Huntsville PD says they tear gassed a peaceful crowd as a "precaution"...

[MattAU05]

And let me be very clear, if these things were happening at the lockdown protests, and protestors were being gassed and brutalized, I would be saying the same thing. They weren’t, of course, despite almost all those protests being in violation of government orders requiring no large crowds, social distance, etc. But even the men who were heavily armed and swarmed the Michigan capitol were not gassed or brutalized. Were any even arrested? I don’t think so. Somehow, they were able to deal with it all without riot gear and chemical weapons. Weird.

 

[MattAU05]

How do you handle that when you have officers outnumbered, say, 5 to 1?

If they’re peaceful as they were here? Or are you talking about a violent crowd?

 

[mkp_81]

I am concerned that you and many others ITT believe Bull Connor was right to use violence on civil rights protesters because they didn't have a permit and riots had occurred elsewhere in the country.

Sir, I was not alive and did not experience the Bull Connor era. I’ve witnessed looting and riots since ‘92 though. There are no winners in this situation. I couldn’t be more against police brutality and racial injustice. Believe me. But I just don’t see how HPD can be expected to stand around and let large crowds get out of hand as night falls as we’ve seen in cities all over the country for going on 7-8 days now.
When do police step in? When objects get thrown at them? Wait until some glass gets shattered? Need some more spray paint decor on buildings saying F*** 12?

As I stated in another thread, what SHOULD cops do now? Someone said use the zip ties and start arresting everyone that refuses to leave. That’s better than tear gas. Lol how?
As soon as you put their arms behind their backs they scream they’re being abused and say you’re hurting them and 20 cell phone cameras are in your face. Which, agitates the crowd even more.

 

[DM8]

How do you handle that when you have officers outnumbered, say, 5 to 1?

Again, that's not applicable to this situation. There was a massive police presence including snipers on buildings aiming at the crowd. The crowd that was gassed and shot with rubber bullets did not outnumber the police 5-1 or anything close to it as you can see it on the video I posted. Had they told the protesters anyone who remained would be detained, I suspect most would have chosen to leave rather than go to jail.

Generally, that's not a problem though when dealing with large crowds of peaceful protesters. No one in the crowd in Huntsville was being violent as is shown on the video I posted. Large crowds of protesters are detained and zip tied at protests on a regular basis. That has been happening in many cities over the last week. I suspect you are aware of that.

 

[DM8]

Sir, I was not alive and did not experience the Bull Connor era. I’ve witnessed looting and riots since ‘92 though. There are no winners in this situation. I couldn’t be more against police brutality and racial injustice. Believe me. But I just don’t see how HPD can be expected to stand around and let large crowds get out of hand as night falls as we’ve seen in cities all over the country for going on 7-8 days now.
When do police step in? When objects get thrown at them? Wait until some glass gets shattered? Need some more spray paint decor on buildings saying F*** 12?

As I stated in another thread, what SHOULD cops do now? Someone said use the zip ties and start arresting everyone that refuses to leave. That’s better than tear gas. Lol how?
As soon as you put their arms behind their backs they scream they’re being abused and say you’re hurting them and 20 cell phone cameras are in your face. Which, agitates the crowd even more.

I wasn't alive in the 1960s either. I honestly believed our society had reached a point where the vast majority of people reject the tactics of Bull Connor of violently attacking peaceful protesters. You and others in this thread have proved me wrong. It's completely ridiculous to claim that orderly detaining a group who chooses to engage in civil disobedience is worse than shooting them with a rubber bullets or gassing them.

 

[WirelessDamnEngineer85]

But I’m quite confident in saying that a militarized police force preemptively gassing and brutalizing people who are, at the time, peaceful is NOT NOR WILL IT EVER BE THE ANSWER. Not in a nation where The People are sovereign.

Imagine a group decides to coordinate a shutdown of a major city's major thoroughfares during rush hour by putting hundreds of people at every choke point. Imagine they intent to stay until they are forced to leave, and that they have supplies to do so (camp for days, protest in shifts.) Imagine you have 1 officer for every 10 protestors.

They're non-violent, but they have basically hijacked the city's infrastructure. Perhaps they even let emergency vehicles through at their discretion.

How do you get them to disperse?

 

[DM8]

And let me be very clear, if these things were happening at the lockdown protests, and protestors were being gassed and brutalized, I would be saying the same thing. They weren’t, of course, despite almost all those protests being in violation of government orders requiring no large crowds, social distance, etc. But even the men who were heavily armed and swarmed the Michigan capitol were not gassed or brutalized. Were any even arrested? I don’t think so. Somehow, they were able to deal with it all without riot gear and chemical weapons. Weird.

Nailed it. Can you even imagine if the protesters in Huntsville had all showed up with AR-15s? The same people in this thread who cheered the armed Michigan protesters as patriots would have been screaming for the police not to take any chances and kill them all. There is hypocrisy on an industrial scale on display ITT.

 

[WirelessDamnEngineer85]

Again, that's not applicable to this situation. There was a massive police presence including snipers on buildings aiming at the crowd. The crowd that was gassed and shot with rubber bullets did not outnumber the police 5-1 or anything close to it as you can see it on the video I posted. Had they told the protesters anyone who remained would be detained, I suspect most would have chosen to leave rather than go to jail.

Generally, that's not a problem though when dealing with large crowds of peaceful protesters. No one in the crowd in Huntsville was being violent as is shown on the video I posted. Large crowds of protesters are detained and zip tied at protests on a regular basis. That has been happening in many cities over the last week. I suspect you are aware of that.

I know it's not applicable, I'm asking you a hypothetical question. What do you do if the non-violent protestors are more agitated? Not every situation is the same, and imo, not every use of tear gas on protestors is a crime against humanity. In fact, sometimes (rarely) it's the safest option.

HPD crossed the line (surprise), but I can think of a few scenarios where tear gas is the best option for all involved. Less-lethal ammunition is another story altogether - it just inflicts the trauma of being shot without incapacitating the target. If it's being used properly, it's just supposed to piss the target off really badly. How does that help anything?

 

[DM8]

Imagine a group decides to coordinate a shutdown of a major city's major thoroughfares during rush hour by putting hundreds of people at every choke point. Imagine they intent to stay until they are forced to leave, and that they have supplies to do so (camp for days, protest in shifts.) Imagine you have 1 officer for every 10 protestors.

They're non-violent, but they have basically hijacked the city's infrastructure. Perhaps they even let emergency vehicles through at their discretion.

How do you get them to disperse?

Why are you making up random hypotheticals that have nothing to do with the Huntsville protest?

 

[harley tiger]

And let me be very clear, if these things were happening at the lockdown protests, and protestors were being gassed and brutalized, I would be saying the same thing. They weren’t, of course, despite almost all those protests being in violation of government orders requiring no large crowds, social distance, etc. But even the men who were heavily armed and swarmed the Michigan capitol were not gassed or brutalized. Were any even arrested? I don’t think so. Somehow, they were able to deal with it all without riot gear and chemical weapons. Weird.

That's because those rifles were never fired. I think they wanted to let the crowd no that weren't going to put up with any crazy shit at all.

 

[DM8]

I know it's not applicable, I'm asking you a hypothetical question. What do you do if the non-violent protestors are more agitated? Not every situation is the same, and imo, not every use of tear gas on protestors is a crime against humanity. In fact, sometimes (rarely) it's the safest option.

As I have already said ITT, I have no issue with the police using tear gas to clear a violent crowd. You can make up countless hypotheticals where the use of gas and rubber bullets would or would not be justified. I don't see where that's a useful exercise in a thread that is about a specific incident where a relatively small number of peaceful protesters were gassed and brutally assaulted with rubber bullets in a completely unjustified manner.

 

[mkp_81]

Why are you making up random hypotheticals that have nothing to do with the Huntsville protest?

Why do you insist on comparing last nights events in HSV to Bull Connor and events from the 60s in which that group was strongly and openly opposed to the civil rights movement?
HSV not only supported the rallies this week, they, like other cities, ensured the safety of the rally by closing off normally busy city streets (twice now in 3 days).
The group that stayed around into the night did not respect the request to protest and then clear the area.

 

[WirelessDamnEngineer85]

Why are you making up random hypotheticals that have nothing to do with the Huntsville protest?

Because I'm interested in how you'd handle them. I suspect the highway blocking hypothetical could become reality soon. It's been done on a small scale in the past, but if tear gas is off the table, how do you disperse a determined and hostile crowd?

 

[WirelessDamnEngineer85]

As I have already said ITT, I have no issue with the police using tear gas to clear a violent crowd.

I haven't read the whole thread, so I missed this. It answers my question. Thanks.

 

[DM8]

Why do you insist on comparing last nights events in HSV to Bull Connor and events from the 60s in which that group was strongly and openly opposed to the civil rights movement?
HSV not only supported the rallies this week, they, like other cities, ensured the safety of the rally by closing off normally busy city streets (twice now in 3 days).
The group that stayed around into the night did not respect the request to protest and then clear the area.

I am comparing it because the situations regarding the decision to initiate violence against peaceful protesters is identical. Bull Connor used gas on peaceful protesters who didn't have a permit and refused to disperse. The protesters in Huntsville had a permit which expired and were peaceful, but refused to disperse. The use of gas and rubber bullets last night was no more justified than the use of fire hoses, dogs and gas on demonstrators in the 1960s.

 

[mkp_81]

I am comparing it because the situations regarding the decision to initiate violence against peaceful protesters is identical. Bull Connor used gas on peaceful protesters who didn't have a permit and refused to disperse. The protesters in Huntsville had a permit which expired and were peaceful, but refused to disperse. The use of gas and rubber bullets last night was no more justified than the use of fire hoses, dogs and gas on demonstrators in the 1960s.

You act as if that crowd was sitting there picking flowers and singing campfire songs.
Have you attended one of these protests in person yet? Or, rather the post-protest “protest”?

 

[DM8]

You act as if that crowd was sitting there picking flowers and singing campfire songs.
Have you attended one of these protests in person yet? Or, rather the post-protest “protest”?

Sigh. I posted the video of the last 8 minutes before the police opened fire. No one was being violent. They were chanting "hands up, don't shoot" when the police attacked.

 

[MattAU05]

Imagine a group decides to coordinate a shutdown of a major city's major thoroughfares during rush hour by putting hundreds of people at every choke point. Imagine they intent to stay until they are forced to leave, and that they have supplies to do so (camp for days, protest in shifts.) Imagine you have 1 officer for every 10 protestors.

They're non-violent, but they have basically hijacked the city's infrastructure. Perhaps they even let emergency vehicles through at their discretion.

How do you get them to disperse?

My opinion doesn’t change based upon the topic we were discussing. Interesting hypothetical, though.

To be clear, neither @DM8 nor myself were saying no action could ever be taken against peaceful protestors. Only that to immediately go to gas and violence wasn’t appropriate. Here’s the thing, when the police show up looking like soldiers ready for battle, there’s a better chance they’re going to see a battle.

Again though, you’re kind of distracting from the actual topic. It’s a red herring. An interesting one, but still a red herring.

 

[acepippen]

I answered your question. Protesting without a permit is called civil disobedience. We have a long history of people exercising their right to free speech through civil disobedience in our country. The protesters who were attacked with fire hoses, gas and dogs in Birmingham were engaged in civil disobedience. That's why Martin Luther King ended up in the Birmingham Jail. I am honestly surprised there are so many ITT who would have sided with Bull Connor over the civil rights protesters. What they did was illegal based on the racist laws on the books, but they were obviously morally justified in fighting for equal rights.

Yet MLK didn’t resort to violence, name calling or looting. Big deference. He served his time then he went along peacefully. The law abiding citizens protested then went home. The others elected to break the law. You make your choices then you live by the consequences. It is really that simple. Nobody gets tear gassed or shot with rubber bullets if they left when the permit expired. It would have set an example that MLK would have been proud off.

 

[DM8]

My opinion doesn’t change based upon the topic we were discussing. Interesting hypothetical, though.

To be clear, neither @DM8 nor myself were saying no action could ever be taken against peaceful protestors. Only that to immediately go to gas and violence wasn’t appropriate. Here’s the thing, when the police show up looking like soldiers ready for battle, there’s a better chance they’re going to see a battle.

Again though, you’re kind of distracting from the actual topic. It’s a red herring. And interesting one, but still a red herring.

This. I am all for the police being able to protect themselves against a violent crowd. If the crowd in Huntsville had been violent, I would have had no issue with them being tear gassed to break it up. As it stands, they were not violent and weren't blocking any major roads so they should have been allowed to stay there chanting until they got tired and wanted to leave or the police could have told them they would have to detain anyone who didn't leave and broken out the zip ties. Both of those options could have been carried out with no danger to police or protesters. As it stands, the only thing HPD succeeded in doing was motivating thousands more people to take to the streets to protest. Sadly, some will see non violent protesters being gassed and shot with rubber bullets and decide that justifies rioting.

 

[mkp_81]

I saw footage of the state troopers rolling in. Kid chunks a water bottle and nails one direction hit.
The troopers were there as a show of force, one of several tactics they tried to use to encourage the crowd IT IS TIME TO MOVE ON YOU’VE BEEN HERE LONG ENOUGH.

They tried audible noises, they tried the lights of the trooper vehicles, they verbally ASKED way more times than they ever normally would. But the crowd gave the middle finger.

It’s amazing how different our narratives are lol. I sort of want to know how you feel about Drew Brees but I’m exhausted at this point.

 

[MattAU05]

Yet MLK didn’t resort to violence, name calling or looting. Big deference. He served his time then he went along peacefully. The law abiding citizens protested then went home. The others elected to break the law. You make your choices then you live by the consequences. It is really that simple. Nobody gets tear gassed or shot with rubber bullets if they left when the permit expired. It would have set an example that MLK would have been proud off.

Did any of the protestors who were gassed and brutalized loot anything?

Did MLK ever violate a curfew?

Look man, resting your entire argument on the curfew is silly. Would you have advocated for all of the lockdown/reopen protestors being gassed and brutalized? Because many broke the law by having the protest at all, or by not wearing masks. Would that be ok with you?

I doubt it would (and it shouldn’t be). You are not being intellectually honest or logically consistent. Those are just facts. If you’re ok with that, then I guess I don’t have an argument for you.

 

[mkp_81]

Yet MLK didn’t resort to violence, name calling or looting. Big deference. He served his time then he went along peacefully. The law abiding citizens protested then went home. The others elected to break the law. You make your choices then you live by the consequences. It is really that simple. Nobody gets tear gassed or shot with rubber bullets if they left when the permit expired. It would have set an example that MLK would have been proud off.

and it should be noted no gas was or “violence” was used until 90 MINUTES after the expired permit. That’s why I don’t even care about the permit aspect. HSV gave these folks an hour and a half of time shutting the square down (and all the roads leading to the square).

 

[Billy Goat Gruff]

I am comparing it because the situations regarding the decision to initiate violence against peaceful protesters is identical. Bull Connor used gas on peaceful protesters who didn't have a permit and refused to disperse. The protesters in Huntsville had a permit which expired and were peaceful, but refused to disperse. The use of gas and rubber bullets last night was no more justified than the use of fire hoses, dogs and gas on demonstrators in the 1960s.

This is not 1960, in any way. You have made that your mission statement in this entire thread. Every single post you make goes back to that. It's tired and ridiculous. If you truly want to do something then do it.... but this bullshit you post is old, if its not the corona virus then it's this stupid shit. Time to shut the fu*k up .

 

[WirelessDamnEngineer85]

As it stands, the only thing HPD succeeded in doing was motivating thousands more people to take to the streets to protest. Sadly, some will see non violent protesters being gassed and shot with rubber bullets and decide that justifies rioting.

Agreed.

 

[DM8]

Yet MLK didn’t resort to violence, name calling or looting. Big deference. He served his time then he went along peacefully. The law abiding citizens protested then went home. The others elected to break the law. You make your choices then you live by the consequences. It is really that simple. Nobody gets tear gassed or shot with rubber bullets if they left when the permit expired. It would have set an example that MLK would have been proud off.

You along with many others ITT are completely ignorant of this subject. You should read Dr. King's letter from the Birmingham Jail. In it, he writes to the white clergy of Birmingham to ask why they support Bull Connor's attacks on civil right's protesters. If he had been there, Dr. King would have been standing alongside the protesters who were gassed last night in Huntsville because he was a huge advocated of nonviolent civil disobedience. Were he alive today, there is no doubt he would have considered those gassed last night to be among the heroes he mentions here...

From his letter:

You warmly commended the Birmingham police force for keeping "order" and "preventing violence." I doubt that you would have so warmly commended the police force if you had seen its dogs sinking their teeth into unarmed, nonviolent Negroes. I doubt that you would so quickly commend the policemen if you were to observe their ugly and inhumane treatment of Negroes here in the city jail; if you were to watch them push and curse old Negro women and young Negro girls; if you were to see them slap and kick old Negro men and young boys; if you were to observe them, as they did on two occasions, refuse to give us food because we wanted to sing our grace together. I cannot join you in your praise of the Birmingham police department.

It is true that the police have exercised a degree of discipline in handling the demonstrators. In this sense they have conducted themselves rather "nonviolently" in public. But for what purpose? To preserve the evil system of segregation. Over the past few years I have consistently preached that nonviolence demands that the means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek. I have tried to make clear that it is wrong to use immoral means to attain moral ends. But now I must affirm that it is just as wrong, or perhaps even more so, to use moral means to preserve immoral ends. Perhaps Mr. Connor and his policemen have been rather nonviolent in public, as was Chief Pritchett in Albany, Georgia, but they have used the moral means of nonviolence to maintain the immoral end of racial injustice. As T. S. Eliot has said: "The last temptation is the greatest treason: To do the right deed for the wrong reason."

I wish you had commended the Negro sit inners and demonstrators of Birmingham for their sublime courage, their willingness to suffer and their amazing discipline in the midst of great provocation. One day the South will recognize its real heroes. They will be the James Merediths, with the noble sense of purpose that enables them to face jeering and hostile mobs, and with the agonizing loneliness that characterizes the life of the pioneer. They will be old, oppressed, battered Negro women, symbolized in a seventy two year old woman in Montgomery, Alabama, who rose up with a sense of dignity and with her people decided not to ride segregated buses, and who responded with ungrammatical profundity to one who inquired about her weariness: "My feets is tired, but my soul is at rest." They will be the young high school and college students, the young ministers of the gospel and a host of their elders, courageously and nonviolently sitting in at lunch counters and willingly going to jail for conscience' sake. One day the South will know that when these disinherited children of God sat down at lunch counters, they were in reality standing up for what is best in the American dream and for the most sacred values in our Judaeo Christian heritage, thereby bringing our nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in their formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

 

[DM8]

This is not 1960, in any way. You have made that your mission statement in this entire thread. Every single post you make goes back to that. It's tired and ridiculous. If you truly want to do something then do it.... but this bullshit you post is old, if its not the corona virus then it's this stupid shit. Time to shut the fu*k up .

Did someone force you to read this thread? Police violently attacking peaceful protesters was wrong in the 1960s and it remains wrong today. I am sorry it upsets you for that obvious point to be raised. If anything, what we saw last night in Huntsville is drastically worse given that this is 2020 and not 1960. There is no excuse for law enforcement in our country to be making the same mistakes today that were made during the civil rights era.

 

[yy4u]

I would love to have seen your reaction if that was a crowd of tea partiers or shutdown protesters. I am sure you would support a crowd including chilidren being gassed and people being seriously wounded with rubber bullets as a "precaution" in case they became violent, as the HPD spokesperson put it.

None of these people protesting at the Michigan Capital had a permit and some were very hostile. You believe they should have been shot with rubber bullets and gassed, correct?

I do not believe 1st amendment protects verbal abuse. A fine line for me I guess. Protest all you want, but no riot, no violence, no abuse, and no property damage or looting. And no inciting it.

Jmo.

 

[Billy Goat Gruff]

Did someone force you to read this thread? Police violently attacking peaceful protesters was wrong in the 1960s and it remains wrong today. I am sorry it upsets you to have the parallel illustrated.

Shut up and grow up.

 

[DM8]

Shut up and grow up.

Run along before you melt, snowflake.

 

[Billy Goat Gruff]

Run along before you melt, snowflake.

Your punk ass won't melt anyone. But I'm willing to give you a try.

 

[DM8]

I do not believe 1st amendment protects verbal abuse. A fine line for me I guess. Protest all you want, but no riot, no violence, no abuse, and no property damage or looting. And no inciting it.

Jmo.

You are incorrect on that point. Federal courts have ruled that yelling "F You" at a police officer is protected as free speech.

https://littlevillagemag.com/federa...saying-****-you-to-the-police-is-free-speech/

 

[DM8]

Your punk ass won't melt anyone. But I'm willing to give you a try.

 

[who_called_the_Wolf]

 

[Billy Goat Gruff]

I would expect a lot more than this from a punk ass that passed the bar. Oh wait... you didn't that's why you post at 5am and sleep until 2 pm. Get a job....I hear they are hiring at whataburger.

 

[mkp_81]

“In the United States, the organizer of a public assembly must typically apply for and obtain a permit in advance from the local police department or other local governmental body.[10] Applications for permits usually require, at a minimum, information about the specific date, time, and location of the proposed assembly, and may require a great deal more information.[11] Localities can, within the boundaries established by Supreme Court decisions interpreting the First Amendment right to assemble peaceably, impose additional requirements for permit applications, such as information about the organizer of the assembly and specific details about how the assembly is to be conducted.[12]

The First Amendment does not provide the right to conduct an assembly at which there is a clear and present danger of riot, disorder, or interference with traffic on public streets, or other immediate threat to public safety or order.[13] Statutes that prohibit people from assembling and using force or violence to accomplish unlawful purposes are permissible under the First Amendment.[14]

(I’m trying to educate myself on all this so a quick google of the first amendment vs unlawful assembly yielded the above)

 

[mkp_81]

“Bull Connor Bull Connor 1960s peaceful protesters should be allowed to rule the world”

-DM8



(Trying to save you a reply @DM8)

 

[DM8]

I would expect a lot more than this from a punk ass that passed the bar. Oh wait... you didn't that's why you post at 5am and sleep until 2 pm. Get a job....I hear they are hiring at whataburger.

 

[Billy Goat Gruff]

 

[Billy Goat Gruff]

That got your best side Danny.