Footage of Scott Olsen being shot by Police at Occupy Oakland

Accidents happen. A weak propellant may have dropped the canister into a lower arc then intended. When you are dealing with crowds, margin of error gets mighty thin. I know! Lets ask Obama for more federal funding for major city law enforcement to have their own:
 
@Dammy
I could accept the accident part until I saw people rushing to help him, until a flash grenade is specifically thrown next to his body as they try to help him.
 
That looks horrible. How is the guy?
 
skull fracture.
Iraq War veteran (2 tours, I believe), so anyone wishing to characterize him as a "hippy" (whatever the hell THAT is) or some bum can take a flying leap
 
redrumloa said:
@Dammy
I could accept the accident part until I saw people rushing to help him, until a flash grenade is specifically thrown next to his body as they try to help him.
Click to expand...

I'd guess the flash was to keep from grouping up, they want them to disperse and move away. Had the crowd stayed away, law enforcement would have to move in as first responders until paramedics arrived. LEOs and FR won't go to him till they are reasonably sure that their own security is established. With mobs, it's all about control. Video only shows it from one side, it doesn't show what is going on with PD/FR since something like that is being fed into the command structure for a unified response.

My guess, if the mob stayed away, the person would have been in professional hands sooner and a far quicker trip to the trauma unit which is important under the Golden Hour rule. Moving a trauma person is a VERY VERY BAD idea. You can cause all sorts of additional complications that could be life threatening or life changing.
 
Dammy said:
Moving a trauma person is a VERY VERY BAD idea. You can cause all sorts of additional complications that could be life threatening or life changing.
Click to expand...

Maybe so but put yourself in their shoes - as far as they are concerned it looks very like:
1. the guy has been deliberately shot;
2. when they went to check on his condition, they were attacked too.

Ask yourself this: in such circumstances is it reasonable to expect this group of people to put their trust in those they perceive as dishing out the violence?

Their intentions towards the injured party were clearly good. You cannot say the same for the police.
 
Robert said:
Maybe so but put yourself in their shoes - as far as they are concerned it looks very like:
1. the guy has been deliberately shot;
2. when they went to check on his condition, they were attacked too.

Ask yourself this: in such circumstances is it reasonable to expect this group of people to put their trust in those they perceive as dishing out the violence?

Their intentions towards the injured party were clearly good. You cannot say the same for the police.
Click to expand...
if I saw someone hurt i would NOT run in the opposite direction.
:rolleyes:

the proper thing to do is go look (ie assess) the person (not MOVE them), and use one's phone to call the ambulance. AND if people are around an injured person lying on the ground they are trying to prevent people from stepping on him or harming him further. it doesn't take a genius to figure THAT out.
 
cecilia said:
the proper thing to do is go look (ie assess) the person (not MOVE them), and use one's phone to call the ambulance.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the people in the clip weren't given that opportunity.
 
Robert said:
Maybe so but put yourself in their shoes - as far as they are concerned it looks very like:
1. the guy has been deliberately shot;
2. when they went to check on his condition, they were attacked too.

Ask yourself this: in such circumstances is it reasonable to expect this group of people to put their trust in those they perceive as dishing out the violence?

Their intentions towards the injured party were clearly good. You cannot say the same for the police.
Click to expand...

Yes I can. I know what the cops are thinking, I know what the protocols are and what their liabilities and responsibilities are. They are in the middle of a riot and trying to control it. They have to have control before they can move from their position. They have to have control of a given area before they move in force. They have to have control of an area before they allow non-combatants (read Fire/Rescue) into the area to do their work. You have a crowd gathering around a injured person that may have been injured by law enforcement action, do you rush in there and break your crowd control line? Do you allow non-combatants into the middle of a riot and put them in danger? Answer is clear the rioters away from the injured person, control that area and move in force to form protection zone for Fire/Rescue to give aid the injured person. This is not the military using force, this is law enforcement which has a different rules of engagement which means they have to provide assistance as soon as it's safe to do so.
 
Robert said:
Unfortunately the people in the clip weren't given that opportunity.
Click to expand...

Because they were ordered by law enforcement to move away. Refusing a lawful order (battle it in court, not in person) is going to have a lawful response. You see there are set responses that law enforcement are allowed to use, varies from state to state, but generally they are about equal. Law enforcement may use one level higher then the suspect is using, that is why refusing a lawful order (again, if you think it's not lawful, take it to court) will open the use of chemical or electronic compliance devices in order not to have to use physical force that may leave the subject and or the officer to significant or worse injuries.
 
Dammy said:
Because they were ordered by law enforcement to move away. Refusing a lawful order (battle it in court, not in person) is going to have a lawful response. You see there are set responses that law enforcement are allowed to use, varies from state to state, but generally they are about equal. Law enforcement may use one level higher then the suspect is using, that is why refusing a lawful order (again, if you think it's not lawful, take it to court) will open the use of chemical or electronic compliance devices in order not to have to use physical force that may leave the subject and or the officer to significant or worse injuries.
Click to expand...

And videos like these make people like me have more sympathy for the OWS crowd.
 
Dammy said:
Yes I can. I know what the cops are thinking,
Click to expand...

I said clearly. Let me say that one more time: CLEARLY.
Maybe you, in your little police clique, "know" that their intentions were good.
Well done. Congratulations.
However, I asked you to put yourself in the shoes of the protesters. You seem to be incapable of doing so.

This makes the rest of your post irrelevant.
 
redrumloa said:
And videos like these make people like me have more sympathy for the OWS crowd.
Click to expand...

Somewhat paradoxically, I've found myself having a wee bit less sympathy with them recently.
Who'd a'thunk you and I would switch sides? :lol:
 
redrumloa said:
And videos like these make people like me have more sympathy for the OWS crowd.
Click to expand...

Go do a ride-along with BSO on a Friday night just after government sends out checks-EBT renewals and see what life is like on the streets. The useful idiots of ONOWS are playing with reality, get use to seeing what happens when the Progressives meet up with street reality because it won't be pretty. This was all intended into moving the useful idiots in to a violent stage of protest, society will demand government to put a stop to it which will continue the spiral downwards.

Everybody can see the hand writing on the wall. Buy gold, silver, food, water, and plenty of ammo and get reconnected with your Creator, we are leaving the golden years of America for something far worse as the spiral downward accelerates.
 
Robert said:
I said clearly. Let me say that one more time: CLEARLY.
Maybe you, in your little police clique, "know" that their intentions were good.
Well done. Congratulations.
Click to expand...

Coming from you, I guess I should take that as a compliment. I am less then impressed on how your government handled your riots. Are you impressed by the way your country handled your riots?

However, I asked you to put yourself in the shoes of the protesters. You seem to be incapable of doing so.

This makes the rest of your post irrelevant.
Click to expand...

True, I can't put my self in their shoes. I do not do drugs, I seldom drink, and I do not want to be a parasite on society. I have work to do, even as degrading as it is, it is a job that produces money. I paid off all my student loans on a degree I made very little money on and I doubt I will ever make any money again, but I don't sit and demand others pay for my choice of a degree or college/university.

Now I do have compassion. I do have compassion for the people of the UK and Europe for they are now staring at a very dark future that will not end in their life times. It makes what the US is about to go through like a camping trip.
 
Dammy said:
True, I can't put my self in their shoes. I do not do drugs, I seldom drink, and I do not want to be a parasite on society.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that the man injured in the video was a junkie, alcoholic parasite on society.
However, the implication that this makes what happened to him acceptable is a little distasteful in my opinion.

I paid off all my student loans on a degree I made very little money on and I doubt I will ever make any money again, but I don't sit and demand others pay for my choice of a degree or college/university.
Click to expand...

As did I. My degree has been almost useless to me and it took me over a decade to pay off my original student loans.
So what? It has nothing to do with defending police brutality.
 
Robert said:
I wasn't aware that the man injured in the video was a junkie, alcoholic parasite on society.
However, the implication that this makes what happened to him acceptable is a little distasteful in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Lets see here, front line of a riot vs police. I can't think of too many reasons to be doing a standoff with cops in full riot gear other then to... riot?

As did I. My degree has been almost useless to me and it took me over a decade to pay off my original student loans.
So what? It has nothing to do with defending police brutality.
Click to expand...

Let me see police brutality and I'll get back to you. So far I have seen an accident with most likely a weak propellant charge to blame. When you use a large bore weapon on a person, you aim for the belly and it usually hits them in the chest. Canister rounds have to be arced into a landing zone. There are several areas of the body LEOs are not allowed to specifically aim for with impact weapsons: head, neck and crotch are the main ones I can remember. Given the movement of the crowd, a poor accuracy style weapon, stress, I can't conceive of a LEO aiming for what a zone that is considered deadly force, even if he wanted to. Lets get real here, those rounds are expensive and most likely the SDPD is not going to be willing to spend a huge amount of money on target practice other then what the city attorney says is the minimum they can get away with for those who are certified to use. Nor can I see the LEO spending his own money on his own time doing further training with a class III weapon with a BATF doc stamp of $200 @ shell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top