Following the recent outcry in Ferguson and Staten Island, the US Justice Department delivered a scathing report of the Cleveland Police Department, alleging they are too quick to use deadly force.
Writes the Cleveland Plains Dealer: “The growing distrust between Cleveland police and the communities they serve can be attributed in part to how quickly officers draw their weapons without trying to use words to calm tense situations.”
The report found that police fire their weapons recklessly, and the report hammers the department for using deadly force or less-than-lethal force as their first approach rather than a last resort, even in cases where a suspect is mentally disabled.
“We…discovered that officers do not effectively de-escalate situations, either because they do not know how, or because they do not have an adequate understanding of the importance of de-escalating encounters before resorting to force whenever possible,” the report says.
The Plains Dealer details 16 different cases.
According to Acting Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta, the investigation, which began in March 2013 as a review of the Cleveland Division of Police and its use of force, “concluded that there is reasonable cause to believe that Cleveland Police engage in a pattern or practice of unreasonable force in violation of the Fourth Amendment.”
That pattern manifested in a range of ways, including:
- The unnecessary and excessive use of deadly force, including shootings and head strikes with impact weapons;
- The unnecessary, excessive or retaliatory use of less-than-lethal force including Tasers, chemical spray and fists;
- Excessive force against persons who are mentally ill and in crisis, including in cases where the officers were called exclusively for a welfare check; and
- The employment of poor and dangerous tactics that placed officers in situations where avoidable force became inevitable.
Said Ms. Gupta, “Our investigation revealed that the causes of these patterns or practices were systemic and resulted from organizational deficiencies. Principle among these is the Cleveland Division of Police’s failure to implement effective and rigorous accountability systems.”
He explained, “Force incidents too often are not properly reported, documented, investigated, or addressed with corrective measures. Supervisors throughout the chain of command endorse questionable and sometimes unlawful conduct by officers. Officers are not provided with adequate training, policy guidance, and supervision to do their jobs safely and effectively. Community policing strategies are not sufficiently embedded in the division.”
Ms. Gupta noted, “In the course of our investigation we also discovered that some of the division’s search, seizure, and arrest practices appear to violate the Fourth Amendment.”
Outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder drew a broader view, noting, “In recent days, millions of people throughout the nation have come together – bound by grief and anguish – in response to the tragic deaths of Michael Brown, in Ferguson, Missouri, and Eric Garner, in New York City. As I announced last night, the Department of Justice is currently conducting an independent, thorough, fair, and expeditious federal civil rights investigation into each of these incidents.”
He continued, “The tragic losses of these and far too many other Americans – including, just last month, the shooting death of 12-year-old Tamir Rice here in Cleveland – have raised urgent, national questions. And they have sparked an important conversation about the sense of trust that must exist between law enforcement and the communities they serve and protect.”
Mr. Holder reiterated, “Since March 2013, the Justice Department has closely examined nearly 600 use-of-force incidents that occurred between 2010 and 2013, including incidents involving the use of lethal and less-than-lethal force. We have determined that there is reasonable cause to believe that the Cleveland Division of Police engages in a pattern or practice of using excessive force – in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and as a result of systemic deficiencies, including insufficient accountability, inadequate training and equipment, ineffective policies, and inadequate engagement with the community.”
President Obama announced a series of constructive steps to help bolster the trust in, and effectiveness of, the policing of our communities. These include convening a new task force to develop ways to reduce crime while building public trust; reforming how the federal government equips local law enforcement, particularly with military-style equipment; and advancing the use of body-worn cameras and promoting community policing initiatives.
On Wednesday night, the Attorney General announced that there would be a federal investigation into the death of Eric Garner after the Staten Island Grand Jury declined to indict the officer involved in this case.
The Attorney General stated, “The Department will conduct a complete review of the material gathered during the local investigation.”
“We have all seen the video of Mr. Garner’s arrest. His death, of course, was a tragedy,” said Mr. Holder. “All lives must be valued. Mr. Garner’s death is one of several recent incidents across the country that have tested the sense of trust that must exist between law enforcement and the communities they are charged to serve and protect. This is not a New York issue or a Ferguson issue alone. Those who have protested peacefully across our great nation following the grand jury’s decision in Ferguson have made that clear.”
Protests continued across the nation on Thursday night.
Mr. Holder urged for calm and nonviolent demonstration: “I know that substantial numbers of people in New York and across the country will be disappointed and frustrated by the outcome of the state grand jury proceeding today. I know many will plan to voice their disappointment publicly through protests. This is the right of all Americans. But as I have said before, throughout our history, the most successful movements have been those that adhered to the principles of nonviolence. I urge all those inclined to demonstrate tonight and in the days ahead to remain peaceful in their demonstrations, and not to engage in activities that deflect our attention from the very serious matters our nation must confront.”
On Thursday around 5 pm, the city of Davis announced that protesters had assembled at 1st and E Street. “They are a peaceful group composed of students & community members. They have been protesting in town and campus since 1 pm. The Davis PD and CHP closed the undercrossing for safety concerns due to the close proximity of the freeway.”
At one point photos show the protesters lying across Richards Blvd, blocking traffic and raising the ire of some residents.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
They have the right to peaceful protest, they don’t have the right to block a major intersection. This gets them nothing but ill will.
They don’t have the “right” to block a major intersection in that it’s against the law. On the other hand, I’m always baffled that people get so bent out of shape over being slightly inconvenienced when people were killed. It just seems trivial in the scheme of things.
No, I think you get baffled that some people don’t see it the way you do. I was downtown a few months ago having an outside dinner with some friends when a group of activists were marching through town shouting “hands up, don’t shoot”. That was fine, they were peacefully making their statement and not interfering with other’s business. When they start acting up like spoiled children that are not getting noticed and block roadways then they’re taking it too far.
How long did they block the intersection and did the police have to break them up?
That’s actually the point I was making. We live in a society where people do all sorts of things that we don’t agree with, that’s our strength. And yet we’ve become completely intolerant to being inconvenienced, that’s the price we pay for an open society. And yes, that means sometimes I’ll be inconvenienced by people who I don’t agree with. I used to work in Washington, there’d be protesters all of the time in from of the White House where I used to like to ride my bike – sometimes they were people I disagreed with and they made it difficult for me to go to work, oh well.
How far would you be willing to let a group go to get noticed? What if just blocking traffic wasn’t enough in their minds? What’s are the limits?
I think it’s important we define what we mean by “let.” I’m not suggesting we change laws to make these actions legal. An important component of civil disobedience is that it is an act that is unlawful and it requires the authorities to deal appropriately with the act. That’s supposed to be part of the purpose.
With that understanding of my views – what is your question?
David wrote:
> On the other hand, I’m always baffled that people get so bent
> out of shape over being slightly inconvenienced when people
> were killed. It just seems trivial in the scheme of things.
So are you saying that it is OK for me to ride over to your house and let the air out of all four of your car tires (next time it rains) if I put a “remember Ferguson sign in the window?
See my response to Barack Palin.
I’m always baffled that people get so bent out of shape over being slightly inconvenienced when people were killed.”
It’s because they are inconvenienced by the protest, but not by the death. If their friend or child was killed, they would feel differently. Some people have no empathy towards the suffering of others. Perhaps they missed the video of the man saying over and over again that he could not breathe. He was surrounded by cops. He wasn’t going anywhere. He was killed for illegally selling a few cigarettes.
Some people have no or limited empathy for criminals who get themselves killed due to their poor decision making skills. He got himself killed for poor health and not submitting to the lawful arrest. He had eight prior arrests for selling cigarettes. Had he allowed the police to handcuff him and not struggled he would still be alive. His acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity and hypertension were contributing factors in his death.
The waste of resources for the officers present is not trivial. They all should have been arrested/cited by the police and then convicted. The police should have cleared the intersection arresting all who participated. If the protesters want to break the law they should reap the consequences of a conviction and fine with pride.
The real tragedy is that they are protesting in response to two grand juries which did their jobs in not indicting either officer. Brown and Gardner are not heroes, they are criminals. Gardner has a lengthy record and Brown committed a number of felonies in the hour before his death. Do we really want our youth looking at Brown as a role model? This dope smoking thug goes to the store committing a robbery for cigarillos to make blunts so he cant smoke more marijuana. Look at how he treated the clerk there, shoving him and staring him down. That clerk is a real victim. Brown resists the officer, punching him and getting into a struggle over the officers gun inside the patrol car. He then runs away and for some reason turns around and charges/moves towards the officer ignoring the officer’s orders to stop and gets shot dead. Bottom line both Gardner and Brown got themselves killed by refusing lawful orders by police officers.
Now Holder promises another DOJ investigation into criminal civil rights violations further aggravating the situation with the appearance of a false promise of prosecution. We are still waiting for Holder’s DOJ to announce a decision on Zimmerman. We are waiting for an announcement on Wilson. Now we wait for an announcement in the Gardner death. A responsible attorney general would come forward and promptly announce that there were no criminal violations in these cases. Instead a segment of our community waits for “justice” with a false hope blind to the fact that justice was delivered in the Zimmerman verdict and the recent grand jury decisions. Justice is not convicting innocent individuals. Show trials to make some members of the community feel good like the Zimmerman trial are not ethical. Someone ought to be looking into the ethics of the special prosecutors who decided to go after Zimmerman. The local DA declined to file charges in that case because the evidence did not support a prosecution. He was right.
I thought Holder was resigning. Yesterday wouldn’t be soon enough. We need to rid the DOJ and free our country of that slime.
“The waste of resources for the officers present is not trivial. They all should have been arrested/cited by the police and then convicted. The police should have cleared the intersection arresting all who participated. If the protesters want to break the law they should reap the consequences of a conviction and fine with pride.”
The police probably felt doing so would create more of a problem – it would draw a large crowd and the second day there would be four times more people there.
“Bottom line both Gardner and Brown got themselves killed by refusing lawful orders by police officers.”
In the Brown case, I believe that you have a point, please tell me how you believe that selling cigarettes and talking back to police constititute cause for “homicide” on the part of the police. Not my word, that of the coroner.
So is that how we should enforce laws from now on? If gang members romp through our downtown creating havoc should we just let them be because there might be four more times the gang members there the next day?
Tia,
The struggle led directly from his refusal to be arrested/handcuffed. Gardner’s acute and chronic bronchial asthma, obesity and hypertension were contributing factors in his death. If an obese person with co-existing medical problems cannot get good oxygenation to begin with, then the physical struggle he engaged in could lead to the homicide finding. He died of cardiac arrest in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. In other words a healthy person would have literally walked away from the encounter observed on the video. This could have been a significant factor in the grand jury’s decision. Another factor could have been the level of care provided by the EMTs. Remember not every homicide is a crime.
throughout our history, the most successful movements have been those that adhered to the principles of nonviolence”
We rightfully expect nonviolent behavior from our private citizens in protesting police and governmental policies. Should not this same expectation of a default of non violent behavior whenever possible be the expectation for our community leaders in the form of police and those who have ultimate control over their behaviors in the form of mayors, city councils, and city managers. For me the standard for the use of force, which in my mind is the officially sanctioned use of violence in enforcement of the law, should be higher for police and leaders than for the general public, not lower.
BP
“When they start acting up like spoiled children that are not getting noticed and block roadways then they’re taking it too far.”
Who gets to decide when it is “too far” ? You see road block as too much but do not seem to mind shouting in a public place. Someone might feel this an unacceptable breach of their “right” to have a quiet, peaceful meal. I would tolerate far more than a temporary road blockage as protest of unnecessary and egregious loss of life as in the Garner case or that of the shooting of a 12 year old without any apparent assessment of the situation by an officer who had previously been judged not emotionally fit for street duty by his previously employing department. I see the egregious actions of the Cleveland and New York police as worthy of this kind of peaceful if minimally disruptive protest. So which of us is right ?
Tia wrote:
> I would tolerate far more than a temporary road blockage as protest
> of unnecessary and egregious loss of life as in the Garner case
Please post what you feel you would “tolerate” next time I want to “protest” one of your posts?
Can I ride over and let the air out of one of your tires so you just have to pump it up or put on the spare, or can I let the air out of all your tires (about an hour with a hand pump to pump them up) or can I put an old bike cable through one of your wheels (so you have to bind some bolt cutters to move your car)?
P.S. would you “tolerate” more from protesters to the “egregious loss of life as in the Garner case” than from anti abortion protesters?
Tia Will, what’s too far for you? Blocking traffic, looting stores, burning down buildings? I’m sure the activists in Ferguson felt they were justified burning down those buildings. What about the mothers that got caught in the protester’s traffic jam and were very late picking up their young child from school, sport’s practice, etc.? How about someone who was rushing their loved one to the doctor because they weren’t breathing properly? There are many scenarios, are you okay with that?
BP
Please see my comments to South of Davis on these questions.
I’m pretty sure Vanita Gupta is a woman.
Hadn’t gotten to this article yet.
My experience with the use of excessive force goes back to 1969. I was at a peace rally in Alameda county and saw a 250 lb, 6’4″ California Highway Patrolman pick up a small, very pregnant girl by her hair, so to get a better swing, when he hit her across the back with his baton, one of the good old fashioned oak/steel jobs. It’s the “Pack Mentality” I reckon.
I do understand being aggravated and inconvenienced by unruly mobs. Sports teams’ parades, charity running events and bicycle races come to mind. I’ve managed to put up with these much more frequent aggravations, so I trust BP can muster the stuff to buck up.
;>)/
Dumb analogy. The aggravations you speak of are planned and sanctioned by the city, not random acts that people can’t plan for.
BP
“Sports teams’ parades, charity running events and bicycle races come to mind.”
“Dumb analogy. The aggravations you speak of are planned and sanctioned by the city, not random acts that people can’t plan for.”
Not as dumb as you might want to portray. Regardless of a scheduled city event, one cannot plan for the sudden onset of illness requiring an ER visit. I do not know this for a fact, but I would anticipate that if I got out of the car, and explained to these protestors that I needed to get past to get my toddler to the ER, they would have cleared space just as the runners did, although some of them were obviously not pleased at my interfering with their timed run.
What about an ambulance that gets caught in the traffic jam and has to alter course to get their critical patient to Sutter costing them several precious minutes?
so you’re going to ban parades, sporting events, farmer’s markets, concerts, etc. which might do the same?
Once again, those things can be planned for so the ambulance doesn’t get caught up in a surprise protester traffic jam.
that’s a distinction without a difference. the police barricaded a perimeter yesterday, the ambulances and emergence vehicles were informed of these restrictions and planned their route accordingly just as they would for any other special event including the parade yesterday.
So are you saying the protesters asked for a permit to block a major intersection and the town knew it was coming and could plan accordingly? Sorry, but you’re just wrong here.
i never even mentioned permitting
Yes, I know, that’s exactly the point.
South of Davis
“would you “tolerate” more from protesters to the “egregious loss of life as in the Garner case” than from anti abortion protesters?”
Anti abortion protesters are routinely allowed to closely approach and express their opinions whether wanted or not to staff and patients at clinics which perform abortions regardless of the reason that the patient is accessing the clinic. There is nothing to stop unsolicited communication to women going for the responsible act of obtaining birth control or the woman going to get her mammogram.
I respect the right of free speech on any topic up to and include the excremental comments of the Westboro Baptist church as I have stated on many occasions. I do not condone any destruction of property in making one’s protest. And I have absolutely no idea why you are asking ridiculous questions about letting the air out of my tires since I have never posted anything that would imply that I support physical destruction of anything during public protest ….. unless of course you just want to jerk my chain…..which I defend as your free speech right to be totally silly if you want to.
Tia wrote:
> And I have absolutely no idea why you are asking ridiculous
> questions about letting the air out of my tires
It is because you seem to be OK with “other people” not being able to drive where they want to drive, but “you” don’t want to be inconvenienced by protesting (unless you want to correct me by posting that anyone who wants to “protest” is OK to let the air out of your tires)…
SOD
Only if you cannot make the distinction between tampering with private property and sitting on public property. I am pretty sure that you can discern the difference.
Tia wrote:
> you cannot make the distinction between tampering with
> private property and sitting on public property
So will you give the OK for someone to block your car with a truck to “protest” your views (make sure to post your license number so we can get your car) if it is “sitting on public property” (say at a city council meeting)?
P.S. I was assuming you parked on the street (and had a garage full of stuff like most people in Davis) …
“Sports teams’ parades, charity running events and bicycle races come to mind.”
I remember quite clearly having to wait for about 15 minutes while a kind race monitor diverted runners so that I could get my ill toddler out of my neighborhood and to a doctor during one of our community “fun runs”. I saw it for what it was…. a minor inconvenience. I see protests over unjustifiable deaths as having at least us much merit, despite their inconvenience, as a “fun run”.
So anytime someone gets killed in this country and a group feels that it was unjust they should have the right to block traffic?
i don’t believe anyone said anyone had the right to block traffic.
White Police Chief Indicted for Killing Unarmed Black Man in South Carolina
by Tribune News Service | December 5, 2014
By David Zucchino
A white former police chief in a tiny South Carolina town has been indicted on murder charges in the 2011 shooting of an unarmed black man. The indictment Wednesday came the same day a Staten Island grand jury declined to criminally charge a white New York City police officer in the killing of Eric Garner.
In Orangeburg County, S.C., the grand jury indicted Richard J. Combs, who was the police chief in Eutawville, S.C., when he shot and killed Bernard Bailey, 54, in May 2011. The two men struggled inside Bailey’s car after Bailey came to Town Hall to protest a broken tail light ticket issued to his daughter six weeks earlier.
RELATED
Across the Country, People Protest Police Killings
White Phoenix Police Officer Shoots and Kills Unarmed Black Man
Protests Erupt After Grand Jury Decides Not to Indict NYPD Officer in Chokehold Death
Protests After Ferguson Officer Escapes Indictment
Combs tried to arrest Bailey on an obstruction of justice warrant for protesting the ticket the day it was issued in March 2011, according to court testimony. The chief then followed Bailey outside Town Hall to his truck. Combs reached into the vehicle as Bailey sat inside.
Combs testified at a court hearing that he became tangled in the truck’s steering wheel as he tried to shut off the ignition. The truck backed up, throwing Combs to the ground, prosecutors said. Combs, saying he feared for his life, shot Bailey twice in the chest.
Prosecutors said the chief instigated the confrontation by following Bailey to his truck. They said Bailey never threatened or attacked the officer. Combs faces up to 30 years to life in prison if convicted on the murder charge.
The grand jury indictment said Combs shot Bailey “with malice aforethought.” Bail was set at $150,000.
On Nov. 25, a circuit court judge in Orangeburg denied a motion by Combs’ lawyer for a defense based on South Carolina’s “stand your ground” law. The judge ruled that Bailey posed no threat to the public and Combs had other ways to serve the warrant rather than by confronting Bailey.
Bailey’s brother, the Rev. Kenneth Bailey, told a bond hearing for Combs in August 2013 that the shooting had racist overtones.
“He (Combs) was probably upset because a black man decided to leave him and he was a law enforcement officer,” the Rev. Bailey said, the Times and Democrat newspaper reported.
John O’Leary, a lawyer for Combs, told the hearing that the shooting had nothing to do with race.
The South Carolina indictment came just more than a week after a grand jury in Missouri declined to prosecute a white police officer in the shooting death of an unarmed black man in Ferguson, Mo., in August. That decision prompted violence and days of protests. The decision in the Staten Island case Wednesday also triggered widespread protests.
The Bailey family lawyer, Carl B. Grant, told reporters Wednesday that the indictment means justice will be served.
“We don’t know what brand of justice they’re serving in Ferguson or New York City, but here in South Carolina we believe in the jury system,” Grant said.
First Circuit Solicitor David M. Pascoe, the prosecutor for Orangeburg and two adjacent counties, declined to comment. He referred a reporter to documents in the case.
In August 2013, a grand jury charged Combs with misconduct in office in connection with the shooting. Combs was placed on leave after the shooting and dismissed from the force six months later.
Bailey’s family reached a $400,000 wrongful death settlement with Eutawville in August. Eutawville, a town of 313 people about 55 miles northwest of Charleston, is 35% black.
(c)2014 the Los Angeles Times
BP
“What about an ambulance that gets caught in the traffic jam and has to alter course to get their critical patient to Sutter costing them several precious minutes?”
What traffic jam ? All of us who own smart phones are routinely are able to avoid obstructed routes these days. I certainly doubt that any road blockage occurs with such blinding speed that an ambulance could not be directed to a quicker route easily. Also, how many seconds do you think it would take these protesters to move once they were aware that an ambulance needed to pass ? What about you deal with, as our frequent poster Frankly says with “the here and now”, rather than concocting stories about what might happen ? The reality is that nothing adverse did happen as best I can tell . Are you aware of any adverse consequence beyond your annoyance ? In your estimation of priorities, how does your annoyance rank compared with the unjustifiable loss of life ?
Tia wrote:
> how many seconds do you think it would take these protesters
> to move once they were aware that an ambulance needed to pass
In the last 24 hours I have heard of many ambulances stuck in traffic, here are a couple that a 10 second Google search found:
http://www.universalhub.com/2014/traffic-jam-caused-protests-kept-paramedics
http://twitchy.com/2014/12/03/if-someone-dies-its-on-them-nyc-protesters-block-ambulance-on-madison-ave-photo/
To be fair to the protesters who is going to let them know that there is someone dying in an ambulance stuck a 1/2 mile away from intersection they are blocking?
You’re not considering the backup of traffic for miles, not just the immediate area. What if an ambulance or individual with a medical emergency were caught in that? When protestors block roads, burn things, riot and loot, they are not generating any sympathetic feelings from society. The opposite occurs and people begin to focus on the behavior of the protestors, rather than the cause itself. Ghandi or Martin Luther King would be a better example for protestors to follow – and they got results.
The minute you are okay with blocking traffic as a means of protest, you start down the slippery slope of permitting illegal acts of protest/anarchy. If blocking traffic is okay with you, how about turning over cars, looting, etc.? Just where do you draw the line? And who gets to draw that line? Secondly, when someone is having a medical emergency, every second can count. To say the ambulance driver can get out and explain to an angry mob the need to get through is blinding yourself to the realities of the situation. 30 seconds, even 5 seconds can be the difference between life and death.
Anon
“Secondly, when someone is having a medical emergency, every second can count. To say the ambulance driver can get out and explain to an angry mob the need to get through is blinding yourself to the realities of the situation. 30 seconds, even 5 seconds can be the difference between life and death.”
Do you really believe that I do not understand the urgency of medical emergencies ? Yes, if an ambulance were trapped in a snarl in LA or on the wrong side of the causeway this might pertain. It simply does not pertain as one poster put it to an ambulance on route to Sutter Davis. I also said absolutely nothing about an ambulance driver getting out and explaining. Please lets not try to apply the facts on the ground in Ferguson, or Oakland, or New York, or Cleveland with those on the ground in Davis. It was fear over the situation in Oakland, rather than at attempt to understand and deal with the real situation here in Davis that led to the administrative and police errors that ended with the pepper spraying.
Eric Holder is on his way out – someone who hardly is a pillar of justice, e.g. Fast and Furious scandal, among others.
Protestors who block roads, burn things, riot and loot are not illicting any sympathies from society, but rather the opposite. The focus then becomes the protestors’ behavior and not the cause itself. Ghandi and MLK protested peacefully – and got results.
it’s remarkable to me how short people’s memories are. both mlk and ghandi might have been peaceful, but they also shut things down including blocking roads. in their day they were despised by the status quo.
Those indviduals are known for arranging boycotts and sit-ins. My point is more about the violent forms of protest…that’s not an effective way of getting a message across. In SF, bicyclists did a “critical mass” which slowed commute. Primary in their message is that bikes should be respected on the road. I agree with that position, but a lot of commuters had angry comments because they couldn’t get home in time after work. The message, similar to road blockages up here, will not get through to people who are negatively affected.
i think we need to look at these separately.
the violent protests, more to the point, the rioting were not perpetrated by the most part by organized protesters, but were focused mainly in ferguson as a response i think both the decision there as well as the police tactics.
blocking the roads are a nuisance, but that’s really the price we live for a democracy. i agree with david, people get too bent out of shape about being inconvenienced. it’s not that i’m arguing they should be permitted, it is illegal, but i think our police do a better job of managing these situations without having things explode than other jurisdictions and so i think it was the right move not to arrest 50 to 75 people and cause a bigger scene than needed.
people are angry and worse yet they feel powerless to change things right now. if the worst thing that happens is i have to go an exit further on i-80 to get home, i consider us lucky.
“Ghandi and MLK protested peacefully – and got results.”
You beat me to it DP. Maybe some of our posters are not old enough to remember how very disruptive, nor how vilified MLK was for his actions. People seem to have forgotten that sitting anywhere one chose on a bus, and sitting at the white peoples lunch counters, and drinking from white drinking fountains was once considered extremely disruptive. So much so that water hoses, batons, police dogs to name a few techniques were used against these “lawless agitators” as they were perceived at the time.
At the time, many were “inconvenienced”, many were “angered”, many were disgusted with the protestors behavior. And yet, that is what it took for change to occur.
Protestors who block roads, burn things, riot and loot are not generating any sympathies from society, but rather the opposite. The focus then becomes the protestors’ behavior and not the cause itself. Ghandi and MLK protested peacefully – and got results.
I agree, poor marketing.
If they applied for a permit to walk or put up signs, then advertised the event, MORE people might be on their side, instead of a bunch of sign waving rejects operating with no plan, no clue.
They would get the message out to more people by renting a billboard on the freeway. Buy a politician like everyone else!
And what does this do, it just empowers the protesters to do it again and again knowing there’s no consequences. There will always be some kind of unjustifiable death or pet cause so do you want our streets blocked off every time some group decides that is their tactic? Would you be so accepting and lenient if the Tea Party blocked a major intersection in Davis over taxation?
you have it backwards. you know what empowers protesters – hauling them off the jail in front of rolling media camera’s. you know what really empowers protesters – beating them up or dousing them with pepper spray. when the ucd administration ignored the protesters they ultimately went away. and when that didn’t work – ie with the bank blocking, they found equally effective summoning them to court and charging them with crimes. they stopped protesting after that.
you know when the media started covering the civil rights movement? when bull connor started sicking the dogs on them. and beat them. that got media coverage and ultimately ended segregation. had they ignored the protesters, they would have lost energy.
So where are the protests for the thousands of police killed in the line of duty, and the ten of thousands injured in the line of duty, and the thousands that commit suicide as a result of job stress and PTSD?
Where are the protests over the tens of thousands of blacks killed by other blacks?
Jobs reports today… 92 million Americans that want to work are unable to find work.
The number of discouraged workers has reached a 36 year old high.
Where are the protests for that?
Maybe what we are seeing is the rise of the underclass forming into anarchists because they have time on their hands and not enough to do.
That type of thing has to warm the heart of any social justice crusader… regardless of they are one of those drug-use and free-love semi-brain impairment-caused children of the Greatest Generation, or a more recent product of leftist brainwashing from one of our broken institutions of higher learning. Next up on the political correctness anti-“privileged” platform… people with jobs and things to do.
It isn’t fair that you have a job and things to do. So you can suffer having to wait for those unemployed protestors to make their point… and maybe suffer having your house broken into and robbed, and your business burned down too.
“So where are the protests for the thousands of police killed in the line of duty, and the ten of thousands injured in the line of duty, and the thousands that commit suicide as a result of job stress and PTSD?”
According to The National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, in 2013, 111 federal, state, local, tribal and territorial peace officers were killed, making it the lowest number since 1959 and 10 fewer than the previous year.(There have been just over 20,00 since 1791.) They note only 15, 500 injuries in the same one year period. That may be inflated if one believes the oft repeated tale of officers taking advantage of early retirement and disability pay for questionable injuries.
I attend a service each year remembering public servants who have passed away. Not as flashy as a protest, so perhaps I’ll suggest we hire a pr person to promote the event and get Frankly to attend, if he can overlook his feelings about most civil servants.
“Maybe what we are seeing is the rise of the underclass forming into anarchists because they have time on their hands and not enough to do.”
Maybe you are seeing industrious, intelligent people, pushed to the limit with little to lose. The fact that you see them as an “underclass” is most telling. They don’t see you as “upperclass.” A potential source of protein, perhaps…
;>)/
Something is really bothersome about this slew of racial anti-law enforcement event reports. It is not like we haven’t had similar things going on for some time, so why now all the hoopla and DOJ action?
After reading the book “This Town” there is not a question in my mind that the main media and Washington politics are one in the same… specifically the Democrat-media connection… it is orders of magnitude stronger than that of the GOP.
With 92 million that want to work still unemployed. With Obamacare imploding. With the state of global conflict, death and destruction amped up to record levels. And with clear evidence that Democrats have lost their ability to retain political traction with their tired old class and gender war divisiveness… from my perspective it appears that the Democrats and their media pals are doubling down on the race war and picking on law enforcement… knowing that conservatives and Republicans are generally quick to side with law enforcement and hence enable the Dems to drive a deeper racial hedge in a last-ditch hope to win back power in 2016.
Conspiracy theory? Maybe… but again, after reading the book “This Town” it does not see far fetched at all.
And in the end maybe law enforcement looks like the biggest fool for voting Democrat to maximize their union pay and benefits.
Since unemployment is down, job numbers and the economy are growing, and the Affordable Care Act is highly successful, your supposition falls apart at your premises. And it’s not like this has come out of nowhere.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-03/labor-participation-rate-drops-36-year-low-record-926-million-americans-not-labor-fo
At least half of the decline of workforce participation is due to baby boomers retiring and leaving the work force. And what any of this has to do with police misconduct exists only in the conspiracy-shrouded corners of the minds of some conservatives.
Mr Shor, I have to disagree. I have been consulting for the last few years, and every job pays less and with no benefits. The ACA is not highly successful except from the press releases you read. Full time jobs are at the high end only.
My experience is the corporations are hiring, but only for short terms and with no benefits. Recently I again had one that ends in less than a year, has “variable” hours, and pays NO benefits, not even SS. $15 an hour sounds good some days.
According to your statistics, job numbers are up… I had three last year. I am sure they counted every one of them.
Frankly wrote:
> specifically the Democrat-media connection…
> it is orders of magnitude stronger than that of the GOP.
You are correct that here in Davis (one of the bluest cities in one of the bluest states) that the media tends to favor Democrats (since most people in the region tend to favor Democrats).
If you go to a red city in a red state where most people favor Republicans you will see the media favors Republicans (since you don’t sell papers or get listeners and viewers by offending people in the region).
> but again, after reading the book “This Town” it does not see far fetched at all.
I was hoping for more out of “This Town” when I read it last summer but the left leaning (former NYT/WaPo) author Leibovich just pulled back the curtain a little bit.
One of my goals posting here is to see Frankly finally admit that the Republicans don’t really want to do what they say they want to do and are just “pretending” to “fight” with the Democrats and they work together to make money for themselves and their donors.
There is no difference between the “fights” on CSPAN as the “fights” in WWF (now WWE) Wrestlemania II when Hulk Hogan pretended to “fight” with the Iron Sheikh as they worked together to entertain viewers and make the WWE Owner a BILLIONAIRE as (to quote Jonathan Gruber) “stupid Americans” pay 18% interest on their credit cards to pay $60 to watc yet another fake wrestling match on pay per view…
“You are correct that here in Davis (one of the bluest cities in one of the bluest states) that the media tends to favor Democrats (since most people in the region tend to favor Democrats).”
that’s actually a crock of cow poo poo. the enterprise is owned by mcnaughton – a notorious, anti-union republican. it’s true they pick their spots but they tend to be more anti-tax, more anti-union than the electorate here. the biggest draw to the paper, bob dunning, is no liberal. he gets five columns a week. who is the big liberal voice? there actually used to be one, but he has long since been run off to winters. that leaves the enterprise with essentially no dominant voice on the left to balance out the paper’s tilt.
DP wrote:
> that’s actually a crock of cow poo poo. the enterprise is owned by
> mcnaughton – a notorious, anti-union republican.
I never said the “Enterprise” was the bluest paper in a blue town, but I can’t remember the last time they endorsed a Republican. The Enterprise endorsed the most pro union left leaning candidates for school board and Garamendi for congress (see below):
http://www.garamendi.org/news/press/davis-enterprise-endorses-congressman-garamendi
It’s funny that when I worked for Willie Brown (who was often described as a left leaning Democrat by the national left leaning press) my “progressive” and “green” friends were mad at me for working for such a “pro-businesss right winger”. How is endorsing Democrats not (as I said) not “favoring Democrats”?
Assuming all politicians are cut from the same cloth, it would come down to ideology. The collection of ideas espoused by one party over the other. And understanding what I do about the collection of ideas espoused by the Democrats verses the GOP, the GOP is significantly a lesser evil. I see the ideas of the GOP as enabling a slow and grinding spiral upward in long-range progress that is the result of stronger private economy economic growth and stronger social stability in general. I see the Democrats as chasing short-term “progress” to satiate emotions at the expense of lower economic growth and weaker social stability.
It isn’t that the GOP are angels and the Democrats are devils. Nor is it that the GOP as designed provides us a perfect solution for what ails us. It is that the Democrats, controlled by the liberal arm of the party, are more damaging and destructive to the nation in pursuit of their ideas… which have been proven failed over and over again.
I think what bothers you is the slick snake-oil salesman money-grubbing charlatan types that infest Washington and some state and local positions. These types exist in both parties. They don’t so much honor the values of their party as they blow where they can find the most money to stuff into their pockets. And certainly many idealistic newly freshman lawmakers end up corrupted to that end.
Generally, in the GOP today, I see a younger core of dedicated public servants passionate about the ideas of their party and responsive to their constituents. But it really comes down to theses values and ideas of the ideology of the two parties. There was a time when the Democrat party was worthy of consideration when the tide flowed too strongly to business and not enough to labor. But today, if you care about either business or jobs, you have only one party choice… the GOP. Because the Democrat party has become the the liberal party and liberals have proven to not own a calculator and to have never take any economic classes that they remember.
Y’know, I was a bit inconvenienced yesterday, since I volunteered my time, as a PD volunteer, to help with traffic control. I was one of the people trying to help those other inconvenienced people get to where they needed to go, instead of being trapped at an intersection with no escape. I spent several hours being thus inconvenienced. Got quite worn out, too – traffic control is a lot of work!
But I have a different viewpoint about participating in such an event. I got to observe how it was managed, and how a successful outcome could result by not over-reacting. This was a fairly minor event; I know that from experience – I was at Columbia University in 1968, and at UC Berkeley in 1964-67. I viewed it as an exercise in democracy, but more importantly from my point of view, an exercise in emergency response, training both the professionals and us volunteers for more major events (can you say “earthquake?”).
As far as I know, there were only four arrests, and those were for egregious acts. That’s a success to me.
I learned quite a bit yesterday. The inconvenience was valuable.
I love seeing anyone who protests anything, and the drive by is worth it, sometimes, it raises awareness. But if there is just a detour, I get no clue.
Hey, I see the comments are fixed!!
You could have parked your car and walked in, or…..I let all bikes pass. Ride your bike!
It is interesting the article mentions Holder is “Investigating over 600 incidents” but has no indictments from any of them? Yet? After 20 months?
It’s all a political ploy. I really think Frankly has hit on to something here. It’s beginning to look like the Democrats are trying to gin up their base after the mid term shellacking they took. It’s coming from the top down and they’ve got all the race baiters working overtime, from Obama, Holder to the Sharpton’s of the world.
I suggest meds.
Meds? Do you really think Obama needs them?
Despite the advances in pharmacological solutions, there are some conditions, for which we have no cure.
It does seem that there is some correlation between a faulty wtf1 gene and gullibility, confirmed by testing of subscribers to The Daily Mail and Roger Whittaker fans. As Dr. Morris says, “You could say that gullibility is in your genes,” said Morris. “You’d be shatteringly wrong, but that wouldn’t matter to gullible people.”
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/04/01/scientists-discover-gene-and-part-of-brain-that-make-people-gullible/#.VINPy8lNe8A
;>)/