• ‘Occupy Oakland’ protester shot by rubber bullet while filming cops
    160 replies, posted
[QUOTE=African DVDS;33177981]If a cop can't take an insult then they should stop being a policeman.[/QUOTE] Even the most patient and tolerant people have their limits. I mean the real victims here are the cops. Look on the internet, every time these rioters see a man or woman in uniform they break out into chants of "f*** the police", they attack them, demonize them, make personal insults and threats. I don't know where the line is, but they crossed it. I get that the cops are supposed to take the heat but theres only so much anyone can handle, maybe there was something on top of this that caused that officer to react the way he did.
He must've been filming with this [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/3bMXC.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Louie XVI;33178002]It's racism like this that lets the people on wall street stay rich folks the spanish people as a whole always make him laugh because he is above everything the spanish people have brought to society.[/QUOTE] But I'm Spanish so I'm above myself?
[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;33178015]He must've been filming with this [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/3bMXC.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] GET ON THE GODDAMN GROUND. IT'LL GIVE ME A GREAT ANGLE.
[QUOTE=sHiBaN;33175581]I'm more concerned about the plainclothes officers wreaking havoc and breaking shit just to get the peaceful protesters in trouble[/QUOTE] You mean the claims that don't have evidence(Or no one has shown any) except for 3 year old videos FROM A DIFFERENT city?
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;33178008]Even the most patient and tolerant people have their limits. I mean the real victims here are the cops. Look on the internet, every time these rioters see a man or woman in uniform they break out into chants of "f*** the police", they attack them, demonize them, make personal insults and threats. I don't know where the line is, but they crossed it.[/QUOTE]I think the police crossed a pretty big fucking line when they decided to shoot a teargas canister in to the head of a marine veteran, running the risk of killing him and leaving him unable to speak. So they can fucking deal with some people accusing them of abuse. Quit being such an apologist, you're not even good at it. What the police have done is horrible and a violation of the rights of the people. Stop trying to excuse it with frankly terrible logic. Damn autocorrect, what I meant to say was "Wow, what a great post."
[QUOTE=GunFox;33177776]Waiting for the veterans in the crowd to be pushed too far. One marine scout sniper would ruin the police for fucking months. They just aren't trained or equipped to counter a sniper with the amount and type of training those guys get.[/QUOTE] Oh for the love of God. Yes, lets shoot a bunch of officers. [editline]7th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33178071]I think the police crossed a pretty big fucking line when they decided to shoot a teargas canister in to the head of a marine veteran, running the risk of killing him and leaving him unable to speak. So they can fucking deal with some people accusing them of abuse. Quit being such an apologist, you're not even good at it. What the police have done is horrible and a violation of the rights of the people. Stop trying to excuse it with frankly terrible logic. Damn autocorrect, what I meant to say was "Wow, what a great post."[/QUOTE] Do you know how teargas canisters are fired? In a fucking arc. Once the shot is off there is not telling who's going to get hit. It was an unintentional injury but because FP, 'Fuck the police'.
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178101]Oh for the love of God. Yes, lets shoot a bunch of officers. [editline]7th November 2011[/editline] Do you know how teargas canisters are fired? In a fucking arc. Once the shot is off there is not telling who's going to get hit. It was an unintentional injury but because FP, 'Fuck the police'.[/QUOTE] [b]NO.[/b] That's the thing swilly. A tear gas canister ARCED into a target could not cause that kind of damage. To do damage like that, it has to be aimed.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33177881]That's not something we should hope for though. It'd be best if it could just stay peaceful and all, without that happening. I keep seeing a lot more people calling for open violence on the part of the Occupy movement and while I understand where they are coming from, the implications and consequences are just so far reaching. It wouldn't be good if it ever came to that. Any violence is bad, and more is only going to make it worse.[/QUOTE] What is the protest currently accomplishing? We have widespread protests occurring in every major city in the United States. Hundreds of thousands, if not in the low millions, of people are participating in varying capacities. I'm not sure the United States has EVER had such widespread protests. I'm not even certain that Vietnam saw these numbers. Nothing is being done about it. The Republicans write them off. Peaceful protest has accomplished nothing. Thousands of people have been arrested and a fair number have been injured. Our government hasn't moved an inch. My preference would not be a marine shooting police, as the police obviously are just doing their job (With a number of exceptions), but rather one shooting federal representatives. There are over 500 members of congress in the United States. You can't even begin to protect all of them from a sniper. These are guys who are trained to wait for days in the same position for a target to make an appearance. You can even play the fun game of watching to see which members of congress adopt the most defensive measures, then match their voting record and check for a correlation between being a douchebag and being afraid of catching an acute case of lead poisoning. Alternatively, we could just riot and burn the fucking country to the ground. Hurt the bottom line until the fat fucks in charge get lobbied by the fuckers who started all this shit by making bad investments to actually start fixing stuff. A game of political chicken. Violence is ALWAYS an answer. There is no problem on the planet that cannot be solved with varying levels of violence. It is just usually a [I]terrible[/I] answer. But when all peaceful avenues available fail, then you must consider the violent alternatives or be willing to simply tolerate the problem.
[QUOTE=GunFox;33177776]Waiting for the veterans in the crowd to be pushed too far. One marine scout sniper would ruin the police for fucking months. They just aren't trained or equipped to counter a sniper with the amount and type of training those guys get.[/QUOTE] Hey didn't Washington have one of those? Just popping shots at random civilians in 2002? I think he was labelled a terrorist.
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178101]Do you know how teargas canisters are fired? In a fucking arc. Once the shot is off there is not telling who's going to get hit.[/QUOTE]Exactly, in an arc, not directly at a person. [QUOTE]It was an unintentional injury but because FP, 'Fuck the police'.[/QUOTE]Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrongity fucking wrong. The only, and absolutely only, way that injured would have occurred is if they fired directly at him from close range. This is not a matter of opinion or debate, this is pure and simple fact. They had to fire it at him, intentionally, to cause that kind of injury. Good now?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;33178137][b]NO.[/b] That's the thing swilly. A tear gas canister ARCED into a target could not cause that kind of damage. To do damage like that, it has to be aimed.[/QUOTE] Do you know the weight of a gas canister? Do you know the trajectory? Do you have proof beyond, "He was injured so badly! IT HAD TO BE AIMED!" Because A.That's a lead, NOT EVIDENCE. And B.Its a shitty lead. [editline]7th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33178173]Exactly, in an arc, not directly at a person. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrongity fucking wrong. The only, and absolutely only, way that injured would have occurred is if they fired directly at him from close range. This is not a matter of opinion or debate, this is pure and simple fact. They had to fire it at him, intentionally, to cause that kind of injury. Good now?[/QUOTE] No I'm not because I have no evidence. I'm getting claims by two strangers [B]on the mother fucking internet[/B].
[QUOTE=GunFox;33178164]What is the protest currently accomplishing? We have widespread protests occurring in every major city in the United States. Hundreds of thousands, if not in the low millions, of people are participating in varying capacities. I'm not sure the United States has EVER had such widespread protests. I'm not even certain that Vietnam saw these numbers. Nothing is being done about it. The Republicans write them off. Peaceful protest has accomplished nothing. Thousands of people have been arrested and a fair number have been injured. Our government hasn't moved an inch. My preference would not be a marine shooting police, as the police obviously are just doing their job (With a number of exceptions), but rather one shooting federal representatives. There are over 500 members of congress in the United States. You can't even begin to protect all of them from a sniper. These are guys who are trained to wait for days in the same position for a target to make an appearance. You can even play the fun game of watching to see which members of congress adopt the most defensive measures, then match their voting record and check for a correlation between being a douchebag and being afraid of catching an acute case of lead poisoning. Alternatively, we could just riot and burn the fucking country to the ground. Hurt the bottom line until the fat fucks in charge get lobbied by the fuckers who started all this shit by making bad investments to actually start fixing stuff. A game of political chicken. Violence is ALWAYS an answer. There is no problem on the planet that cannot be solved with varying levels of violence. It is just usually a [I]terrible[/I] answer. But when all peaceful avenues available fail, then you must consider the violent alternatives or be willing to simply tolerate the problem.[/QUOTE]Its still early on. Its been just under two months. The civil rights movement took many years. If they had resorted to open conflict just because they didn't get what they wanted in the first two months, it would have been a disaster.
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178192]Do you know the weight of a gas canister? Do you know the trajectory? Do you have proof beyond, "He was injured so badly! IT HAD TO BE AIMED!" Because A.That's a lead, NOT EVIDENCE. And B.Its a shitty lead. [editline]7th November 2011[/editline] No I'm not because I have no evidence. I'm getting claims by two strangers [B]on the mother fucking internet[/B].[/QUOTE] Uh, they're designed to be non lethal on impact IN AN ARCED MOTION. So that's how I know this isn't right.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33178173]Exactly, in an arc, not directly at a person. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrongity fucking wrong. The only, and absolutely only, way that injured would have occurred is if they fired directly at him from close range. This is not a matter of opinion or debate, this is pure and simple fact. They had to fire it at him, intentionally, to cause that kind of injury. Good now?[/QUOTE] No I'm not because I have no evidence. I'm getting claims by two strangers [B]on the mother fucking internet[/B]. And don't pull that "google it yourself" because the burden of evidence is on fucking you. [editline]7th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;33178207]Uh, they're designed to be non lethal on impact IN AN ARCED MOTION. So that's how I know this isn't right.[/QUOTE] Oh for the love of...HOW DO YOU KNOW!?
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178192]Do you know the weight of a gas canister? Do you know the trajectory? Do you have proof beyond, "He was injured so badly! IT HAD TO BE AIMED!" Because A.That's a lead, NOT EVIDENCE. And B.Its a shitty lead. [editline]7th November 2011[/editline] No I'm not because I have no evidence. I'm getting claims by two strangers [B]on the mother fucking internet[/B].[/QUOTE]Heh, I think GunFox should handle you on this one. It wouldn't be the first time he had to go over this. But I know there is a report around here from back when it happened stating that they would have to have aimed it at him. I'll look for that too, just in case.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33178204]Its still early on. Its been just under two months. The civil rights movement took many years. If they had resorted to open conflict just because they didn't get what they wanted in the first two months, it would have been a disaster.[/QUOTE] They did. Regularly. Like all of the violent riots in the United States have been race related. Shit got done in virtually every case.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33178173]Exactly, in an arc, not directly at a person. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrongity fucking wrong. The only, and absolutely only, way that injured would have occurred is if they fired directly at him from close range. This is not a matter of opinion or debate, this is pure and simple fact. They had to fire it at him, intentionally, to cause that kind of injury. Good now?[/QUOTE] Do you have any proof of this? You really underestimate the power of an arcing projectile. This is going to sound kind of "know it all"y but did you know that if you fire a gun at almost any angle other than straight upward, the arcing bullet can be fatal? [QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33178071]I think the police crossed a pretty big fucking line when they decided to shoot a teargas canister in to the head of a marine veteran, running the risk of killing him and leaving him unable to speak. So they can fucking deal with some people accusing them of abuse. Quit being such an apologist, you're not even good at it. What the police have done is horrible and a violation of the rights of the people. Stop trying to excuse it with frankly terrible logic. Damn autocorrect, what I meant to say was "Wow, what a great post."[/QUOTE] Swilly has already explained the tragic accident in the form of a teargas grenade so I'm not going to go into that. I fail to see how their actions can be called any more horrible than what the occupiers are doing. These are true patriots, brave Americans who are standing up to protect the citizens of their once great country and this scum thanks them with profanity, threats, and violence. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, you start a bloody riot, you get police called in to prevent things from going out of hand, you attack the police, they defend themselves with appropriate force, which is always slightly more force than the opposition. Again I'm trying as hard as possible not to take sides here, I'm just standing up for the real victim.
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178210]No I'm not because I have no evidence. I'm getting claims by two strangers [B]on the mother fucking internet[/B]. And don't pull that "google it yourself" because the burden of evidence is on fucking you. [editline]7th November 2011[/editline] Oh for the love of...HOW DO YOU KNOW!?[/QUOTE] Because you wouldn't design a non lethal projectile to be accidentally lethal while doing it's described job. I know, magical.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riot_gun[/url] [quote=Wikipedia]Riot guns have been documented to be lethal in some cases. The death of American baseball fan Victoria Snelgrove is one such incident.[/quote] [quote=Wikipedia]he incident occurred near Fenway Park when an FN 303 blunt trauma / pepper spray projectile hit her eye, causing her to bleed excessively. Ambulances were blocked by the excessive crowds which still refused to clear the area, preventing prompt medical attention from arriving from the dense medical area only a half-mile away[/quote] Evidence. So for all of you saying it had to be point blank. Someone died from the ARC of the god damn grenade hitting her in the head.
[QUOTE=GunFox;33178164]What is the protest currently accomplishing? We have widespread protests occurring in every major city in the United States. Hundreds of thousands, if not in the low millions, of people are participating in varying capacities. I'm not sure the United States has EVER had such widespread protests. I'm not even certain that Vietnam saw these numbers. Nothing is being done about it. The Republicans write them off. Peaceful protest has accomplished nothing. Thousands of people have been arrested and a fair number have been injured. Our government hasn't moved an inch. My preference would not be a marine shooting police, as the police obviously are just doing their job (With a number of exceptions), but rather one shooting federal representatives. There are over 500 members of congress in the United States. You can't even begin to protect all of them from a sniper. These are guys who are trained to wait for days in the same position for a target to make an appearance. You can even play the fun game of watching to see which members of congress adopt the most defensive measures, then match their voting record and check for a correlation between being a douchebag and being afraid of catching an acute case of lead poisoning. Alternatively, we could just riot and burn the fucking country to the ground. Hurt the bottom line until the fat fucks in charge get lobbied by the fuckers who started all this shit by making bad investments to actually start fixing stuff. A game of political chicken. Violence is ALWAYS an answer. There is no problem on the planet that cannot be solved with varying levels of violence. It is just usually a [I]terrible[/I] answer. But when all peaceful avenues available fail, then you must consider the violent alternatives or be willing to simply tolerate the problem.[/QUOTE] Once the movement starts randomly killing elected officials simply for being elected officials, you can count me out. Actually, you can count me on the other team.
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178192]Do you know the weight of a gas canister? Do you know the trajectory? Do you have proof beyond, "He was injured so badly! IT HAD TO BE AIMED!" [/QUOTE] There was that marine in the news who was trained with the tear gas launchers for dealing with riots overseas. He pointed out a few interesting things with how the military handles riots: 1) They do not use the launcher to deal with the crowd directly. They arc the shots over a long distance to block off roads. The primary means of dispersing tear gas is to use hand launched canisters and drop them directly on the ground after pulling the pin. They fog the line and then kick the canisters along the ground towards the crowd in order to push the gas into the civilians. Again, they don't shoot at the crowd. 2) He pointed out that, due to the angle with which you fire the tear gas, the only way to headshot someone so very close to your lines is if you intentionally aim for the protester.
[QUOTE=GunFox;33178271]There was that marine in the news who was trained with the tear gas launchers for dealing with riots overseas. He pointed out a few interesting things with how the military handles riots: 1) They do not use the launcher to deal with the crowd directly. They arc the shots over a long distance to block off roads. The primary means of dispersing tear gas is to use hand launched canisters and drop them directly on the ground after pulling the pin. They fog the line and then kick the canisters along the ground towards the crowd in order to push the gas into the civilians. Again, they don't shoot at the crowd. 2) He pointed out that, due to the angle with which you fire the tear gas, the only way to headshot someone so very close to your lines is if you intentionally aim for the protester.[/QUOTE] Article instead of you telling me. Because I just posted evidence of someone dying from getting hit in the head.
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178263][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riot_gun[/url] Evidence. So for all of you saying it had to be point blank. Someone died from the ARC of the god damn grenade hitting her in the head.[/QUOTE] The FN 303 is not a tear gas launcher. It launches large pepper balls through compressed air. It is intended to be aimed at the torso of belligerents, but generally hasn't proven to be worth the risk when compared to the effectiveness of converted paintball guns. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_303[/url] It is not, as you say, arced. It is a direct fire weapon that shares nothing in common with a grenade launcher.
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178281]Article instead of you telling me. Because I just posted evidence of someone dying from getting hit in the head.[/QUOTE]Here ya go, have fucking fun: [url]http://www.businessinsider.com/marine-with-crowd-control-training-points-out-oakland-used-methods-prohibited-in-war-zones-2011-10[/url]
[QUOTE=GunFox;33178297]The FN 303 is not a tear gas launcher. It launches large pepper balls through compressed air. It is intended to be aimed at the torso of belligerents, but generally hasn't proven to be worth the risk when compared to the effectiveness of converted paintball guns. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_303[/url][/QUOTE] Kinda my point. We don't have the full details. Everyone is jumping on board because a Marine said something. If they're using M203's then it can definitely do some damage since it was originally used as a grenade launcher.
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178281]Article instead of you telling me. Because I just posted evidence of someone dying from getting hit in the head.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1137019[/url]
Relevant: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmbvVPxNcuo[/media]
[QUOTE=Swilly;33178310]Kinda my point. We don't have the full details. Everyone is jumping on board because a Marine said something. If they're using M203's then it can definitely do some damage since it was originally used as a grenade launcher.[/QUOTE] The guy got hit in the face with a police launched projectile. It was either a rubber bullet, in which case the officers grossly misused the rubber ammunition and fired on non aggressive protesters AND failed to follow procedure and aim only for extremities. Or it was a tear gas grenade. The only way those injuries could happen that close to the police lines is for the officer to have aimed LEVEL TO THE GROUND directly at him. Both of which are completely fucked up.
Alright, I admit fault in this case. I still want more information but I'll admit to misconduct on the Officer's part. Whether he did it on purpose or was a rookie and pulled the trigger from nervousness has yet to be seen.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.