The Ferguson, Missouri thread

[Nephlite]

The police gathered when the protests started. They started upping the ante when the rioters started burning stores down and throwing shit at them. The police merely being there totally sparked it in to that. Yup. And it's okay for other people's stuff to get torched, and people robbed, and houses broken in to, and people getting the shit beat out of them because they're white, and drive-by's just hours after the shooting, and sure, the police being there made it all happen.

And you wonder why sometimes the police would love to just give up and let nature take it's course. But then, that'd be wrong.

[Acevalefor]

And you wonder why sometimes the police would love to just give up and let nature take it's course. But then, that'd be wrong.

Are you really that dense? Here, let me quote what I said;

Until there is illegal activity that needs to be dealt with (read; looting, vandalism, fights, etc.) there is no reason for the police to be involved with the protests at all.

Hmm. Looks like the looting, burning, beatings, etc. fit right in there with illegal activity. That means you get to do your job and respond to those and arrest people for it. Go get em Tiger! That still does not mean you get to use force on innocent protesters. That absolutely does mean that you SHOULD pick your targets and not be so indiscriminate with your use of force continuum.

[Quicklet]

I'm sure there are a fair number of police officers there who are trying to do their best in a volatile situation. There were (and still are) officers who had no business being out there because they weren't acting responsibly in that situation. Doing things like training a gun on a crowd in broad daylight on top of a MRAP, or pointing a rifle directly at protesters lined up several feet away, or yelling "fucking bring it, you animals". That kind of stuff only riles people up and makes it harder to control emotions.

Part of the issue initially was that the police response basically took both extremes without having a good middle ground. One night they were completely absent from protecting businesses and property from looting, the next they basically turned the entire area into a war zone.

I'm sure there are internal politics involved too that make this a no-win situation for the police. To that end, I think it's a failure of a number of the leaders in handling this in a way that moves the situation in a positive direction, and I don't really see that having changed at all.

[notorious bum]

Funny how the looting and burning are always brought up, yet the police were present the whole time and allowed for those couple of buildings to be affected. All the other businesses left untouched were guarded by the community and even gangbangers at one point. The Micky D's that got special treatment by the police was looted for milk for teargas victims. I guess this never got discussed on whatever corporate sewage pipe you favor. It's easy to talk about necessary use of force when details are painted with a giant black dildo.

You can simply return to the beginning of this thread and see posts with clear depictions of what happened on the ground during the police's assault, which quickly debunks this new narrative of police simply being precautionary and reactionary, as opposed to escalating the fear, anger, and intimidation at every single step of the way. This is basically a waste of time arguing well-documented infringements on people's rights and disregard for human safety. What, did you just throw out the ACLU's report and dismiss it as exaggeration, fabrication, or misinformation? You know, kinda like ol' chief does on twitter?

If I had the time I would spam 10-20 videos for you that shows just how ignorant and wrong it is to say that police even needed a reason to beat, arrest, blockade, threaten, and fire upon unarmed protestors and the media. It's unbelievable how short people's memories are that events transpired only a few months ago are but a blur or forgotten completely.

[Nephlite]

This is also coming from a guy who regularly shares information from clickbait sources designed to stir up crap.

It's okay. I'm not mad. We're gonna disagree, and that's fine. I'm just glad it's almost over, to be honest. All this incident has done is spent millions of dollars and ruined countless lives. Nothing positive will come out of either decision.

[notorious bum]

This issue is far from over, the fuse has been lit and it will be hard to contain cities all over country having their own Fergusons on a daily basis. Also, I do not subscribe to any clickbait news sources, I mistakenly posted one when I was on break once, so sue me. I'm the biggest stickler when it comes to that, I can hardly tolerate seeing Salon (MJ not far behind) headlines these days, even if they do publish respected journalists.

[kuronosan]

Um, since when was "eh can't tell them apart gas them all" an acceptable tactic?

[Acevalefor]

Um, since when was "eh can't tell them apart gas them all" an acceptable tactic?

It's not a tactic. It's an acceptable response on the use of force continuum and Q agrees that humans are barbaric when given any sort of power over others.

It kind of goes hand-in-hand with agencies like NYPD forcing officers to harass and assault random minorities to fill their quotas of stop-and-frisk or face disciplinary action.

[Nephlite]

Um, since when was "eh can't tell them apart gas them all" an acceptable tactic?

I'd like to see any of you attempt to pull people out of a crowd. Do it with 40 officers, with 1000+ people yelling, screaming, moving, dark outside, raining most nights, with 5-10 people hiding amongst them throwing rocks, bottles, Molotov's, and you start to hear gunshots coming from the crowd.

Most of you talk some big game for people who've never experienced that type of environment.

And granted, it could have been handled a bit different. Day ones issues were there weren't enough officers, which explains why Day 2 saw such an increase in police response (the non existent to full-blown riot squad tactics). Policing is an almost purely reactive by nature, and if one day a riot starts and buildings burn down (and no, the protesters did not protect buildings on day one, because if they did, they would have also stopped the looting from the dozens of other stores), you have to respond to that. So by day two, they put the riot control action plan in to effect.

Stop trying to mash the whole timeline of this together. It was an expanding and evolving incident, not an all of a sudden "there's the police with MRAPS!" that magically appeared out of nowhere scenario.

[kuronosan]

Dude, no one is talking game. It was a question.

Get off the Mountie horse and talk like a person.

[Quicklet]

The police response was disastrous from the start and continued to be disastrous up until they finally realized that images of streets filled with tear gas and harassment of media were not winning them any supporters. There seemed to be no clear command structure with three or four different police organizations acting in the area, and every time they did something to try and calm the situation, they ended up doing something else that negated it. And that's the crux of the problem: the people in charge are not willing to admit that they handled the situation poorly and aren't taking steps to keep things from getting worse after the grand jury announcement.

[Nephlite]

Dude, no one is talking game. It was a question.

Get off the Mountie horse and talk like a person.

Definitely wasn't a question. It's open criticism without any solution or basis of knowledge as to how the tactics should have been better or what they could have done instead. There's no examples of it going perfect, nor are there any good ways to do it, except just DO IT. Everything looks good and tidy on paper and after we type it on a forum; the reality is, it's not going to be perfect and it's not going to go the way you want it to go.

The police response was disastrous from the start and continued to be disastrous up until they finally realized that images of streets filled with tear gas and harassment of media were not winning them any supporters. There seemed to be no clear command structure with three or four different police organizations acting in the area, and every time they did something to try and calm the situation, they ended up doing something else that negated it. And that's the crux of the problem: the people in charge are not willing to admit that they handled the situation poorly and aren't taking steps to keep things from getting worse after the grand jury announcement.

Like I said before, there was no easy way to do it and they did it with what they had at the time.

If anything, it shows a drastic disparity in the so called "militarization" of police, as the tactics and structure to support such an organizational element isn't readily apparent until the resources are available. The beginning of the protests was a cluster of ramshackle tactics and equipment that were thrown together at a minutes notice. How can you prepare for something that happens maybe once a decade? Most of the surplus equipment and officers probably had little to no experience in riot control training, except what they might've learned at the Academy. Hell, in my 3000+ member agency, only 20-30 officers are so called "Riot Control Tactics" trained. How can 20-30 officers deal with a protest/riot on the Ferguson scale where several thousand people were there in the beginning?

It wasn't until the Missouri Highway Patrol stepped in did it gain structure and wasn't a complete mess. Even then, from a tactical standpoint, there were too many factors that led to different objectives at once. In the Incident Command Structure to deal with riots like this, there's very specific things that needed to happen, that did in fact happen as planned. The only thing that did not happen, was the containment of media. Under free speech, they ignored the directives to stay in the media staging area and went beyond the perimeter to gain a better story because of the allegations of brutality. Know what happens when you go outside the staging zone? You become a combatant.

[BaneTheBrawler]

anyone with a gram of sense knows that when faced with a mass of angry people the last thing you want to do is escalate. we've seen that go down in linkshells and forums for years and it never works. and yet that's exactly what the officials have done at every turn in this mess. when the training offered by MMOs outclasses the training offered by police departments, there's a pretty huge fucking problem.


the worst part is its not even specific training. it's just "how to not be shitty"

[Nephlite]

I'm not sure of what you're getting at.

A mass of people as in individual humans trying to work towards a common goal against a computer AI with predictable responses, or a mass of humans versus a mass of humans with unpredictable responses because they're human? Is that an accurate comparison? What specifically are we talking like Dynamis level shenanigans or Salvage?

[BaneTheBrawler]

they are all applicable. the appropriate response is always to stop the behavior that is actively destructive with the absolute minimum amount of force required and then just let people wear themselves out.

[Nephlite]

they are all applicable. the appropriate response is always to stop the behavior that is actively destructive with the absolute minimum amount of force required and then just let people wear themselves out.

I'd have to say the force is minimal, but that's just me. Remember the responses: Verbals > Empty Hand Techniques > Less Lethal > Hard Empty Hand Techniques > Intermediate (impact) Weapons > Lethal Force. They used verbals, and there was no response. Once stuff started getting thrown, they were authorized up to Intermediate Weapons, and instead used Less Lethal.

Also:

http://aattp.org/anonymous-unmasks-r...s-imagesvideo/

[noblemountain]

Here is something you brushed off earlier and didn't really address...I mentioned that the rules of engagement in war were stricter than officers practice in the US...that is real. I wasn't allowed to shoot an Iraqi until I saw him fire at me. Not have a gun...not point a gun at me...fire. That is extreme obviously and was because EVERYONE there had guns so you couldn't just shoot everyone with a gun. How many times did you pull security in Iraq/Afghanistan and face an angry mob of people throwing rocks, shouting, throwing shit and piss at you? Every three days? Yeah, it sucks...I get it brother, I honestly do...but I also didn't sign up for it. It is an increasingly shitty job that is made shittier by horrible practices in place and terrible management in this specific situation that has led to an escalation that was unnecessary.

[kuronosan]

It definitely was a question. It's not my fault you're incredibly defensive against anyone who even suggests a cop might be doing the wrong thing.

Or did you forget I work in medicine?

[BaneTheBrawler]

I'd have to say the force is minimal, but that's just me. Remember the responses: Verbals > Empty Hand Techniques > Less Lethal > Hard Empty Hand Techniques > Intermediate (impact) Weapons > Lethal Force. They used verbals, and there was no response. Once stuff started getting thrown, they were authorized up to Intermediate Weapons, and instead used Less Lethal.

Also:

http://aattp.org/anonymous-unmasks-r...s-imagesvideo/

let me explain what minimum force required means to people who haven't read the idiotic manual.

if someone smashes a window, you close in on the window. if you see that person, detain them. if not, you stand there and prevent anyone else from doing it. that is minimum force required.

blasting everyone in the crowd with riot control weapons is not. because you will invariably hit someone who wasn't doing anything, and EVERYONE in the area knows it. Grats, you just became the people who hurt an innocent bystander. humans don't just stop thinking in a mob. they don't think as well, but they don't stop. the idea is to prevent yourself from becoming "them" in an us vs. them conflict, which you do by being specific in your use of force. keep "them" as the criminals who are actually doing damage.

[kuronosan]

let me explain what minimum force required means to people who haven't read the idiotic manual.

if someone smashes a window, you close in on the window. if you see that person, detain them. if not, you stand there and prevent anyone else from doing it. that is minimum force required.

blasting everyone in the crowd with riot control weapons is not. because you will invariably hit someone who wasn't doing anything, and EVERYONE in the area knows it. Grats, you just became the people who hurt an innocent bystander. humans don't just stop thinking in a mob. they don't think as well, but they don't stop. the idea is to prevent yourself from becoming "them" in an us vs. them conflict, which you do by being specific in your use of force. keep "them" as the criminals who are actually doing damage.

Exactly.