, vis a vis this inability for children to consent.

[iEyeCaptain]

If someone is throwing a rock at you, you either arrest that person or get out of the way. You don't start shooting into a crowd, Rambo style.

What if the people throwing rocks outnumber the non-riot-gear wearing police officers?

If you were a cop, a bunch of people are throwing rocks at you while you're wearing nothing but a bulletproof vest, do you walk up to the group of people and handcuff them one at a time?

:facepalm:

[Agafaba]

If someone is throwing a rock at you, you either arrest that person or get out of the way. You don't start shooting into a crowd, Rambo style.



You can't consent on behalf of a child to being hit by bullets. The caregiver does not have that legal power. There are lots of things that children cannot consent to, that an adult can't just walk in and say, "Yeah, it's OK to do this because it's my kid". Subjecting children to violence is one of them.

Again, if you want to blame the parents for this, that's fine.. I don't care - but police still have to take the crowd's constitution into consideration, vis a vis this inability for children to consent.

Does that mean its illegal for the police to use rubber bullets to stop dangerous children because they failed to consent to being arrested? I dont understand why the police should allow individuals to commit crimes just because there is a child in the vicinity.

[Syne]

If you can't restrain a child as a cop, you're in the wrong profession.

[Agafaba]

If you can't restrain a child as a cop, you're in the wrong profession.

What if the child had a knife or a gun, or was throwing large rocks from somewhere not easily reachable?

[Mayosandwich]

the video was removed where can i see it?

[olssy]

What if the child had a knife or a gun, or was throwing large rocks from somewhere not easily reachable?
But they weren't, and police usually retreat when attacked by protesters and then call in the riot police. In some cases they even let the riot continue like in Vancouver for the Stanley cup. There is also no way to really know if a peaceful protest will turn into a riot, it only takes a few people to get a crowd going and you can't blame parents for it, no where does it say that parents were throwing rocks and using their children as human shields. From the video it definitely didn't look like a bunch of rioters that were getting attacked by the police but a bunch of people scarred for their lives. Anyone throwing rocks was probably long gone by the time the police started firing.

[Sharks316]

Media blackout: California cops open fire on women, children, babies and release dog



Only in the US and A.

I wish our police officers had the BALLS to stand up to crime!!!!!

[Agafaba]

But they weren't, and police usually retreat when attacked by protesters and then call in the riot police. In some cases they even let the riot continue like in Vancouver for the Stanley cup. There is also no way to really know if a peaceful protest will turn into a riot, it only takes a few people to get a crowd going and you can't blame parents for it, no where does it say that parents were throwing rocks and using their children as human shields. From the video it definitely didn't look like a bunch of rioters that were getting attacked by the police but a bunch of people scarred for their lives. Anyone throwing rocks was probably long gone by the time the police started firing.

I think both sides are at fault here, but that doesnt change the fact that having kids in the vicinity should mean that police should simply run away.

And that just makes the parents even less responsible... If people started throwing rocks at police would you hang around with your kid long enough to be in this video? If the people that were causing trouble had plenty of time to get away all the parents could have done the same, but instead they disregarded their childs safety so they could keep watching/protesting.

[Cafe_333]

If someone is throwing a rock at you, you either arrest that person or get out of the way. You don't start shooting into a crowd, Rambo style. Police still have to take the crowd's constitution into consideration.It is only that simple because that is what you want to believe. Perhaps you should get your facts straight - it was not one person. According to NBC Los Angeles, "Anaheim police who remained on the scene after the shooting were encircled by a group of angry residents who threw bottles and rocks and began getting too close to police officers. The police responded with rubber bullets and pepper balls. The incident drew more than 100 people." This was clearly a protest that escalated into a riot and the police responded with appropriate force. What did you expect them to do? Stand there as they got pelted by rocks because they have to take the crowd's constitution into consideration? Run into the crowd of rioters outnumbered with no protection or riot gear to chase down the several individuals who threw rocks at them? They acted appropriately, end of story.

[express.items]

It is only that simple because that is what you want to believe. Perhaps you should get your facts straight - it was not one person. According to NBC Los Angeles, "Anaheim police who remained on the scene after the shooting were encircled by a group of angry residents who threw bottles and rocks and began getting too close to police officers. The police responded with rubber bullets and pepper balls. The incident drew more than 100 people." This was clearly a protest that escalated into a riot and the police responded with appropriate force. What did you expect them to do? Stand there as they got pelted by rocks because they have to take the crowd's constitution into consideration? Run into the crowd of rioters outnumbered with no protection or riot gear to chase down the several individuals who threw rocks at them? They acted appropriately, end of story.

@Cafe_333, I'm in complete agreement with you.

But for argument's sake...
@Everyone saying the police should have left and called in a riot squad.

What if the police did leave and call in a riot squad? What would they do different? They may have more protective gear (for themselves), but would probably still use the same force to disperse the crowd?

[iEyeCaptain]

It is only that simple because that is what you want to believe. Perhaps you should get your facts straight - it was not one person. According to NBC Los Angeles, "Anaheim police who remained on the scene after the shooting were encircled by a group of angry residents who threw bottles and rocks and began getting too close to police officers. The police responded with rubber bullets and pepper balls. The incident drew more than 100 people." This was clearly a protest that escalated into a riot and the police responded with appropriate force. What did you expect them to do? Stand there as they got pelted by rocks because they have to take the crowd's constitution into consideration? Run into the crowd of rioters outnumbered with no protection or riot gear to chase down the several individuals who threw rocks at them? They acted appropriately, end of story.

I've said multiple times in this thread that the police in the video were massively outnumbered by people throwing rocks at them.

Syne refuses to read it.

So good luck convincing him that walking politely up to the protesters to arrest them and read them their Miranda rights isn't a good idea.