Credit to our Right-Wingnuts
joanne said:
The more I read your discussions of crowd control the more thankful I am to realise that, by and large, our march organisers generally have to notify ‘authorities’ (incl police) of their plans incl the route so that traffic signage can be installed esp for emergency vehicles - and that if things get somewhat ‘wild’ we’re basically mustered, a bit like livestock.
You really have to watch some working dog mustering to understand what I mean, and also understand that even though our police might costume in Riot Gear with helmets, shields etc, most of us still think of our police as not carrying guns. Ridski, even though times have changed, I think it’s still the same in the UK isn’t it? Police don’t always carry guns? So first reactions are to be maybe shovy, noisy, but not necessarily use the sprays, tear gas etc, wave guns, batons, etc. The other thing is that until recently our police tended not to get really physical with the protestors unless actually attacked (think of Royal Guards on duty at the palace, stoic). So they could take a fair bit yelling, accidental shoving etc but spitting and direct poking or throwing things would have you arrested for assault.
Our graziers use working dogs for mustering in preference to using teams of jackaroos on bikes and choppers: keeps the livestock safer and calmer. Smart police crowd planners working with traffic planners work their teams like the graziers do, moving the people around to safe dispersal points, or gathering in open places where various emergency services can attend as required. Amazing to watch. (Still scary to be in, when the mood changes; and the police don’t always get it right)
K9 units are mentioned in one of the articles I linked to. There are definitely ways to control crowds and disperse them without resorting to extreme measures.
And if anyone thinks I don't appreciate good policing in crowd control, or don't know what it is, I do. The Asbury Park PD is generally very good at crowd control. I've been to 4th of July fireworks on the boardwalk, the Sea, Hear, Now festival, and even a BLM demonstration there. And the APPD usually follows all the best practices. At the BLM demonstration they greeted us all, gave directions, directed traffic, walked people across the main streets and generally welcomed us.
Ironically enough that night also gave an example of what not to do. After several hours of peaceful protest, nearly all the crowd went home. About two dozen folks stayed around in front of city hall, and around 11pm the authorities lost their patience. Instead of just letting a bunch of people chant and wave signs all night, they decided it was time to clear them out. And after a day of goodwill between cops and demonstrators, a scuffle broke out, and of course the person to end up injured wasn't a cop OR a protester. It was an Asbury Park Press photographer who got hit in the head by a cop. So all in one day one police force showed exemplary crowd control strategy as well as a lesson in how it can go wrong quickly.
I wasn’t saying we use police dogs for crowd control, I was saying we use mustering techniques for crowd control. Use the officers to move crowds the way we use dogs’ skills to move livestock (but with less running around by the officers).
I’ve just seen this article on sonic crowd control methods used in Canberra last week:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-18/coronacheck-sonic-weapons-lrad-police-canberra-protests/100839612 No, not music.
joanne said:
I wasn’t saying we use police dogs for crowd control, I was saying we use mustering techniques for crowd control. Use the officers to move crowds the way we use dogs’ skills to move livestock (but with less running around by the officers).
I’ve just seen this article on sonic crowd control methods used in Canberra last week:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-18/coronacheck-sonic-weapons-lrad-police-canberra-protests/100839612 No, not music.
got it re: dogs.
My understanding of sonic weapons is that they are essentially methods of torture. They really should not be used.
I’m responding with this link to an older article about last November protests in Melbourne, because it highlights the social media use of old/dishonest photos and also a link to an academic paper on the aggressive/defensive use of sonic tools in the open.
https://factcheck.afp.com/http%253A%252F%252Fdoc.afp.com%252F9TE6UN-1
(I’ve got to meet someone soon so getting ready now)
joanne said:
I’m responding with this link to an older article about last November protests in Melbourne, because it highlights the social media use of old/dishonest photos and also a link to an academic paper on the aggressive/defensive use of sonic tools in the open.
https://factcheck.afp.com/http%253A%252F%252Fdoc.afp.com%252F9TE6UN-1
(I’ve got to meet someone soon so getting ready now)
lol. how can an article about the brown "note" not cite South Park?
PVW said:
drummerboy said:
DaveSchmidt said:
drummerboy said:
terp said:
It is interesting to see working class people come together on an issue and the left oppose them pretty aggressively. There has been a polar shift in politics.
yeah yeah. it's a labor protest.
”Come together on an issue,” he said. He didn’t say it was a labor issue.
(When working-class people come together, the issue at hand does tend to have something to do with how aggressively the left opposes them.)
I know he didn't say it. But others of his ilk have been saying it. Others who largely give a crap about working class issues. "working class" is a tell in this case. So I put 1 and 2 together and got 3.
If he meant something else, I do apologize.
Careful, you know how sensitive he gets about math.
I suppose if the political left had a history of opposing employer work safety measures, this would be a shift. I'm having trouble thinking of any examples though. I can't recall significant blocks on the left claiming employees have a right to smoke at the office or come to work drunk, for instance.
There has been a shift. These truckers are the people who made sure the laptop class got goods before there was even a vaccine at risk to their own personal health. This as the laptop class wiped down their amazon packages. The truckers are against mandates which do not create safer work environments.
The left is now pro war. That shift started with the Obama administration and has continued to the point where the neocons are safe at home on the left. The left supported the overthrow of Libya, the overthrow of Assad in Syria, the genocide occurring in Yemen(at least started by a leftist president), and has been openly hostile to Russia.
The left is now pro-censorship. It is now pro big business and fascist. The left uncritically supports cooperation between the government and Big Pharma, Big Tech, Big Media and the Military Industrial Complex.
The left has replaced support for the working class with racial equity and social justice. It looks down on the working class(deplorables) and frankly can no longer relate. See the first paragraph.
terp said:
The left has replaced support for the working class with racial equity and social justice. It looks down on the working class(deplorables) and frankly can no longer relate. See the first paragraph.
No. See anything factual about the topic, instead of the right-wing propaganda.
[Edited to add] And on that note, I'll check back on this tomorrow morning.
terp said:
There has been a shift. These truckers are the people who made sure the laptop class got goods before there was even a vaccine at risk to their own personal health. This as the laptop class wiped down their amazon packages. The truckers are against mandates which do not create safer work environments.
The left is now pro war. That shift started with the Obama administration and has continued to the point where the neocons are safe at home on the left. The left supported the overthrow of Libya, the overthrow of Assad in Syria, the genocide occurring in Yemen(at least started by a leftist president), and has been openly hostile to Russia.
The left is now pro-censorship. It is now pro big business and fascist. The left uncritically supports cooperation between the government and Big Pharma, Big Tech, Big Media and the Military Industrial Complex.
The left has replaced support for the working class with racial equity and social justice. It looks down on the working class(deplorables) and frankly can no longer relate. See the first paragraph.
my only response to this is that it seems the term "the left" has lost all usefulness in any sort of meaningful discussion of political or social issues.
ml1 said:
terp said:
There has been a shift. These truckers are the people who made sure the laptop class got goods before there was even a vaccine at risk to their own personal health. This as the laptop class wiped down their amazon packages. The truckers are against mandates which do not create safer work environments.
The left is now pro war. That shift started with the Obama administration and has continued to the point where the neocons are safe at home on the left. The left supported the overthrow of Libya, the overthrow of Assad in Syria, the genocide occurring in Yemen(at least started by a leftist president), and has been openly hostile to Russia.
The left is now pro-censorship. It is now pro big business and fascist. The left uncritically supports cooperation between the government and Big Pharma, Big Tech, Big Media and the Military Industrial Complex.
The left has replaced support for the working class with racial equity and social justice. It looks down on the working class(deplorables) and frankly can no longer relate. See the first paragraph.
my only response to this is that it seems the term "the left" has lost all usefulness in any sort of meaningful discussion of political or social issues.
well, for some people anyway
drummerboy said:
well, for some people anyway
I had thought I was of "the left" but none of that describes me. I feel lost now. If I'm not "the left" who am I?
terp said:
PVW said:
drummerboy said:
DaveSchmidt said:
drummerboy said:
terp said:
It is interesting to see working class people come together on an issue and the left oppose them pretty aggressively. There has been a polar shift in politics.
yeah yeah. it's a labor protest.
”Come together on an issue,” he said. He didn’t say it was a labor issue.
(When working-class people come together, the issue at hand does tend to have something to do with how aggressively the left opposes them.)
I know he didn't say it. But others of his ilk have been saying it. Others who largely give a crap about working class issues. "working class" is a tell in this case. So I put 1 and 2 together and got 3.
If he meant something else, I do apologize.
Careful, you know how sensitive he gets about math.
I suppose if the political left had a history of opposing employer work safety measures, this would be a shift. I'm having trouble thinking of any examples though. I can't recall significant blocks on the left claiming employees have a right to smoke at the office or come to work drunk, for instance.
There has been a shift. These truckers are the people who made sure the laptop class got goods before there was even a vaccine at risk to their own personal health. This as the laptop class wiped down their amazon packages. The truckers are against mandates which do not create safer work environments.
If you believe that the coronavirus is a highly contagious virus responsible for millions of deaths and hundreds of millions of serious illness worldwide, then vaccine mandates are pretty obviously a workplace safety issue. If you don't, well, there are plenty of other threads on that topic, and I doubt any of us have anything to say on this that we haven't already, so I won't pursue it any further here.
PVW said:
terp said:
PVW said:
drummerboy said:
DaveSchmidt said:
drummerboy said:
terp said:
It is interesting to see working class people come together on an issue and the left oppose them pretty aggressively. There has been a polar shift in politics.
yeah yeah. it's a labor protest.
”Come together on an issue,” he said. He didn’t say it was a labor issue.
(When working-class people come together, the issue at hand does tend to have something to do with how aggressively the left opposes them.)
I know he didn't say it. But others of his ilk have been saying it. Others who largely give a crap about working class issues. "working class" is a tell in this case. So I put 1 and 2 together and got 3.
If he meant something else, I do apologize.
Careful, you know how sensitive he gets about math.
I suppose if the political left had a history of opposing employer work safety measures, this would be a shift. I'm having trouble thinking of any examples though. I can't recall significant blocks on the left claiming employees have a right to smoke at the office or come to work drunk, for instance.
There has been a shift. These truckers are the people who made sure the laptop class got goods before there was even a vaccine at risk to their own personal health. This as the laptop class wiped down their amazon packages. The truckers are against mandates which do not create safer work environments.
If you believe that the coronavirus is a highly contagious virus responsible for millions of deaths and hundreds of millions of serious illness worldwide, then vaccine mandates are pretty obviously a workplace safety issue. If you don't, well, there are plenty of other threads on that topic, and I doubt any of us have anything to say on this that we haven't already, so I won't pursue it any further here.
ml1 may be the exception that proves the rule. You clearly can't make the same claims that he is making above.
terp said:
ml1 may be the exception that proves the rule. You clearly can't make the same claims that he is making above.
While I'm certainly guilty of indulging in tangents in threads, there's just to many disparate issues you threw out there. I responded to the one that's generally on topic. If you want to talk about war, the Ukraine thread is more relevant for that. If you want to talk free speech and censorship, there's been threads on that, some of which I've commented on, and which you're free to respond to me on. Similarly for threads on various social justice issues. And of course, if there's a particular bone you feel you need to pick, you can always start a new thread.
You can be my friend! 
ml1 said:
I had thought I was of "the left" but none of that describes me. I feel lost now. If I'm not "the left" who am I?
PVW said:
While I'm certainly guilty of indulging in tangents in threads, there's just to many disparate issues you threw out there. I responded to the one that's generally on topic. If you want to talk about war, the Ukraine thread is more relevant for that. If you want to talk free speech and censorship, there's been threads on that, some of which I've commented on, and which you're free to respond to me on. Similarly for threads on various social justice issues. And of course, if there's a particular bone you feel you need to pick, you can always start a new thread.
it was a tangent, but the discussion was related to the amount of restraint Canadian authorities have shown toward the protesters. So there's that.
Regardless, it's an upside down argument to say that a vaccine mandate is evidence "the left" doesn't care about the safety of workers and the risks they have been taking regarding COVID.
And once again we see that there are people who don't believe in any responsibility beyond themselves. If there is any group of people who have a responsibility during a pandemic to do what they can to mitigate spread, it's people who get in vehicles and travel around the country every day.
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
Smedley said
Yes, horses worked great at the border last summer. I'm surprised you support this.
Three border control officers trying to control 12,000 migrants in Del Rio. The officers were doing their jobs, and to control their horses, they use horse reins. They lost their jobs, immediately, after the president saw a photo caption which stated the officers were whipping migrants.
@mtierney Just stop. Nobody likes a broken record. Find another audience - maybe an echo chamber - to share you panic about brown people entering illegally.
mtierney said:
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
Smedley said
Yes, horses worked great at the border last summer. I'm surprised you support this.
Three border control officers trying to control 12,000 migrants in Del Rio. The officers were doing their jobs, and to control their horses, they use horse reins. They lost their jobs, immediately, after the president saw a photo caption which stated the officers were whipping migrants.
The did not lose their jobs, either immediately or later on.
You are lying to us.
Apologize.
A long time ago, a poster who grew up in a Warsaw Pact nation noted that anybody who thought the Democrats were socialist had no idea what socialism really was.
Similarly, I think that people who think vaccine mandates and mask mandates as implemented in the U.S. are grave threats to their freedom have never really experienced a loss of freedom.
DHS Press Release dated November16, 2021 (according to my Google search this is the latest update):
DHS Update Regarding the Investigation of Horse Patrol Activity in Del Rio, Texas on September 19, 2021
Release Date: November 16, 2021
WASHINGTON — The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) provides this update regarding the investigation of horse patrol activity in Del Rio, Texas on September 19, 2021. The activity under investigation, which was captured in photographs and video that circulated nationwide, occurred during the large gathering of Haitian and other migrants near the International Bridge.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) initially referred the investigation to DHS’s Office of Inspector General (OIG). The OIG declined to investigate and referred the matter back to CBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR). OPR then immediately commenced investigative work, including its review of videos and photographs and the interview of witnesses, employees, and CBP leadership. OPR has followed customary process in its investigation of this matter.
Once completed, the results of the investigation will be provided to CBP management to determine whether disciplinary action is appropriate and, if so, the specific discipline to be imposed. At that time, the employees will be afforded due process, including an opportunity to respond, and any corrective actions will comport with applicable laws and regulations. The disciplinary process, which is separate from the fact-finding investigation, is subject to certain timelines established in CBP’s labor-management agreement with the employees’ union of the United States Border Patrol.
DHS remains committed to conducting a thorough, independent, and objective investigation. DHS will share information, as available, consistent with the need to protect the integrity of the investigation and individuals’ privacy.
Set forth below is a more detailed overview of the key steps of the investigative and disciplinary processes that govern this kind of matter:
CBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) is the office charged with investigating alleged misconduct of CBP employees.
In accordance with DHS policy, OPR refers all allegations of serious misconduct against law enforcement officers to the DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG).
OPR may share its initial findings with the United States Attorney’s Office to alert federal prosecutors of the facts of the case and ensure that administrative actions do not inadvertently compromise any potential criminal investigation. Depending on the circumstances, OPR may wait to interview the subject(s) of an investigation until the U.S. Attorney makes a decision on whether or not to pursue the case.
If the U.S. Attorney accepts the case, OPR coordinates with the Department of Justice on the investigation. In most situations, OPR defers to the prosecuting entity, which generally means that it will wait for the completion of the criminal case before conducting interviews of the subjects involved.
If the U.S. Attorney declines the case, OPR continues with the final steps remaining in the investigation. The results of the completed investigation are then provided to CBP management to evaluate whether disciplinary action is warranted.
In determining what disciplinary action to take, deciding officials are typically required to consider a number of factors, referred to in case law as the Douglas Factors (based on criteria set forth in the 1981 case, Douglas vs. Veterans Administration), to include an analysis of the nature and seriousness of the action; the employee’s role and position, work record, and disciplinary history; the notoriety of the offense; and the consistency of the proposed penalty with discipline imposed for analogous offenses.
The employee is issued a decision letter in which the individual is advised of the decision, which charges were sustained or not sustained, the factors considered in deciding on the chosen disciplinary action, and appeal rights, if any. For certain types of disciplinary actions, such as long suspensions and removal actions, the agency is required by law to provide at least 30 days’ notice and an opportunity to respond before effectuating the discipline.
The appeal avenues available to the employee depend on the type of discipline imposed, the employee’s employment history, and the employee’s bargaining unit status. Depending on the circumstances, employees have the right to the following processes: review by the Merit Systems Protection Board; review by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; a negotiated grievance procedure and arbitration; and an internal administrative grievance procedure. Which of those processes would apply depends on the circumstances.
URL: https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/16/politics/border-patrol-horses-del-rio/index.html
Excerpt from CNN 11162021 Report:
"The agents involved in the incident remain on administrative duty [emphasis added], according to DHS spokeswoman Marsha Espinosa. Horse patrol units continue to be deployed based on operational assessments, but are not deployed in the city of Del Rio, she added.
============================================
It is unclear to me whether this investigation of the Del Rio incident is still going on, or has been completed as it appears that most recent report is from 11162021.
PS Appears that agents involved in the Del Rio incident have been assigned to administrative duty during the investigation. And, horse patrol units are not being deployed in the Del Rio area at the time of the report.
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
Well whatever, to me you pretty clearly disagree with at least one key provision in each of the MM links you posted, but for some reason you won't acknowledge it.
But for the record, it's good to know that you don't disagree with this:
"These grenadiers also need to be able to follow legal protocol and utilize chemical munitions to disperse an unlawful assembly that refuses to disperse, after being given lawful commands."
if it's pretty clear that I disagree, how about quoting me where that's the case.
you said: "the police should never be using military type tactics on peaceful protesters....The tactics I'm referring to are officially sanctioned sweeps with armored cops using flash grenades, tear gas, and sometimes using armored vehicles."
MM said: "Trained grenadiers ...need to be able to follow legal protocol and utilize chemical munitions to disperse an unlawful assembly that refuses to disperse, after being given lawful commands."
Do you know what a grenadier is? It ain't a social worker.
Anyway, if the two statements don't conflict, I don't know what does.
so you think it's ok to tear gas peaceful protesters?
wow, how very authoritarian of you.
I fully endorse the Madison Method, at least the two links you shared, which I have read in full. I'm sure there's more to the MM but I imagine I would endorse that too, given how spot-on I found the two links that you shared. When I say I fully endorse the MM, that does includes the part where they say police "need to be able to follow legal protocol and utilize chemical munitions to disperse an unlawful assembly that refuses to disperse, after being given lawful commands."
If that makes me a monster, so be it.
It's fine if you don't support that part of the Madison Method. People disagree on things. It's
you're really missing my point. The word "peaceful" is an important one in what I wrote. I didn't see anything in the articles I linked to that suggest it's legal or proper to open fire on peaceful demonstrators. The fact that you interpret it to mean that it is proper says a lot about your attitude toward peaceful protest.
You're working really hard to contort the Madison Method, which you cited as a model to emulate, to fit your own personal beliefs. Rather than just saying you disagree with part of it (which seems to me would be a lot easier).
Police "need to be able to follow legal protocol and utilize chemical munitions to disperse an unlawful assembly that refuses to disperse, after being given lawful commands."
As assembly would be deemed "unlawful" if it refuses to disperse after being given lawful commands. I'm sure the peacefulness of the assembly would be (or at least should be), factored into the police decision of whether, when and how to move on the crowd. But ultimately the peacefulness of the crowd at that moment should not preclude the police from moving in -- if that were the case, I'm sure the MM would have specified that. But it didn't.
Police chiefs who are responsible for public safety face tough decisions with this stuff, and rolling out the riot gear, military equipment etc is a decision that shouldn't be taken lightly. But there are risks associated with what you support, which is leave an assembly be, cross fingers and just hope it dissipates. Sometimes it will, but sometimes it won't, and bad stuff (violence, destruction, mayham) can happen if the police aren't proactive. If I'm a police chief I have to consider that.
So keep on assailing my morals if that makes you feel better. But ultimately a policy of "never" moving in on a peaceful protest is just bad policy IMO.
RFA, that screen-hogging, scroll-forcing tundra of a paste job, when a click on the hyperlick does the trick, was hardly necessary.
DaveSchmidt said:
RFA, that screen-hogging, scroll-forcing tundra of a paste job, when a click on the hyperlick does the trick, was hardly necessary.
Duly noted.
Smedley said:
You're working really hard to contort the Madison Method, which you cited as a model to emulate, to fit your own personal beliefs. Rather than just saying you disagree with part of it (which seems to me would be a lot easier).
Police "need to be able to follow legal protocol and utilize chemical munitions to disperse an unlawful assembly that refuses to disperse, after being given lawful commands."
As assembly would be deemed "unlawful" if it refuses to disperse after being given lawful commands. I'm sure the peacefulness of the assembly would be (or at least should be), factored into the police decision of whether, when and how to move on the crowd. But ultimately the peacefulness of the crowd at that moment should not preclude the police from moving in -- if that were the case, I'm sure the MM would have specified that. But it didn't.
Police chiefs who are responsible for public safety face tough decisions with this stuff, and rolling out the riot gear, military equipment etc is a decision that shouldn't be taken lightly. But there are risks associated with what you support, which is leave an assembly be, cross fingers and just hope it dissipates. Sometimes it will, but sometimes it won't, and bad stuff (violence, destruction, mayham) can happen if the police aren't proactive. If I'm a police chief I have to consider that.
So keep on assailing my morals if that makes you feel better. But ultimately a policy of "never" moving in on a peaceful protest is just bad policy IMO.
you might want to go back over all the comments and read what I really wrote instead of what you think I wrote. I never wrote that there is never a place for force in dispersing a crowd.
But some of the military-style tactics being used are actually in violation of generally regarded best practices for police forces. Tear gas, rubber bullets, and especially kettling are known to be provocations that make crowd situations worse.
and a tidbit about tear gas -- if the demonstrations were war zones instead of protests, using tear gas would be a violation of the Geneva Protocol. So in other words, a tactic which is deemed to inhumane for warfare is being used on unarmed demonstrators in the U.S.
mtierney said:
Three border control officers trying to control 12,000 migrants in Del Rio. The officers were doing their jobs, and to control their horses, they use horse reins. They lost their jobs, immediately, after the president saw a photo caption which stated the officers were whipping migrants.
Again, who is lying to you about this?
Rentals
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
The more I read your discussions of crowd control the more thankful I am to realise that, by and large, our march organisers generally have to notify ‘authorities’ (incl police) of their plans incl the route so that traffic signage can be installed esp for emergency vehicles - and that if things get somewhat ‘wild’ we’re basically mustered, a bit like livestock.
You really have to watch some working dog mustering to understand what I mean, and also understand that even though our police might costume in Riot Gear with helmets, shields etc, most of us still think of our police as not carrying guns. Ridski, even though times have changed, I think it’s still the same in the UK isn’t it? Police don’t always carry guns? So first reactions are to be maybe shovy, noisy, but not necessarily use the sprays, tear gas etc, wave guns, batons, etc. The other thing is that until recently our police tended not to get really physical with the protestors unless actually attacked (think of Royal Guards on duty at the palace, stoic). So they could take a fair bit yelling, accidental shoving etc but spitting and direct poking or throwing things would have you arrested for assault.
Our graziers use working dogs for mustering in preference to using teams of jackaroos on bikes and choppers: keeps the livestock safer and calmer. Smart police crowd planners working with traffic planners work their teams like the graziers do, moving the people around to safe dispersal points, or gathering in open places where various emergency services can attend as required. Amazing to watch. (Still scary to be in, when the mood changes; and the police don’t always get it right)