November 3, 2011 at 1:24 pm
Oh, gawd, ain’t that the truth.
November 3, 2011 at 3:40 pm
They’re all geared up to protect us! From ourselves of course.
November 3, 2011 at 4:59 pm
“Gentlemen, get the thing straight once and for all– the policeman isn’t there to create disorder, the policeman is there to preserve disorder.”
–Richard J. Daley, Mayor of Chicago, 1968
I’m old enough to remember 1968, and I really don’t enjoy the flashbacks.
November 3, 2011 at 10:38 pm
So very, very true.
November 5, 2011 at 9:29 am
No, I disagree. The police aren’t the cause looting and violence, and society does have the right to uphold the law. (Yes, even if the protesters think they represent
99% of us.)
November 5, 2011 at 10:06 am
The police aren’t the cause looting and violence, and society does have the right to uphold the law.
1)I am not aware of any looting going on at these rallies.
2)The police almost always escalate the situation to a level it hadn’t reached before. And yes, violence is how they disperse large groups and reestablish order.
3)Uphold the law? That’s honestly what you think is going on.
November 6, 2011 at 4:02 am
Hm. Some truth in your post.
Mark Shea has some thoughts about the protestors and violence here, where he describes them as “largely rather harmless”.
I’m posting this link for those thoughts but mainly because of the Colbert clip embedded in it which made me laugh like a drain.
November 6, 2011 at 4:03 am
… the protestors are described as “largely harmless”, not the violence.
November 6, 2011 at 7:22 am
julian, Im sorry if I made my post overly simplistic. The point about looting and violence was that there definitely are situations where riot gear is legitimately necessary and violence had already gotten out of control before the police showed up. That was the main reason I took exception to the post and following comments; the image that the mean ‘ol police are always beating on the innocent little protesters. Still, with regards to OWS, saying the police escalate the situation is like saying I escalate the situation when I tell my 2 yr old she has to stop eating candy. Sure she’d be more peaceful if I politely asked her over and over, but we all know its not going to happen until I take it all away. I protesters refuse to stop breaking a law, then they need to be arrested, and more power to the police if they chose to wear protective equipment.
Stephanie Zvan says
November 6, 2011 at 12:56 pm
actuallyserious650, the appropriate analogy would be you grabbing a paddle and carrying it with you every time you felt you needed to tell your two-year-old something. Except, of course, that the police have used their non-protective equipment (also quite visible in the picture) on several occasions.
Tina Trent says
November 9, 2011 at 2:07 pm
Oh, do consider growing up. It’s bracing.
Besides, I’m sure you’re the brand of ingrate who’d go screeching to the police demanding an immediate response if someone frightened you or stole your favorite pricey electronic . . . whatevers.
November 9, 2011 at 2:20 pm
Actually, a few weeks ago our car was broken into. We filed a police report online like any other grown-ups. No screeching involved. We didn’t have to throw away the Constitution to do it either.
What I actually am is the sort of person who knows enough good cops to know that protecting and serving can be done without assaulting people peaceably exercising their civil rights.
[…] I put up a picture of police in formation in riot gear, with the caption, “You can always tell who came to start […]