Occupy Wall Street

Sit on a Sidewalk, Get Pepper Sprayed


Students at University of California-Davis sitting on campus sidewalk as part of an "Occupy" protest pepper-sprayed and dragged away:

Uh, have a great weekend!

NEXT: Toldja: Not a Good Idea to Pursue Solyndra Crime Angle

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Speaking of crazy situations, Oklahoma St. just lost to Iowa St.

    1. Way more messed up.

      1. Urban Meyer>Tim Tebow>Luke fucking Fickell

    2. Wasn’t paying attention, but seriously? I’d be ok with an LSU-Bama rematch at this point….

      1. UGA or Arkansas will beat LSU and then we’ll have a fucking mess on our hands.

        1. Arky won’t win and neither will U(sic)GA.

          1. Haha. It’s funny ’cause it’s true.

          2. The SEC ain’t about schoolin’. It’s about bein the best damn foosball conference on God’s green earth.

      2. Oh god no. Who wants to watch that snooze fest again!

        1. true…it would be much more enjoyable to watch LSU beat up a non-SEC team. That would make four years in a row.

    3. Thank Jaysus. So does that mean Bama gets to rematch LSU?
      Maybe we can win this time if they put our kickers through some sort of bataan death march training.
      Roll Tide!

      1. Hey, look at me. I can’t even win the division in my conference but I deserve to play for the MNC. Hurr de durr de do.


        1. When you are in the most insanely overpowered division/conference, that’s the way it works!

          1. My comment sure looked a lot smarter about 23 hours ago.

  2. It’s like they were spraying bugs.

    1. They were, the students just got in the way.

  3. It’s pretty clear that they had been warned. They got exactly what they wanted.

    1. Ah.
      So today’s lesson is: “Obey your masters, or you’ll deserve to suffer the consequences.”

      I don’t have much sympathy for the ideals of OWS, but fortunately i’ve realized some time ago that it doesn’t mean i have to side with jackbooted fascists of the state.

      1. If they’re making a nuisance of themselves? Absofuckinglutely.

        1. Yeah, why simply arrest citizens when you can assault them first?

  4. Pepper spray is for people who are violent and out of control. It’s not for hippies on sidewalks. They could have just arrested them, THEN pepper sprayed them if they got violent.

    1. actually, not really true. pepper spray’s place on the UOF continuum does not require it only be used when people are “violent” AND out of control

      however, we can agree it is not justified for mere passive resistance under these (apparent) circs.

      it’s rarely justified for passive resistance.

      1. What the fuck does that mean?

        1. do i have to dumb it down to your level?


          derp derp derp jerbs derp derp


          1. If you look at me funny, am I justified in punching you in the throat?

            1. ah, the internet tuff gai!!

            2. I’d be OK with it. But you gotta promise you’ll kick him in the nuts for me when he’s down.

              1. seriously. this is the level of discourse?


                1. Is your shift key broken?

                  1. Is your shift key broken?

                    It must have looked at one of his fellow cops the wrong way.

                    1. Sloopy, you are the real fascist here. Gratuitous generalizations are for the weak-minded.

                    2. Right, because we see so many cops arresting their fellow officers who break the law.

                      I mean, the internets are just packed wall to wall with stories of cops who go out of their way to treat other cops with the same level of scrutiny.

                      And FWIW, I didn’t know a requirement for being a fascist was “overgeneralizing groups of people.”. I did know, however, a part of it was controlling the masses with force.

                    3. Really? I’ve always thought generalization to be at the core of fascism, whether it’s all JOOS suck of the Hitler variety or all white males suck of the Feminista variety.

                    4. I’d say it was the fact that they killed 6M of them that made them fascist. The generalizing is mere bigotry.

                      IOW, mass graves aren’t full of bodies that were killed by the hurtful words of others. They are, however, full of bodies the state used force against.

                2. Did you see where I stuck up for you in that thread a while back? If not, well, I did.

              2. I’d be OK with it. But you gotta promise you’ll kick him in the nuts for me when he’s down.

                And say “Fuck off, slaver”

          2. Don’t get angry at Dunphy, his answer here is actually useful – because it confirms that to law enforcement it’s standard procedure to inflict pain to extract compliance, and not just to defend officers or third parties.

            So it was helpful of him to reply to Amagi.

            1. Breaking Libertarian News: Corporations are people but cops are uniformly fascist cunts.

              1. Corporations are groups of people

                Fixed it for you

              2. Who said that?

                I just said that it’s very common for law enforcement agencies and departments to have as part of their STATED POLICY that you can use pepper spray and/or tasers not in defense, but to force compliance.

                When Dunphy comes back, I’m sure he wouldn’t even dispute that – because it’s true.

                1. correct. but GENERALLY speaking, and iirc there is case law to this effect under the 9th circuit too, you cannot use pepper spray merely against PASSIVE RESISTANCE. which is the only thing i see here

                  i contrast this with the seattle episode, where people were blocking a busy street at rush hour. other factors apply there

                  not apparently here

              3. Hey, uniformly fascist cunts are people too!

                1. But are they as tasty as Soylent Green?

                  1. Hell, they’re the ones that make it.

            2. no, it’s not standard procedure.

              if you’d read what i wrote, you’d see that i refer to this pepper spraying as (based on what i see here) UNJUSTIFIED


      2. Can you give an example of passive resistance where your UOF rules would consider it justified?

        If people aren’t posing an immediate threat, how can you justify using force?

        1. the example i give is the busy seattle street during rush hour, where a large group fo protesters decided just to block it.

          one does NOT have to present an “immediate threat” for pepper spray ot be justified.

          however, GENERALLY SPEAKING, it is not justified when people offer merely PASSIVE resistance as seen in this video

    2. They could have just arrested them, THEN pepper sprayed them if they got violent.

      Or they could’ve taken them into an alley, then pepper sprayed ’em. Then rolled ’em in flour and baked.

      1. That’s the thing, hippies come pre-baked!

  5. They certainly got what they wanted – YouTube hits, but did the police have to give it to them? What was the motivation for forcing them to move? Context needed.

    1. Whatever happened to ignore them and they’ll get bored and stop crying? All they want is attention, and the media keeps giving it to them.

    2. They were apparently blocking a sidewalk. It wasn’t just that they were sitting on a sidewalk, but across it. Ridiculous to “prepare” them for transport by pepper spraying, though, plus it probably gets the paddy wagon nasty.

      1. As a Davis grad, it appears the section they were blocking was on the quad. Anyone other than someone wheelchair bound could just easily walk around that, and I bet they’d move for anyone in a wheelchair, as long as he wasn’t wearing a Bush/Cheney shirt.

        1. That wheelchair-bound person was gonna have one hell of a time getting past the police cruiser that blocks the entire sidewalk.

          Oops, nevermind.* The cruiser is fine where it is.

          *I forgot the cops are like minorities with all the bigotry on here toward them. Their protected-class status entitles them to take up 10 times the right of way as the people they are telling to move.

          1. troll-o-meter: .0001

            1. Please explain how pointing out a simple fact is trolling. Is the car there or not? Is it taking up sidewalk space or not?

              Go to hell.

  6. Regis hasn’t even left for a few hours and this.

  7. Helloooooooooooooo dunphy.

    Proud, asshole? These are your boys. I’m sure you will call for their arrest and prosecution.

    1. imo they were given lawful orders to disperse. they chose not to. OC spray was justified. i should know, i’m a UOF trainer.

      1. my [dunphy] [/dunphy] tags didn’t take. fuck.

        1. actually, i don’t think this is justified imo

          i don’t know the details, but they appear to just be sitting on some piece of sidewalk etc. on campus…

          there is no exigency, like in the downtown seattle plopping down in the street during rush hour incident

          GIVEN the above assumed fact pattern (iow all i know is what i see on video) … pepper spraying these people for mere passive resistance is NOT justified

          1. So, if it’s not justified, you are calling for their arrests, right?

            I mean, if a citizen had done this in front of you, they’d be arrested, right? I want to see if you will call for equal justice under the law and call for the same for these fucking pigs.

            1. christ, not this shit again.

              for the 100th time, saying something is not justified is NOT the same thing as saying it meets the criteria for criminal assault

              that is a much higher standard

              if you really want to get into the legal nuances, we can.

              and the stupid “if a citizen had done this” (ignoring the fact that cops and noncops are citizens) is stupid because it’s disanalogous, since “citizens” are not tasked under the law with enforcing various laws, such as the UC cops, who are POST officers acting pursuant to commission etc.

              unjustified? based on the fact pattern i am aware of … yes

              criminal assault? no

              1. sorry dunphy. You’re often more levelheaded than most of the knee-jerk reason commenters give you credit for, but you’re wrong here. It’s precisely the fact that cops are POST officers tasked to enforce the law that any unjustified action a cop does should be criminal assault. Hell, it should be double criminal assault.

                Great power, great responsibility, etc.

                1. Seconds Yonemoto.

              2. for the 100th time, saying something is not justified is NOT the same thing as saying it meets the criteria for criminal assault

                Um, when it comes to using force against another person, it fucking should.

                that is a much higher standard

                Seems to me, the main difference is whether or not you are wearing a police costume.

                …since “citizens” are not tasked under the law with enforcing various laws, such as the UC cops, who are POST officers acting pursuant to commission etc.

                Two sets of laws. One for the master. One for the slave.

                Thanks for clearing that up.

                1. no, not at all. fwiw, i wouldn’t arrest a “citizen” for pepper spraying a trespasser who refused to leave their property EITHER, after repeated warnings.

                  i would forward a case to theprosecutor’s office, but i would not make a custodial arrest

              3. But I think you have his point. If a private citizen did this, it would be criminal assault. It should also be that for the police. At a minimum, our “public servants” should be held to the same standard that each of us are as private citizens. Again, this at a minimum.

                1. I meant “have missed his point”.

      2. you’re also full of shit. as usual, the reasonoid bigorati misrepresents my positions.

        this does NOT appear justified.

        again, nothing more boring than a bigot. a prejudiced bigot. you think you know my position. you don’t. you only see what u want to see.

        here, what i see is something that does NOT appear justified

        you assumed i would think it justified

        that tells me you can’t fucking read. you just are a bigot who assumes i always come out on the side of the cops, which is demonstrably false


        1. OK, then call for their arrest.

          Citizen does this=A&B
          Cop does this=UOF and two weeks off without pay using banked vacation pay.

          1. i didn’t say it was A&B. i said it was unjustified.

            since, as usual, you can’t fucking read, you again jump to conclusions

            unjustified =/= A&B

            the former is a necessary, but not sufficient element of the latter in regards to police UOF

            1. had a little dunphy,
              And I fed it in a trough.
              He got so big and fat,
              That his tail popped off!
              So, I got me a hammer,
              And I got me a nail,
              And I made that pig
              A wooden tail!

              1. the bigorati speak

                it’s just like racism, but with a different target.

                1. it’s just like racism, but with a different target.

                  Yeah, you guys are just like the blacks in the 60’s. Getting fire hosed by cops libertarians. Being kept out of schools and places of higher education by cops libertarians. Having your rights to peacefully protest taken away by truncheon-swinging cops internet-posting libertarians.

                  Yeah. Just like racism.

                2. Find me the black guy who chose to be black, who gets paid to be black, and who could choose one second after I post this, to cease being black.

                  You choose this every moment.

            2. What if I had done this to a bunch of people sitting in my way and you were sitting in your squad car 10 yards away? Would you tap me on the shoulder and tell me I had used “unjustified force” and told me to move along? Or would you have put me in cuffs and charged me with a crime?

              That’s what you don’t get, dickface. If policemen are not treated the same as non-cop civilians when they commit the same act, then there is a double-standard. And if you treat them differently than you would me for committing the exact same act, then you are an enabling cocksmoking pig.

              1. except it’s not the same act, because the same totality of the circs don’t apply in your hypothetical.

                it’s ALWAYS about totality of the circs.

                no matter who is using force.

                i’ll ignore your trollish bigotry. like i said, it’s just like dealing with a racist.

                1. You just answered the question. The circumstances are never the same because you don’t view your brothers in blue the same way you view the rest of us.

                  Or you can answer the question I’ve been asking and you’ve been dodging: If you saw me do this to a group of people blocking my way, would you arrest me or would you let it go like you would if I was a cop?

                  Your silence speaks volumes about your character.

                2. Dunphy, why do you feed the trolls?

                  1. What happened to your other 1%? Are they still hospitalized or jailed after being beaten senseless by the cops?

            3. Cop does it = unjustified
              Citizen does it = A&B

    2. It’s dunphy. Cops never do wrong.

      1. He just said they did.

        It’s the University of California. Not like the cops have no experience with this kind of demonstration.

        I would have to know the situation, but if they’re trespassing, or violating some ordinance about blocking sidewalks, they ought to be arrested.

        People with access to the political process who nevertheless break the law (if that’s what they did) are not high on my list of sympathetic people.

        Unless like prolifers, they’re protesting on behalf of the disenfranchised or those who cannot speak for themselves. But prolifers don’t get arrested much nowadays. Why is that? We’re alwasys told that prolifers are more lawless and violent that these benevolent hippies. Yet even in university towns (not exactly Bible Belt areas) the prolifers get arrested (if at all) much less than the hippies with the same political affiliation as the university authorities.

        1. He just said they did.

          Yep. And he also said it’s not a crime because they are cops, yet if I did it, it would be a crime because I’m not a POST officer. Well, in my book, assault is assault, regardless of the costume you are wearing.

          You don’t see the double-standard there? If they are charged with upholding the law, shouldn’t that mean the law, not their law?

          1. i didn’t say it’s not a crime BECAUSE they are cops. i said based on the totality of circs.

            merely exceeding the UOF continuum IN AND OF ITSELF does not necesasrily rise to the level of criminal assault

            among other things, you need mens rea.

            iow, you would have to have evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the cops had criminal intent, not merely that they exceeded force guidelines

  8. Does pepper spray come in any other scents? I don’t like the color either

    1. Baton Rouge Louisiana, Indianapolis Indiana, and Columbus is the capital of O-Hi-o. There’s Montgomery Alabama, south of Helena Montana, then there’s Denver Colorado and Boise Idaho.

      1. There’s a blast from the past.

    2. I did some research and pepper spray also comes in a fart scent and slightly greenish brown color. Maybe it is fart in a jar spray, not pepper spray.

  9. Seven of the sudents sprayed were sitting on the grass; is the lawn a right-of-way?

    1. Texas has Austin, then we go north, to Massachusetts Boston and Albany New York. Tallahassee Florida and Washington D.C., Santa Fe New Mexico and Nashville Tennessee (Elvis used to hang out there a lot, you know).

        1. Trenton’s in New Jersey north of Jefferson Missouri, you got Richmond in Virginia South Dakota has Pierre, Harrisburg’s in Pennsylvania and Augusta’s up in Maine, and here is Providence Rhode Island next to Dover Delaware.
          Concord New Hampshire, just a quick jaunt, to Montpelier which is up in Vermont, Hartford’s in Connecticut so pretty in the fall and Kansas has Topeka Minnesota has St. Paul.

          1. Masturbate then go to bed

            1. Juneau’s in Alaska and there’s Lincoln in Nebraska and it’s Raleigh out in North Carolina and then, there’s Madison Wisconsin and Olympia in Washington, Phoenix Arizona and Lansing Michigan.
              Here’s Honolulu Hawaii a joy, Jackson Mississippi and Springfield Illinois, South Carolina with Columbia down the way, and Annapolis in Maryland on Chesapeake Bay (I got crabs there once).

              1. I never thought I’d say this: I miss epi’s stupidity

                1. Cheyenne is in Wyoming and perhaps you make your home in Salt Lake City out in Utah where the buffalo roam. Atlanta’s down in Georgia and there’s Bismarck North Dakota and you can live in Frankfort in your old Kentucky home.
                  Salem in Oregon, from there we join, Little Rock in Arkansas and Iowa’s Des Moines. Sacramento California, Oklahoma and it’s City, Charleston West Virginia and Nevada Carson City.

                  1. Um, aren’t you still seven short?

                    1. Look up a bit

                    2. Look up!
                      Nevermind. You missed it again.

                    3. United States, Canada, Mexico, Panama,
                      Haiti, Jamaica, Peru; Republic Dominican,
                      Cuba, Carribean, Greenland, El Salvador too.
                      Puerto Rico, Columbia, Venezuela, Honduras, Guyana, and still; Guatemala, Bolivia,
                      then Argentina, and Ecuador, Chile, Brazil.
                      Costa Rica, Belize, Nicaragua, Bermuda,
                      Bahamas, Tobago, San Juan; Paraguay, Uruguay, Suriname, and French Guiana, Barbados, and Guam.

                    4. I always wondered what happened to Boo Radley

                      …keep going, baby

                    5. Must have went the way of the fart in a jar with an loose lid.

                2. I never thought I’d say this: I miss epi’s stupidity

                  Did somebody finally kill him?

                  1. sorry, I gave you hope

    2. Clover rights now! End the oppression of our green brothers and sisters! Chlorophyl!

  10. If I didn’t know there were fucking morons in our police departments I would say this was staged. Once again, what was the fucking point? This shit is FINALLY dying down and you gotta keep putting them in the news.

  11. So removing the 4 protesters actually blocking the sidewalk would have been too taxing for campus 5-0?

    1. Dude, its rush hour. People need to get to class.

      1. wheee!

        and that, btw, is the critical distinction

        i see no exigency here. that’s why it’s unjustified. because all i see is passive resistance

  12. No byline? Or is this post endorsed by everyone?

    1. Dibs!

  13. looks unjustified to me.

    w/o context, can’t tell for sure. but it does not appear justified based on what can be seen in the tape

    it appears they are merely offering passive resistance. that, in itself imo does not justify pepper spray

    distinguish this from the seattle case where they were blocking a street during rush hour. that’s more than mere trespass, in that … it’s a busy seattle street during rush hour

    here, i just see some clump of sidewalk and grass on campus. arrest them for trespass or something if orders are given and they refuse to move?


    but pepper spray?

    not justified imo

    1. I’m sure you will call for their arrest and prosecution.

      1. Fuck him. He’s an enabler just like every other pig whose not an overt criminal.

        1. i didn’t say it was a crime. i said it was unjustified. the fact that you don’t realize there is a difference is just another example of your ignorance.

          oh, and sloopy. fuck you too, buddy!

          enable my white ass biznatch!

          1. had a little dunphy,
            And I fed it in a trough.
            He got so big and fat,
            That his tail popped off!
            So, I got me a hammer,
            And I got me a nail,
            And I made that pig
            A wooden tail!

          2. Then answer the question: would you treat a non-cop the same as a cop if they each did this in front of you?

            A simple yes or no will do.

            1. He got so big and fat…

              No he has a nice body but alas I didn’t find him naked on the www 🙁

              1. Norway, and Sweden, and Iceland, and Finland, and Germany now one piece;
                Switzerland, Austria, Czechoslovakia,
                Italy, Turkey, and Greece.
                Poland, Romania, Scotland, Albania,
                Ireland, Russia, Oman; Bulgaria, Saudi Arabia,
                Hungary, Cyprus, Iraq, and Iran.

          3. dunphy, was sitting on the grass blocking the right-of-way?

            1. They were blocking the right to fart in a jar.

          4. So, they should be fired and lose their pensions?

            Nah, their union rep would never let that happen.

          5. i didn’t say it was a crime. i said it was unjustified. the fact that you don’t realize there is a difference is just another example of your ignorance.

            I know there’s a difference:
            “Civilians” commit crimes. People in police costumes commit unjustified acts.

            You made yourself perfectly clear.

            1. false. cops commit crimes all the time. like i claimed hte jailhouse beating by paul schene was. or the baton poking by UC Berkeley cops

              again… you lie

              cops can and do commit crimes

              but not all instances of force that exceeds UOF guidelines meet criminal standards.


      2. It’s not fun but it’s only pepper spray. It hurts, but it isn’t fatal. Why are you so angry at the cops? They are trying to keep order, they are fallible humans in a tough situation. Sure this doesn’t seem justified, but is it criminal? Are we for ordered liberty, or are we for pitchforks and torches?

        1. or are we for pitchforks and torches?

          Nah. AKs and MACs, bitchez.

        2. I’m for the cops picking these douchebags up one at a time and arresting them all.

          That’s the correct outcome. And it’s also the outcome we eventually got.

          It’s the intervening step where the police say, “Well, you know and we know that this ends with us picking you up and arresting you. But we’re going to make sure that before we do that, we try to force you to get up voluntarily using a torture device,” that I have a problem with.

          1. If it is wrong for the cops to spray it is wrong for the occupistas to throw unidentified liquids on reporters and police, no?

            1. I didn’t see that in the video

              1. She’s talking about those OWS twits that assaulted police officers by throwing vinegar in their faces.

                And she’s deflecting.

            2. Absolutely. It’s called assault in both cases.

              1. Is it? As a society, we do grant police some powers of violence to maintain order. That is the nature of any non-anarchical state.

                We can debate the fact that we have given the state too much power of violence, for too many circumstances, but it isn’t clear that it’s “assault in both cases”. One is an exercise of state power which we have delegated to the police on our behalf, one is an act of an individual against the state. These are not meant to be equivalent things.

                I’m not justifying the pepper spray itself, just making the point that there’s a lot of hyperventilating on this page about something which isn’t so clear cut.

                Don’t like it? Vote for the most libertarian candidates you can find, and try to convince your neighbors to do likewise.

                1. Don’t like it? Vote for the most libertarian candidates you can find, and try to convince your neighbors to do likewise.

                  Yeah!!! And until those libertarians are in office, suck it up. Right?

                  Would you have said “If you don’t like it, take it to the ballot box” to Rosa Parks? MLK? Tom Paine?

                  Fuck, man. Rights are easy for the majority. It’s the minority that needs protecting, and sometimes democracy (the ballot box) works counter to it.

                  1. No, until that happens if you believe in a cause enough to get a faceful of pepper spray, that’s bound to happen.

                2. Is it? As a society, we do grant police some powers of violence to maintain order. That is the nature of any non-anarchical state.

                  The problem with this argument is that it assumes a complete fiction. “We” don’t, nor have ever, given any of said powers you claim. The powers are carryovers from divine right and simple brute force. Because we get to vote for new appointees who sometimes change procedures doesn’t change the fact that we exist IN the system which forces us to accept it’s mandates regardless of what “we” believe.

                  1. Nonsense. We the people elect mayors and city councils and legislatures who make laws on our behalf, and those laws authorize cops to use violence. If that wasn’t the case, then the next time you are faced with a criminal there’d be no point in calling the police, now would there?

                    If you don’t like it, we have a system that allows you to run for office and to convince your fellow citizens that we should change it. Just because you personally didn’t vote to give certain citizens badges and guns, doesn’t mean it’s a “complete fiction” that this is how civil society works. You think Jeebus invented the earth on the day you were born?

                  2. Here, Ray. Here’s the short history of how the Davis PD came to be. If you really were interested, you could go to city hall and look up all the civil statues that were voted on over the years establishing the department, their powers, the uniforms, the budget, the regulations governing their conduct, for both the city and the State of California.

          2. the pepper spraying in this incident appears unjustified.

            BASED upon the fact pattern as established in the video (don’t know what else occurred if anything), this pepper spraying would not be


            and iirc there is also 9th circuit case law that makes it presumptively unreasonable under case law

    2. I don’t see how the sidewalk is any different from the street.

      Once traffic is stopped, and there’s no imminent risk, the only difference between the sidewalk and the street is that more people are inconvenienced by the people in the street.

      There’s no more risk to the officers, no more risk to the bystanders.

      To me the entire point here is that officers shouldn’t get to use pepper spray or tasers to make things more convenient. They should only get to use them when force is necessary to protect the officer or others.

      1. I agree with this. But let’s be realistic. We’ve given the cops this mission, and these tools to do the job. Was it any better in the olden days? Put yourself in the cops shoes. Is a pepper sprayed protestor as likely to be as aggressive in resisting you as a non pepper sprayed? Yeah it looks like “torture” to us here safe on the internets, but to the cop it’s just softening up the target to make the rest of the process a bit easier. Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t, but in the cop mind, why take the chance? Use all the tools available. We don’t have to like it but what’s the alternative? Mob rule? Fire hoses?

        1. Actually – yeah, I think the pepper-sprayed protestor is more of a hazard.

          I think that if I was pepper-sprayed, I’d be flailing about like a crazy person, and if you tried to pull my hands away from my face to handcuff them I would probably freak out.

          I would be about 1000% safer to arrest cold than with a faceful of pepper spray.

          1. That’s you, and only you know that about yourself. The cop doesn’t know these kids. Clearly they are more fit than he is, and there are more of them than there are cops on the scene. The cop mentality is use the tools at hand to ensure they get home safely. These kids created the situation, not the cops. Our laws put the pepper spray in his hands instead of a baton and water cannons or live rounds. The kids could have dispersed peacefully when ordered, but that doesn’t make for good YouTube video.

            The alternative would be the cops start dragging them away, and countering resistance with clubs. That happened last week and there was an outcry about that as well. So what’s the answer? Just let the kids decide what the rules are? Or take away all tools so the cops have to just use harsh words to try and maintain order?

            As it is, your hypothesis is shown to be false. No cops were injured in making these arrests so apparently most people are not like you, not prone to get more violent when pepper sprayed.

          2. I would be about 1000% safer to arrest cold than with a faceful of pepper spray.
            that’s what the cops in NYC – the ones NOT using pepper spray – thought, too, but perhaps you noticed that EVERYONE taken into custody resisted. The OWS folks have set the tone and it is to provoke confrontation when possible. If that were not true, you might see footage of people being arrested quietly.

            1. Each situation must be treated independent of every other situation.

              You are basically saying:
              Occupy people in NYC resisted.
              People in Davis are from Occupy movement.
              People in Davis will resist.

              Not always true.

              1. No, I am saying if a cop is given the job to clear these people out, and he has a can of pepper spray in his hand and the legal authority to use it, and if he believes it makes the protesters less likely to injure him while carrying out his duty, he’s going to use it. You are making a presumptuous argument that somehow the pepper spray made those protesters more dangerous. The cop obviously judged the situation otherwise.

      2. the fact that you don’t see the diference obviously is the problem in the first place.

        cops ABSOLUTELY have the right to use force to remove people from a busy roadway during rush hour. there is an exigency factor to that. you may think people being “inconvenienced” (it’s not just about inconvenience. it’s about safety, but i digress) doesn’t change the equation

        however, i can tell you that it DOES change the equation

  14. Love the guy who said fuck it and left at 16 seconds. Stay strong brother.

    1. He was my favorite too. Whatever issue they think they are protesting is not important enough to get pepper sprayed.

      Now, if it was for something truly important I would get pepper sprayed.

      1. I’ve never been pepper-sprayed. Thankfully, on the few occasions I’ve been arrested for protesting the lack of 1A Rights outside abortion clinics, the arresting cops were gentle and courteous.

        1. There are still some places where they arrest prolife protesters – and for peaceable communication, not for OWS-like shenanigans. Glad you had the guts to protest this.

          Maybe the cops were like: “You want us to arrest *who*? Well, a job’s a job…”

  15. stop posting these videos without context. It does no good.

  16. This is why I don’t get why some posters call dunphy “one of the good cops.”

    Just because he’s pro-drug legalization and has a lovely wife in Morgan Fairchild doesn’t mean that he isn’t an enabling scumbag.

    1. nor, does it mean he is.

      Why do you hate all cops?

      1. I never said I did.

        But I can’t stand the fact that they do not have to abide by the same set of rules that we do because they are the ones enforcing the rules and do not have the slightest clue give a flying fuck what equal justice under the law means.

        His posts betray his disdain for civilians on a regular basis. And too many people on here give him a pass because he’s pro-pot legalization. I’m not gonna play that shit.

        1. cite one of the posts -I’ve never noticed

          1. OK. How about this post then. When asked what he would do if a non-cop did this in front of him, he goes on about “how it’s different,” and “circs” and then he refuses to answer if he would treat them the same as a cop or not.

            Because if he gave a fuck about equal justice, he would demand that they be treated the same. And he would also practice what he preaches, which we know he doesn’t do because the myriad bad cops in the Sea-Tac area would have fragged him by now.*

            *Lord only knows that those fuckers are good shots. A slew of dead people could attest wish they were alive to attest to that.

            1. Which thread did he refuse to reply, or did he even see it?

              Like me, he has spoofs, are you sure any of the words were his?

              1. He never answered the question in any of them, even after being challenged multiple times. And if they’re spoofs, then they’re spot-on.

                1. I’m emailed and Meebo’s all the time to ask if a comment was mine -90% of them aren’t. Just saying

                  1. I’m emailed and Meebo’s all the time to ask if a fart in a jar was mine -90% of them aren’t. Just saying

                  2. What the fuck is a Meebo?

                    1. Post Master General,

                      See my blog for an example of Meebo.

                    2. see above for spoofs
                      and helle, fuck off

                    3. Wouldn’t it make more sense to fart in a jar instead of fucking off?

                2. actually, i said that if i had a ‘citizen’ who pepper sprayed a protester who was given multiple orders to leave and did not, i would NOT arrest that “citizen” for assault


                  but that’s largely tangential to this incident vis a vis UOF guidelines

        2. no, my posts show that i am familiar with the law, with UOF guidelines, and that i recognize that society empowers cops with certain authority given that we have certain responsibilities (and yes, i know cops are under no burden per the scotus to protect any individual , so spare me)

          you are butthurt that society and the law doesn’t work the way you want it to work.

          tuff shit.

          yes, i understand that in your ideal world, these UC Davis cops should be arrested and tried for A&B (if that’s the relevant charge in CA)


  17. OK. This is police brutality. The cops didn’t even try to non-violently pick up the protesters on the side walk, and they sprayed the protesters who weren’t on the sidewalk.


  19. did anyone notice how fat all the cops are?


    1. It’s the steak, caviar and fine port lifestyle. I keep telling Dunphy I want to cut their pay for their own good.

      1. we are very well paid. i have to meet weight class guidelines, so i must stay relatively low bf. i am averaging about 5000 kilocalories a day.

        lots of steak, thanks for asking

  20. Definitely not justified in this instance as the violence initiated by the hippies barely registered as such. Maybe a gentle fumigation fog flea bath was called for, but not pepper spray. Saved it and the batons to the knee caps for the real violent cases (yes, those who hold up traffic are committing a serious breach of the peace).

  21. So, uh, dumb question: why did the cops pepper spray them?

    What did the spray allow them to do that they weren’t able to do without it? I didn’t notice the spray making the protestors jump up and disperse as ordered, or handcuff themselves, or magically be transported into the paddy wagon… What was the spray meant to accomplish? What did it akshully accomplish?

    1. I know. It didn’t even look like it was that much fun, as far as compliance weapons go. They should have formed up a taser firing squad.

      Internal LEO policy and procedure (which is apparently law) states that officers can torture civilians into respecting their authority. How many times in life does a person get to physically take out his frustrations on another person (who is not his wife) consequence free? Granted, spraying chemical irritant or firing a shock device isn’t as satisfying as swinging a baton, but it’s a lot easier, and those cops were pretty overweight.

      1. jesus. nice fucking rhetoric”Internal LEO policy and procedure (which is apparently law) states that officers can torture civilians into respecting their authority”

        do you really believe this shit?

    2. simply put, they were sprayed as punishment for not respecting their authoriteh. if the dirty hippies would have done what they were told, the nice pig wouldn’t have been forced to hurt them. see what they made him do?
      Tina: i’m sorry Ike.
      Ike: not half as sorry as i am, bitch.

    3. I thought they were sanitizing them with an anti-bacterial spray before handling them. Shrink wrapping would me more humane.

  22. I’d just like to know what “society” can do for these protesting cretins that would appease them and cause them to call off their protests. They have a right to petition the government for redress of grievances. Ok, what’s the victory scenario for the protesters? Because absent that, absent a goal toward which we could negotiate and solve their complaint, their “movement” is nothing more than anarchy. I’m not very sympathetic to a “cause” which is simply an excuse for mobs to throw a 2 month tantrum in public. What’s the next stage of this “movement” will they hold their breath until their faces turn blue?

    1. you make yourself seem petty by reacting with anger rather than understanding. The lack of specific demands is very intentional – if they had demands, then those demands would be ignored and dismissed. OWS isn’t something I necessarily support, but I do acknowledge the necessity of productive tension.

      1. You still didn’t answer the question. You just criticized how I asked it. The lack of an end game is what turned me against this group. 2 months ago they had my attention. Possibly my support. Now they have declining support among the public. So yeah I am frustrated and angry with them for causing all of this trouble and expense for essentially no reason, I am not the only one who feels that way. The cop spraying them might have once sympathized too. Now he just wants to go home without injury. I sympathize with him even if I think I would never do what he did.

        1. “The lack of specific demands is very intentional – if they had demands, then those demands would be ignored and dismissed.”

          The problem is, that probably isn’t even a joke. No point pressing any demands, but a lack of demands doesn’t mean we can’t hold a Meaningful Political Protest, complete with civil disobedience, and expect everyone to take us seriously!

        2. See the movie Meet John Doe.

    2. When you live your life watching the government make various occupations without any sign as to what victory would be, when you protest for more government power, what do you expect?

      See Iraq, Afghanistan, et al.

      1. That’s not much of an argument but at least you tried. Just excusing their ill-conceived protest because “the government did it too” doesn’t help and it doesn’t answer my question. I’ll ask again, with less anger and annoyance in my tone.

        What would constitute victory for these folks, that in their minds they’d decide it was time to end this confrontation with society?

    3. Why does the OWS movement seem to bug you more than cops assaulting non-violent protesters?

      1. Abusive cops bug me a lot. If this was a wrong door no-knock drug raid, or a cop tasering a driver, unprovoked, at a traffic stop, I’d be all over the cops. But when the context is a purposeless protest intended to create this very situation for the YouTube cameras, rather than simply knee-jerk hysterics at the cops for doing what cops do, I’m inclined to ask why the fuck this is happening to begin with. And nobody can tell me what action our government or society could take that would calm these kids down and have them end this protest, which has been going on for 2 months.

        This isn’t Tahrir – in that case, we knew that if Gaddafi stepped down the protests would have been victorious and it would have been ended.

        These are privileged college students acting out with no intelligible agenda or end game, they are putting themselves in a position to comfront the cops, so don’t be surprised when a cop gets out of hand.

  23. I like to look at the context.

    Cops are accountable (if only to IA) for violating people’s rights. If there was no law violated (though I think there would be some law against this), then there’s false arrest.

    But I am interested in the attitude of the protesters. They wouldn’t care if they’re violating the law or not, and they would cry police brutality even if the arresting officers used kid gloves and put them in a feather-bed-laded prison cell.

    Holding cops accountable in these situation is for our sake, not for the sake of these protesters who have no concept of legitimate vs. illegitimate law enforcement.

    No, I take that back – they think legitimate law enforcement is arresting corporate officers for the crime of being yucky and corporate-y. They are shocked at the idea that they themselves may need to be arrested from time to time.

    1. So because someone is stupid and/or misguided, their rights should somehow be reduced? Or because they desire something moronic and/or distasteful, they don’t deserve our respect under the law?

      It’s like Edward Norton said in the courtroom scene in that movie about the porn guy: these are just the kind of assholes the 1A was written for.*


      1. I chose to change the subject – I acknowledged the cops’ misbehavior, then talked about the demonstrators’ misbehavior. Are we to say that the protesters should be free from criticism the moment the cops mistreat them in any way?

        1. Not at all, but I am pretty sure their demands have been roundly rejected in these here parts.

          1. Serious question: What fucking demands?

            1. Amen to that. What could society at large agree to that would satisfy these protestors and they’d all go home happy? I’d really like to know and nobody seems to be able to say.

              1. We want our democracy back.

                1. WTF does that mean and how will we know when it’s done? Most of the protestors probably had no idea that an election day just passed them by. If they want democracy back, on the street is not where you get it. Show up at primaries, get different candidates nominated. Setting up a “people’s library” under a tent in a park in a part of Manhattan where nobody lives isn’t going to accomplish that.

                  Anyway thanks for playing, next?

                  1. We can start by ending racist incarcerations by the millions, eliminating such things as pipelines that cause toxicity, polluting smokestacks, cancer causing franken-crops and cruel meat factories. End the wars that go on for decades in tragic absurdity. People around the world are dying because environmental depression, landscapes covered in pavement and pain, the Earth demonized and love narrowed to sexual bigotry of bosses.

                    1. The protests have such urgency, do you honestly think any of the “demands” on your list can be met any time soon?

                      With such vague childish demands that basically amount to complaining about all of human nature and human history, then I guess we can expect this “protest” to go on forever. You might as well “protest” the fact that water is wet.

                      As I said, thanks for playing.

                    2. Seriously, shut the fuck up, you fucking hippie waste.

            2. Serious question: What fucking demands?

              Student loan forgiveness. Increase in scope of government jobs programs. Guaranteed living wage of $20/hr. Mortgage restructuring for people that bought over their income level. Growth of welfare state. Free college. Free healthcare.

              The fucking list goes on.

              1. That’s a more accurate answer, and by the fact that it makes sense, I can tell you are not part of the protest. I want to hear from one of these protesters what would constitute victory, and as RevvedupBilly explained, the protesters demands will be met when the great god Zenu pops out of his volcano hideout, ends all strife and mortal suffering, and we all will live happily ever after. At least, that’s what I understood from his response.

  24. Many of these protesters will grow up and occupy positions of power where they will be happy to support arrests of prolife demonstrators and other politically-incorrect people. At the same time, they will retain nostalgia of their youthful “idealistic” years and attend anniversary dinners and make self-indulgent documentaries about how they stood up to the pigs.

    It’s the Sixties repeating itself as farce (though much of the Sixties was itself farcical).

    1. Many of these protesters will grow up and occupy positions of power where they will be happy to support arrests of prolife demonstrators and other politically-incorrect people.

      Two wrongs. One right. Etc. Etc.

  25. (What would you have said about dunphy if he had actually *defended* the cops?)

    1. Well, he called it an “unnecessary use of force.” when asked would he treat a “civilian” the same as a cop if he saw them each doing this, he said they were different.

      He did defend them because he judges their actions under a different light than the rest of the populus. He is an enabler.

      1. i did say situations were different

        i did not say i would treat a “civilian” differently.

        you made that up

        in THIS situation

        because i would NOT arrest a property owner for pepper spraying a trespasser

        there was evidence that he gave multiple warnings AND the trespassers refused to leave.

        especially if he gave warnings he would use pepper spray

        i would not make a custodial arrest in that case


        1. But you did say you’d refer the property owner for criminal charges.

          Would you do the same to another officer?

  26. Whenever you sit on a sidewalk in front of police in riot gear, you take a Gambol.

  27. I have no problem with the cops arresting people for civil disobedience.

    That’s what civil disobedience has been all about since Thoreau got himself arrested.

    But there’s no need for police brutality against peaceful protestors.

    Civil disobedience doesn’t justify police brutality against peaceful protestors.

    Hell, if being convicted of murder doesn’t justify police brutality, how could sitting on a sidewalk?

    There’s nothing new about any of this. This is just like them using fire hoses on civil rights marchers.

    There’s nothing wrong with the cops arresting people who are engaging in civil disobedience for disorderly conduct or unlawful assembly.

    But police brutality is a crime.

    1. good post. except “police brutality” is NOT necessarily a crime

      sometimes it is. sometimes it isn’t

      i have pointed out several instances that were, imo

      e.g. paul schene. and note that EVEN IN THAT *obvious* example (at least to me) he got a hung jury


      this is nowhere near as bad.

      and imo is not even criminal

      but it is unjustified imo

      1. “sometimes it is. sometimes it isn’t”

        If you’re saying that a jury should decide, then we might actually agree on something.

        I can see how force can be justified sometimes. Just like shooting someone can be justified in self-defense. In the case of self-defense, shooting someone isn’t really murder. Homicide can be justified in certain situations, but murder is never justified.

        I’m not convinced police brutality isn’t like murder. There are times when the use of force is justified. When people are resisting arrest or when they’re a threat to the police or other people or maybe even themselves…

        Sometimes the use of force is justified, and sometimes it isn’t. But I don’t think there’s any time that police brutality is justified.

  28. Is there no end to the Californian welfare state? First San Francisco offers free transsexual surgery and now free chemical peels!

      1. Lighten up, I thought that was funny.

  29. Wow! Interesting.

    1. Hey, stop posting with my name!

      1. You should fart in a jar and see what happens.

  30. I understand dunphy’s point that cops are not the same as non-cops and can do things that non-cops can’t. But those things are an exception because they are part of being a cop. When a cop does something “unjustified,” i.e. not doing his job, not being a cop, then he should be judged by at least the same standards as everyone else. A cop unjustifiably pepper-spraying someone is exactly the same as a non-cop assaulting someone with pepper spray.

    1. They were sitting with undue prejudice. Something had to be done.

      1. Plus that pepper spray will go bad if you don’t use it by it’s experation date. I’m sure the OW’ers would agree that it’s wrong to be wasteful.

        1. actually, as i have said

          given a trespasser and a property owner giving repeated commands to the trespasser to leave, warning he would use pepper spray AND then using it.

          i would not arrest the property owner

          people here are ASSUMING i would

          i would NOT

          regardless, we are talking about the UOF here, which is not justified imo

    2. That’s all I was pointing out above. If he holds them less accountable that he would us, he is enabling their criminal behavior.

      Why some people on here call him “one of the good ones” is beyond me. His pro-pot stance is fine and dandy, but it doesn’t offset his willingness to treat cops better than the rest of us.

      1. I am not sure. While I agree with anyone who says that many forms of police misconduct should be criminal and police held to a higher standard as a balance to their police powers, your position that they be treated the same is not only unrealistic, but ignores the nature of their job. They are paid to make decisions about use of force. Sometimes they will make mistakes in the conduct of their professional duties. Those mistakes should carry professional consequences, but not all should be considered criminal. Willfully ignoring a citizens right, abuse of power, etc…zero tolerance. Bad call conducted in a good faith effort to carry out professional duties…retraining, professional sanctions.

        1. Neu, you fucking racist bigot.

          You too, sloopy, are a fucking racist bigot motherfucker!

          *lowers a shaking with indignant rage finger in sloopy’s general direction*


          1. …the fuck?

          2. …the fuck?

            1. dunphy|11.19.11 @ 2:33AM|#
              except it’s not the same act, because the same totality of the circs don’t apply in your hypothetical.

              it’s ALWAYS about totality of the circs.

              no matter who is using force.

              i’ll ignore your trollish bigotry. like i said, it’s just like dealing with a racist.

              Emphasis added.

              1. Ipso Facto you are a fucking racist, sloopy.

                1. [replaces betteries on sarcasm detector]
                  Got it!

      2. There is no 14th amendment exception for cops. True, like everything else in the document, that applicability has been whittled down by corrupt forces to make exceptions for such positivist and managerial elitist concepts as the ‘new professionalism’, but if anyone is being honest, they’ll look at it, and come back with, ‘gee, the law is applied equally to cops as well as the people, as cops are civilians without even privilege under martial law.’

        1. Which raises an interesting question, that is, can you enforce the laws of a society without the enforcers of those laws being allowed to commit illegal acts?

          1. Criminality is never necessary given that enforcement is never perfectly maintained, nor is it expected to be. If cops didn’t need a warrant to enter a premises, or were not limited in a search to the specific evidences listed, they would be able to get their job done more efficiently through that criminal trespass. However, there is more to it for the purposes of maintaining the peace, like not pissing people off who have good cause to shoot back.

      3. actually, in many respects i think cops should be treated MORE harshly.

        for example, assume a cop who steals $20 worth of property from a scene he is at.

        should he get a harsher penalty than a shoplifter who stole $20 worth of property ?


        so, again… you lie

        you claim i think cops should be treated more leniently.

        that’s false

  31. I see Fearless Fosdick still cannot comprehend why we don’t love him. He wouldn’t gas us if he didn’t love us. In your heart, you know it’s true.

    He’s a libertarian, deep down inside (RES IPSA! SRSLY LOL), and he totally digs edgy music and stuff!

    When push comes to shove, and he’s out there on the front lines pulling the trigger for his statist overlords, he won’t even enjoy it.

    1. i don’t need your love p brooks. anybody who becomes a cop because they want to be loved is an idiot

      granted, a LOT of society loves cops, but we don’t take the job for the love.

      i used to be a firefighter. THAT is a great job if you want everybody to love you.

  32. your position that they be treated the same is not only unrealistic, but ignores the nature of their job. They are paid to make decisions about use of force. Sometimes they will make mistakes in the conduct of their professional duties. Those mistakes should carry professional consequences, but not all should be considered criminal.

    Speaking of enablers…

    The pigs have been allowed to believe their every word carries the force of law. Some of them even seem to believe this applies when they are off duty.

    If you are standing behind my car, and I tell you, you’d better look out, because I’m getting ready to back out of this parking space, I don’t get to hit you with the bear spray if I don’t think you’re lively enough. But the pigs live in a different world. Because “we” (I’m looking at you, Scalia) let them.

    1. Actually P brooks…

      I think you misunderstand my point. The policies of police conduct that would justify use of pepper spray or other similar means against passive resistance need to be eliminated. Cops should have stricter rules against use of force than are currently in place. They should be held to much higher standards than private citizens. There should be many circumstances were a citizen would be justified in their use of force that would fall outside of the justifiable force realm for police. But once you have reasonable policy in place, police misconduct would need to be considered in light of the police officers duties and their good faith effort to follow those policies. Review of their conduct should be by non-police citizen review boards. etc…

      1. i’d be surprised if this campus has a policy that justifies pepper spray for mere passive resistance

        considering that is, as far as i know, inconsistent with case law, it would be a pretty fucking stupid policy.

        1. dunphy, I believe you. I am talking purely in the abstract here. I am sure many policies allow use of force that goes beyond what I would considered justifiable. And I am sure there is wide variability between departments. But just as you say below…police should be held to higher conduct standards than non-police. It should require higher triggers to justify use of force. So, as you say, a citizen who warns a trespasser to leave, says he will pepper spray him, gives him time to comply, etc…shouldn’t be charged criminally…but a cop who willfully violates procedures with pepper spray might face criminal sanction.

          1. …might face criminal sanction for abuse of position/power.

    2. in many cases, a police officer’s word DOES carry the force of law.

      because we task officers with investigating crime, because we give them the authoritah to make seizures based on reasonable suspicion, etc. we also recognize their authoritah to make REASONable demands to further those goals, in the interest of efficiency, safety, etc.

      and the vast majority of the time cops are reasonable in their demands AND people subject to those demands reasonably comply

      that helps keep police uses of force quite rare on a UOF per contact basis (i’ve already posted those stats) and helps protect EVERYBODY’s safety, to include cops, the person being dealt with, and passersby etc.

      decades of study in force science, etc. have helped UOF instructors *such as myself*, policy writers, etc. train officers in how to do so so as to both respect rights, protect themselves, protect others, and conduct investigations

      sorry, if you are all butthurt about it

  33. Those people were obviously perpendicular to the right-of-way.

    res ipsa loquitur


    1. it appears UNjustified

      i know you’re all butthurt and all.


  34. Did you guys see this:

    Republicans at a dead heat in Iowa

    Cain: 20%

    Paul: 19%

    Romney: 18%

    Titties: 17%

    Barf inducing quote:

    “In Iowa, it’s long been a two-person race between Romney and someone else,” said J. Ann Selzer, president of Selzer & Co., which conducted the poll for Bloomberg. “It is now a four- person race between Romney and three someone elses.”

    They really, really want Romney to win…

    I don’t get it.

  35. And yes, it’s blockquote-Saturday if you were wondering.

  36. Uh, have a great weekend!


  37. This is like the worst chat room ever.

  38. But once you have reasonable policy in place, police misconduct would need to be considered in light of the police officers duties and their good faith effort to follow those policies.

    Oh, I get it.

    “Assume a can opener.”

    [insert smiley face as needed]

    1. i would suggest that many here would disagre over what *is* a reasonable UOF policy.

  39. I know I’m just an internet tough guy — but it would warm my heart to have seen someone open fire on these pigs.

  40. Just start noting the houses of cops that have a take home unit. The information might eventually be useful. You may not be able to find the specific cop, but members of his gang wear the same colors…

  41. And mark themselves for your convenience.

  42. Watching the vid a second time, it appears only those individuals who were sitting directly on the pavement were subject to arrest while those on the grass were left alone. The implication being that occupying the pavement was the arrestable offense; occupying the grass was not.

    With this in mind, notice how the pepper spray was deployed. Piggie #1 swaggers back and forth waving the canister in the air as if to say, “What we have here is a failure to communicate!”, then takes aim primarily at those sitting on the pavement (with a little overspray onto those on the edges of the grass just for good measure).

    As he motions for reinforcement, piggie #2 bolts in from behind the group (so they couldn’t see what was coming next) and goes straight at those firmly on the grass to the right and nowhere near even the edge of the pavement. Then the arrests begin — but again, only those that were on the pavement. Those on the grass were left alone and attended to by other civilian bystanders.

    So if sitting on the pavement, even if peaceably, is a crime worthy of pepper spray to the face, what exactly were those sitting on the grass guilty of that warranted such a blatant abuse of force? Instilling fear “You’re next…” is the only thing which comes to mind. And control via fear of physical assault by agents of the state is the very foundation of fascism.

    Another question: To all of you above who seem to think the actions of the campus PD were in any way justified (likely due to personal bias against anything and everything OWS-related). Would you still feel the same if it were your son or daughter that caught the pepper spray? And what if they were only sitting on the grass and not the pavement? What if they suffered long term physical or psychological trauma as a result?

    1. If my kid turned out commie, I’d shoot him myself, but, no, the police action went too far.

      What if they suffered long term physical or psychological trauma as a result?

      When you see someone crying, you need to slap them across the face several times, and yell, ‘get a hold of yourself, you big pussy!’

      That knocks the trauma right out of them.

  43. Disarm the police. Imagine how different this video would be if pepper spray was replaced with silly string.

  44. My first reaction was typical for the thread, disgust. I think the pepper spray went too far.

    That said, did the cops do these kids a favor, in retrospect? With arms locked the way they were, I can see that the violence needed to “just arrest them” could well have been worse.

  45. Morality play:

    Peaceful protesters (PP):Let’s make our point by depriving other people of their equal access to this property

    Property manager (PM) to self: Hmm I have a responsibility to protect the rights of each individual desiring access here.

    PM to PP: Sorry folks you can’t do that here. Please leave.

    PP: NO!

    PM to Police (PD):Please remove the PP

    PD to PP:You have to leave now, You are breaking the law (also acting as a mob to deprive others of their rights).

    PP: NO!

    PD to self: Hmm decision tree– (1)physically arrest individual members of the mob, risk escalation and possible wrestling match with multiple opponents. Also note that I have brought a firearm to this potential wrestling match.– Well this is a peaceful angry mob maybe I should take the risk –or–
    (2) subdue mob with chemical agent then either disperse the mob or arrest remaining members. Less risk of injury to self, less risk of serious harm to others.

    PD to PP: Leave or we will use this pepper spray


    PD sprays PP

    PP and lay observers: Abuse, Abuse, Abuse!!

    1. I missed the part where the PD told them they were under arrest.

      1. Apparently ten of the protestors didn’t, as they were arrested in the course of this event.

        JM’s progression makes sense to me. I’m honestly curious about someone else’s hypothetical sequence of events and how it should have happened. It seems to me that the protestors themselves determined the means of their removal. If they refuse to cease blocking the right of way peacefully, are the fuzz just supposed to shrug their shoulders and walk away?

        1. Find me the person who called the police because these people were blocking their access to somewhere. Find someone not in uniform that asked them to please move.

          Fuck, man. If there is no complainant, the police created the crime in the first place .

          Proactive policing has it’s place when there is a potential victim involved. However, sitting on a sidewalk is a victimless crime until they block access by someone. Sorry, but I just didn’t see that happen here.

          And explain to me how the protesters are blocking access, but the cruiser that’s parked on the sidewalk isn’t. Because a police cruiser is expected required to follow traffic laws unless it’s flashers are on. AFAICT, it’s lights aren’t on. Somebody ought to have that fucker towed away.

          1. Someone obviously called the cops, no?

            And if the point isn’t to block access, why not sit off to the side of the sidealk?

          2. “Fuck, man. If there is no complainant, the police created the crime in the first place.”

            Fuckman to the rescue!

            Some of the cops have apparently been placed on administrative leave.

            Two UC Davis campus police officers have been placed on paid administrative leave over their controversial use of pepper spray on student protesters, university officials announced Sunday.

            A video that showed an officer dousing a group of students who were huddled on the ground Friday quickly went viral on the Internet, drawing outrage and calls for the chancellor’s resignation.

            “I spoke with students this weekend, and I feel their outrage,” UC Davis Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi said in a statement. “I am deeply saddened that this happened on our campus, and as chancellor, I take full responsibility for the incident. However, I pledge to take the actions needed to ensure that this does not happen again.”


            I don’t have all the facts, but I’ve read elsewhere that the chancellor at UC Davis was under pressure to resign over this incident.

            My understanding was that a lot of faculty requested that she resign over this incident, and if that’s true, then it may be that the Chancellor requested the police presence.

            But why stop there?

            I blame Jerry Brown.

            1. Some of the cops have apparently been placed on administrative leave.

              Well done, Chancellor, it’s a well-worn solution to throw underlings to the dogs for the poobahs’ politically embarrassing situations.

              So when the students storm your office and “occupy” it to protest income inequality, corporate greed or a host of shit you have no control over (nor should), will you call these same guys that you just tossed to that same baying mob? Is there a reason they shouldn’t tell you to go fuck yourself with a red-hot poker, sideways?

              1. Exactly.

                The wheels on the bus go ’round and ’round–let’s throw the underlings under the bus.

                Meanwhile, the cops will say they were just following orders–and the union will defend them.

                And most of the students will go on blaming Wall Street for their problems.

                Some of them will start thinking for themselves though. And some of them will come here to Hit & Run to find us. And if Epi and others don’t scare them all off with constant trolling, there may be some cause for hope.

                1. 99% of the 99% are leftists, Ken, an ideology whose bedrock core is economic egalitarianism. They’re not likely to become libertarians.

  46. Well done, Chancellor, it’s a well-worn solution to throw underlings to the dogs for the poobahs’ politically embarrassing situations.

  47. A more complete video account of the incident. Context is important. http://www.therightscoop.com/v…..l-with-it/

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.