This. They should have arrested him the first time. That’s the correct response to a person breaking the law, and the whole point–civil disobedience is literally about putting your physical body on the line, allowing the state to arrest it, which highlights how stupid and powerless the state really is. Thoreau said:
The law was stupid. Illegal. Stopping a peaceful protest because they don’t like the message. The old man should have been arrested. It’s what the law calls for, it’s what was appropriate, it’s what he wanted. Through his peaceful arrest (and the peaceful arrest of all the protesters, here and across the nation), the state will be forced to admit their own stupidity, their own rush to deny people their first amendment rights. So they don’t want to arrest protesters. It’s a losing play. So instead they assault them, in hopes that they will run away, hurt.
This dude “cast his whole vote” and he’s a hero for that. Ultravires, your argument explains why he should have been arrested, but not why he should have been assaulted.
Nor do I think the police were in serious danger of assault. Let alone with nothing else they could have done about it.
They ain’t got no business shoving anybody of any age around in that fashion, unless it’s the only or the likely least damaging way to prevent imminent physical harm to somebody else.
The issue of his age has to do with fragility of bones and unsteadiness of balance. It’s true that on average a person in their 70’s is both more likely to fall if pushed, and more likely to break bones if they fall, than a person in their 20’s or 40’s. But a person of any age may fall if pushed, and a person of any age may break bones if they fall, especially on concrete. And there are fragile and/or unsteady people of various ages whose fragility/unsteadiness isn’t visible to the casual glance.
They certainly may have. I wonder if they actually knew who he was when he approached them. (I wonder if the citizen might have personally know any of the policemen. To turn the question on its head.)
So what is it you are hoping to accomplish with this thread? It sure seems like you are going to great lengths to excuse the police knocking an old man to the ground and not much else.
A) regardless of his age or reputation police do NOT have the right to send people to the hospital for being in their way, in their face, or for being obnoxious. Ever.
B) police officers as a regular part of their daily work are expected to and trained to notice and estimate ages of people. Ever hear a description of a suspect? It always includes an estimation of the perps age based on the officer’s observation.
This defence attempt is beyond weak tea and on the ragged fringes of utterly ridiculous to my mind. I mean, come on.
The officers that engaged with the protester were poorly trained and exhibited behavior that indicates that they have no business engaging with the public as law enforcement officers.
The police are not supposed to behave as machines, clearing a street. If that was all that was expected, a crew of bull dozers could have been used.
There is no excuse for the behavior that was exhibited. There’s not a lot of additional things to look into.
And that’s what really troubling about the OP. So since the man assaulted uses his 1st amendment rights, he’s fair game to the police? Is decent treatment by the police reliant on you never sharing your views on how the country should be run? Is that the real reason the OP posted, he wants an excuse to crush freedom of the press and assembly and uses the incident as a dry run for his excuses?
He was a known trouble maker, although the police had no idea how old he was, that’s how much of a trouble maker he was, they only noticed the trouble and not the wrinkles.
Whether it can be used defensively is entirely irrelevant (guns can be used “defensively” :rolleyes:). In football, “the runner uses the stiff arm to defend against being tackled” by aggressively knocking people out of the way, much like the police aggressively knocked this man out of the way.
It’s absurd to try and spin it the way you do.
I agree.
No, it’s most certainly not worth looking into. It’s entirely irrelevant.
I was hoping to point out that, “The Situation with the Police in Buffalo is More Complex than it Seems.” It seems I pointed out the police union were a bunch of knuckleheads. I also said this calls for a complete investigation. We also discussed the nature of the straight-arm move. We talked about the police medics. I expressed regret that the citizen was not wearing the helmet he brought with him.
Someone asked if the citizen might have been recognized by the policeman he approached. I had never considered this interesting question and I turned it over in order to examine it more closely.
[quote=“thorny_locust, post:91, topic:855197”]
Is it only permissible to knock people down in a fashion likely to cause injury if they’re strangers?/QUOTE]
Of course not. I cannot imagine how you got such a strange idea.
I think you found out the opposite: police shouldn’t go around knocking people to the ground for no good reason. I can’t believe we needed a thread for that.
Earlier in the thread people were claiming that the officer with the baton wanted to help the guy on the ground, but was moved on by his fellow officer. I didn’t get that impression at all from the video. At the 2:46 mark, the cop, with both hands on his baton in a threatening manner, seems to make the typical cowardly bully-flex. He seems to quickly lean in as if threatening to finish the job. My take rests largely on the fact that his movement was quick and jerky, and that both hands remained firmly on the baton during this interaction. If I’m interested in helping someone, I don’t keep both hands out in front of me and on the object that I just used to assault them. Was he going to help him by holding him down with his baton to protect him from the other assholes? Additionally, when his cop buddy pushes him forward, I got the vibe that he was telling him to leave the guy alone, as he was already out of the way and didn’t need to be taught a lesson. Additionally, baton dude doesn’t look back so I’m having a hard time believing he had any concern for the guy on the ground.