# \#OccupyWallStreet **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 19, 2011, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851 "2011-09-19T18:27:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/161 "2011-09-27T15:22:19Z")
No. I don’t. But, moving right along, you are free to infer, so long as what you are inferring is directly reflected in the evidence. Your suggestion that the video was altered to omit something taking place before the incident at hand does not qualify, being unsupported. Your suggestion that the use of the term “observer” is relevant does not qualify, since the labels were applied after the fact, and do not change anything on the video itself. Here are my inferences. I infer that when the officer reaches for his belt, he means to retrieve something. I infer that the object retrieved is a can of pepperspray/Mace. I infer that he extended that object in the direction of the, ah, unsub. I infer that the spray that issued from said cannister was directed at the unsub. I infer that her back was turned to him, by which I infer that she was not approaching him. I infer that it is far more likely that she was moving away from him, which undercuts any suggestion of aggressive action on her part. Hence, it is fair to conclude that she was offering no threat, and that his actions were aggressive and punitive. My inferences are different from yours, they are supported by direct physical evidence. I offer the conclusion that, therefore, mine are substantial, and yours are not. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/162 "2011-09-27T15:25:56Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Actually, we really don’t know if it’s mace. Could be anything, but if we’re not making assumptions or inferences… Mind if we call you “Stretch”? The video clearly shows him retrieving it from his “utility belt”. Think it might be air freshener? Do police commonly carry air freshener in their belts? Do they commonly carry pepper spray in their belts? ---
**Author:** ![Hello\_Again](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/85e7bf/32.png) [@Hello\_Again](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hello_Again)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/163 "2011-09-27T15:34:44Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Do they commonly carry pepper spray in their belts? Yes. NYPD carry pepper spray and they **do not carry mace**. And have not done so in about 20 years. [Report of the Citizen Complaint Review Board on the NYPD’s use of pepper spray](http://www.nyc.gov/html/ccrb/pdf/pepperreport.pdf), stating that officers have not carried Mace (directed tear gas) since pepper spray became standard in 1994. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/164 "2011-09-27T15:38:14Z")
Excellent! Clarified, then. Not Mace, which is worse but merely pepper spray! Brutality Lite, then! ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/165 "2011-09-27T15:40:51Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > The video clearly shows him retrieving it from his “utility belt”. Think it might be air freshener? Do police commonly carry air freshener in their belts? Do they commonly carry pepper spray in their belts? It could be an onion. That is all the style, as I understand. ---
**Author:** ![Jenaroph](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e8c25b/32.png) [@Jenaroph](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jenaroph)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/166 "2011-09-27T15:43:00Z")
It could be Silly String, have you thought of that? Invisible Silly String of course. Or maybe he thought the protesters were stinky, so he used his handy belt deodorant. Or he was freshening up their 'dos with his hairspray. ---
**Author:** ![Dolukhanova](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c68b51/32.png) [@Dolukhanova](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dolukhanova)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/167 "2011-09-27T15:43:24Z")
> [@Zebra](#): > > It was documented that a tactic the NYPD employed on protestors during the Republican National Convention in 2004 was to put undercover officers in the crowd marching down the street. This officer would befriend his fellow protestors. Then uniformed officers would grab this undercover officer, for no apparent reason and ‘rough him up’ a bit and cuff him. Of course if any other protestor objected to this they were arrested for interfering with the police. Could you point me to where this was “documented”? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![saoirse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@saoirse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/saoirse)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/168 "2011-09-27T15:51:34Z")
I think it’s pretty obvious that Deputy Inspector Bologna knew that he was doing something wrong. If not, he wouldn’t have slunk away. He was not arresting anyone, and the protesters were moving away from the police and from him. Of course, he may have wandered off from a Barney Miller rerun, and had to get back before the commercial break was over. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/169 "2011-09-27T15:52:47Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And certain people lost their fucking minds. Pointing out that you’re a dishonest person isn’t losing one’s mind. In many threads you maintain the veneer of decency. It surprises some people when you lose control and let the lying shit behind the curtain peek out. Boo-fucking-hoo. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/170 "2011-09-27T15:57:09Z")
After carefully reviewing the video, it seems obvious that the officer was reaching for tictacs. I’m sure the protesters were skank-mouthin’ and when they realized that their breath offended they reacted in a manner that looked, to us, like a bunch of people getting pepper sprayed. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/171 "2011-09-27T15:58:50Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Let’s say, as a hypothetical, that I am blindly favorable to dirty fucking hippy protestors, and inclined to accept police brutality as a given. OK. Oooh, that was easy. But we haven’t even scratched the surface of hypotheticals. Who’s to say that the “police officers” in the video aren’t actually demonstrators dressed up as police, spraying eau de toilette on each other and feigning distress? (One of my cousins knows a reporter who had a friend on the Chicago police force and he says this was a common trick during the Democratic Convention riots in 1968). You can’t prove it isn’t so, and if it is you’d have to revise your hippie-loving assumptions now wouldn’t you? And if you didn’t you’d be dishonest like a lot of the leftist posters who have offended the sensibilities of the bitterly attacked conservative minority of this board who are here to uphold righteous standards of debate even if they don’t want to take actual positions on the issues. You have a lot to answer for. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/172 "2011-09-27T16:01:17Z")
To be ruthlessly fair, “slunk away” is an unwarranted inference. He did what he did, which is bad enough. And then he left. That is really all we got. More than enough. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/173 "2011-09-27T16:03:53Z")
Luce You didn’t actually infer the things you say you did. You observed them. From what I “observe” it doesn’t seem that the woman turns her back until after she is sprayed with what I “infer” is pepper spray. To further support this theory I note that the woman is crying in pain in a way that seems to me pretty consistent with being sprayed in the face with pepper spray. I’m guessing that pepper spray is not like a bullet where getting shot in the back is just as damaging. So, the fact that she is on her knees screaming suggests to me that she got hit in the face which means her back was probably not turned. Now, you may try to dismiss the whole observer issue if you wish but that’s kind of disingenuous since you were the one who presented the annotated version. If you don’t wish to accept comments on the annotation or think it’s irrelevant then why present it? Furthermore, the “observer” label is significant, because that is not something that one can derive from the information on the tape. These leads me to “infer” that the annotator has information not on the tape. Since the tape is notable for what is missing, one can reasonably assume that an edit has occured. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/174 "2011-09-27T16:16:37Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > …So, the fact that she is on her knees screaming suggests to me that she got hit in the face which means her back was probably not turned… Nope. Second count 34, the officer approaches with pepper spray in hand, hand exteneded. She has her back to him, most likely unaware of him or his hand. He releases the spray directly at her, and then continues to release his spray in a more general fashlon, which hits the woman next to her, who is facing in the cops direction. But he didn’t start with her, he started with the woman facing away. Its right there, second count 34. ---
**Author:** ![Scylla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@Scylla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scylla)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/175 "2011-09-27T16:26:06Z")
Ok. I will have to rematch it when I have more than an iPhone. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/176 "2011-09-27T16:40:22Z")
You may then note that the “altercation” you refer to appears to be an arrest, several cops surround someone on the ground. The group of people are all focused on that, several have cameras out, apparently in an effort to document the indicent, but they are clearly shocked and dismayed by what they are witnessing. The police are not “detaining” them in an " arrest" fashion, but preventing them from getting closer. Nothing wrong with that part, it could prevent an incident from escalating. And further note that the officer continues to spray. He wasn’t defending himself, they aren’t that close to him, they are making no threatening motions, they are not armed. One woman is directly hit, face on, another had her back turned, and a third was some steps away. To my eye, it appears that the group as a whole was the target. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/177 "2011-09-27T17:06:10Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Me? Nothing. Not on my knees screaming with mace in my eyes. > > That dumb woman had to do about 5 stupid things in a row, one after another, in order to get maced. > > 1. Go to a protest about nothing > 2. Stick around when things get heated > 3. Get in the face of a cop when he is feeling threatened > 4. Fail to follow police orders > 5. Do whatever it was she did in the moment that she got up in the cops face and the camera briefly pulled away (kinda conveniently, don’t ya think?) that caused her to get maced. > > She deserves it. She was asking for it. And… after she gets what she wants, she screams like a baby. Her behavior was basically choreographed to elicit a forceful response. Gimme a fucking break. It’s poetic justice. I love it. > > Same goes for that idiot in the next video who also fails to follow police orders and instead stands there, spreads his arms and attempts to dialogue. > I don’t go to protests and I’m not a policeman, but I know enough about basic tactics and logic to understand exactly what is going to happen when a small, armed, professional, minority is attempting to control a hostile mob. It ain’t dialogue. Not hostile and not a mob. The women were marching on Wall Street, not confronting the cops. The confrontation was the action of the cops. Nobody deserves to get maced. Yet somehow you can ascertain what the discussion was and that she refused to follow orders from a public servant. I am glad you enjoy the police hurting citizens who exercise their rights peacefully. ---
**Author:** ![Mellivora\_capensis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8797f3/32.png) [@Mellivora\_capensis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mellivora_capensis)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/178 "2011-09-27T17:26:03Z")
> [@Scylla](#): > > Unknown subject. Apparently you don’t watch CSI. I don’t think it’s from CSI. If memory serves me it’s either Criminal Minds or Without a Trace. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/179 "2011-09-27T17:54:32Z")
So, let me get this straight. If you have a substantive issue with current policies and practices, you should not protest or raise awareness of those issues unless you have a coherent, workable idea of the steps necessary to address the issues. If you are unlikely to directly influence policy, it is bad to attempt to make your voice heard. The ‘I’m not touching you’ or ‘JAQing off’ method of engagement is not disingenuous; it substantively adds to the developing conversation. People should accept to be physically abused merely for partaking in a protest. To not expect it, or to decry it, means that the subject of the protest can be dismissed. :rolleyes: Besides being fairly childish, much of that is antithetical to the political foundations of the country. Shameful. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2011, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851/180 "2011-09-27T18:14:49Z")
> [@saoirse](#): > > … He was not arresting anyone … And ain’t it curious how many, many, times we’ve seen video of someone on the wrong end of a can o’ mace/pepper spray or a riot club/[PR24](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baton_%28law_enforcement%29#Side-handle_baton) who’s apparently done something bad enough (in the mind of the officer) to warrant that response but somehow not bad enough to actually get arrested. Just like in this video. > [@Mellivora\_capensis](#): > > I don’t think it’s from CSI. If memory serves me it’s either Criminal Minds or Without a Trace. [_Unsub_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsub_%28TV_series%29) predates both and IIRC the word was used in other serial killer fare before that. CMC fnord! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/occupywallstreet/596851.md?page=10)