Pepper Spraying Students at UC-Davis

[tar heel]

There also is the little problem that some people can't tolerate pepper spray. That happened where I live. Kid was 19 or 20 and died on his way to jail. His crime had something to do with a line scuffle at Waffle House.

 

[WebmasterAlex]

Could you show me where I mentioned Gitlow? If you don't want to be educated, don't ask questions or post wrong information.

I only read the last page or so on the thread and was just kidding! I certainly wasn't trying to make a point, it was supposed to be light hearted. I'm sorry if someone took at as an insinuation of anything more

 

[happygirl]

Do I think it was right for them to pepper spray those kids, I dunno did the police have much of a choice, I don't think so. They repeated told them to leave or they would be sprayed.

 

[eliza61]

I think there was something about people being upset about monopolies and taxes on "luxury" items. They boarded a boat, behaved rudely, and made the tea unsuitable to drink -- even by American standards.

Close enough.

And to think, we've morphed into a society that believes you should never behave rudely because the "authorities" might not like it. I mean come on, the patriots had the choice to drink some thing else. no one was forcing them to drink the tea. They should have just went home and not brought the tea then they wouldn't have had those pesky soliders bothering them.

Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Interestingly enough, every major social change from the revolution to civil rights to Gay rights happens because some one "protested". nothing changes in the country when every one decides to "leave".

 

[Chris the CPA]

Those particular students where violating the rights of other citizens and particularly the owners of the property to use that sidewalk. Sometimes the world is not all about "you" and your rights. Did you really want the police to forcible separate their arms and then arrest them? You would be crying why didn't you just leave them alone. You can't have it both ways either the government can enforce the rights of citizens or they can't. The property owners did not give up their rights to use their property so whose rights prevail?

 

[Princess Dolly]

Do I think it was right for them to pepper spray those kids, I dunno did the police have much of a choice, I don't think so. They repeated told them to leave or they would be sprayed.

The correct first action would be to attempt to arrest after the warnings not pepper srpay.

 

[eliza61]

Yep, protest is against the rules. So when you break the rules, accept the consequences. In this case, the consequences were pepper spray and arrest.

The students were ordered to leave, they were warned they would be sprayed, and yet, they remained. They have no one to blame but themselves.

The worst person here is the UC-Davis President. She gave the order to have the protesters removed, and then when the PR went bad, she hung the police out to dry. They followed her orders, and rightly so. If she now thinks the order to remove them was wrong, say it, admit it, accept it.

Very true and when the consequences are excessive, brutual and border on a gestapo, the cops have no one but themselves to blame. following the mantra of those here. NO one forced them to use pepper spray. they were not in a situation where their safety was in jepordy (although I'm sure they will testify that they felt mortal danger from the people sitting on the ground LOL) they had a choice of other non lethal methods so the cops also must face the consequences of their actions.

Fire every single one involved.

 

[nuttylawprofessor]

Those particular students where violating the rights of other citizens and particularly the owners of the property to use that sidewalk. Sometimes the world is not all about "you" and your rights. Did you really want the police to forcible separate their arms and then arrest them? You would be crying why didn't you just leave them alone. You can't have it both ways either the government can enforce the rights of citizens or they can't. The property owners did not give up their rights to use their property so whose rights prevail?

It is public property. The students had the right to be there. And yes, the appropriate thing to do, if you must, is arrest them and pick them up. But again, the administration can't even show the need to arrest and move them, let alone pepper spray them. The administration wanted to quash all protests. This is the path they chose. They screwed up.

 

[MIGrandma]

It really doesn't matter if you don't equate pepper spray and Taser on the same level for use of force, for many police departments they are considered the same.

I don't care if you don't think it matters. I stand by my opinion.

You think they should have been hit with pepper spray -- are you kidding me? This was not an appropriate use of pepper spray. So, you think policemen should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as they warn you first . . .

No, I'm not kidding you. They were told numerous times to move along, they CHOSE to remain there, then accept your consequences. You feel it was not an appropriate use of pepper spray. I think it was appropriate. Difference of opinion, which we are all entitled to. Of course I do not think police should be allowed to do whatever they want to as long as they warn you first. But I do think they had the right to pepper spray the students when they didn't move, as they were told to do.

IF pepper spray doesn't work, then arrest them? Why is it alright for pepper spray to come first on a bunch of students just SITTING there?

Because they were told to move along numerous times, yet they CHOSE not to, so as I said the police had the right to follow through with their warning of pepper spray. If the students didn't want to be sprayed, leave. Simple as that.

Yep, protest is against the rules. So when you break the rules, accept the consequences. In this case, the consequences were pepper spray and arrest.

The students were ordered to leave, they were warned they would be sprayed, and yet, they remained. They have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[nuttylawprofessor]

And to think, we've morphed into a society that believes you should never behave rudely because the "authorities" might not like it. I mean come on, the patriots had the choice to drink some thing else. no one was forcing them to drink the tea. They should have just went home and not brought the tea then they wouldn't have had those pesky soliders bothering them.

Oh how the mighty have fallen.

I don't know if "fallen" is the right term. These protests and the governmental responses are following a pretty typical cycle, which we've seen in this country several times. Increased agitation --> exaggerated response by authority --> some form of "revolution." Sometimes the escalation continues to violent revolution. Other times it results in non-violent ouster.

 

[olwyngdh]

Those particular students where violating the rights of other citizens and particularly the owners of the property to use that sidewalk. Sometimes the world is not all about "you" and your rights. Did you really want the police to forcible separate their arms and then arrest them? You would be crying why didn't you just leave them alone. You can't have it both ways either the government can enforce the rights of citizens or they can't. The property owners did not give up their rights to use their property so whose rights prevail?

No, they weren't violating rights of the owners of the property by using that sidewalk.

Hague v. C.I.O., 307 U.S. 496 (1939), the high court ruled that peaceful demonstrators may not be prosecuted for "disorderly conduct." This case also secured streets and sidewalks as public forums.

 

[iheartdisney]

That child isn't being taught to hate. That child is being taught to fear. And while fear may lead to hatred, what the sons were taught are excellent safety tips.

Call it what you want, but when you teach a child that "cops will shoot the black kid" just be proud of yourself because it isn't WHITEY keeping him down anymore.

 

[luvmy3]

I'm sorry; my post confused. Yes, I agree that people who weren't sprayed were arrested. I was trying to point out that the pepper spray wasn't in lieu of arrest; it was in conjunction with the arrest.

Okay I understand your point now.
In this case it was excessive even in conjunction with their arrest.

 

[luvmy3]

The correct first action would be to attempt to arrest after the warnings not pepper srpay.

This exactly. Arrest them, physically remove them. If then they resist and fight back, use the pepper spray. I would think that would be further down on the list of things to do first, somewhere in between handcuffing, phsyically escorting them to a police car and tasering them.

 

[Planogirl]

No, they weren't violating rights of the owners of the property by using that sidewalk.

Hague v. C.I.O., 307 U.S. 496 (1939), the high court ruled that peaceful demonstrators may not be prosecuted for "disorderly conduct." This case also secured streets and sidewalks as public forums.

There are other laws that they could be in violation of.

To a PP, I didn't know that the chancelor was a female. My error.

 

[nuttylawprofessor]

Call it what you want, but when you teach a child that "cops will shoot the black kid" just be proud of yourself because it isn't WHITEY keeping him down anymore.

Oh, that's right. Now that we've elected a black President, we're in the post racial era, where arrest and incarceration rates for blacks v. whites are proportionate.

 

[Heidict]

Oh, that's right. Now that we've elected a black President, we're in the post racial era, where arrest and incarceration rates for blacks v. whites are proportionate.

Your statement has absolutley nothing to do with what Iheartdisney was saying. The previous poster was teaching her son that cops will shot him based only on his color. That is pretty sad but has nothing to do with the incarceration rates of blacks v. whites.

I think the police overreacted and that there were other ways to break up this sit in without resorting to pepper spray.

 

[eliza61]

My sons were taught and now that they drive we reinforce it daily, they are never to argue or resist a policeman, that is a recipe for a black kid to get killed and shot. They are to tell them their name period. and to repeatedly request to call their parents. They are not to answer any questions about any thing.



Cops do not have the authority to do what they want simply because they have a badge. There is a name for that, it's called a police state.

Don't go by me, my favorite person was Eleanor Roosevelt.

Oh, that's right. Now that we've elected a black President, we're in the post racial era, where arrest and incarceration rates for blacks v. whites are proportionate.

Do not engage Nutty, the above is what I posted and I stand by it. In the city of Philadelphia where my sons work and drive, the rate of police brutality is threw the roof. Now we have had a horrible problem with flash mobs so that aint helping. But my kids are told how to respond to police when they are pulled over because facts are facts. An african american kid driving aluxury car, which my kids do have an almost 33% higher rate of being pulled over and stopped for no reason (police generally assume they are drug dealers) and when that wackadoodle from pennsylvania lied and said that 2 black men had carjacked her only to be found in the Grand floridian, the police here went on a rampage, they've got so many lawsuits from men who were randomly pulled over and search.

Damn straight I teach my kids what to do when face with the police. Do I teach them they have a much greater chance of a violent confrontation with cops simply based on their skin color. Yep because that is exactly the truth. and since they have no idea if they are getting a police officer who takes his job as a public servant seriously or Joe rambo I don't have the luxury of "all cops will help you"

Or like this summer, my kids went to the Phillies game (we have a 20 pack) and since my dh and I could not go they went with 2 friends. The cops outside the stadium pulled them aside and made them produce ID, then asked them where they got the tickets from, who paid for them and basically 20 questioned them before letting them into the game. When dh and I went down to file a complaint we were told that they had gotten a report of suspicious activity. What is very interesting is that on any given day outside citizens bank park you can find a gazillion people selling scalped tickets, all while the cops stand by chatting.

If its sad so be it, better sad then dead or beat down. I would love to be able to lie to them and tell them they will be treated like everyone else but that is not the world they live it.

 

[Oreo Cookie]

UC Davis opened up a can of worms. If the students were breaking the "rules" then arrest them, but the use of pepper spray in this specific situation seems excessive. Police do not have the right to just "use force" regardless of the nature of the alleged crime. The students don't appear to be violent or fleeing the scene, so why was pepper spray necessary.

I found this opinion to be interesting;

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/11/22/4072526/viewpoints-uc-davis-likely-has.html

UC Davis police may well have violated the Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard. In 1989, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Graham v. Connor that excessive force claims are properly analyzed under the Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard. The court had to determine whether a particular use of force is legal under the Fourth Amendment in the course of making an arrest or investigatory stop. In other words, how much force is necessary?

Like most general standards found in FourthAmendment precedent, the answer is, "it depends."

The Graham ruling requires an officer to give "careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case," including:

The severity of the suspect's crimes.

The immediacy of the threat posed by the suspect to the safety of the officers or others.

Whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.

Police do an extraordinary job of keeping the peace and keeping us safe everyday. There are a few bad apples in the bunch, and they need to be dealt with. This situation needs to be investigated and if the police used excessive force they should be held accountable.

 

[timmac]

That polce chief has been put on paid admin leave, pending an investigation.

So basically, he's on vacation?