I have conflicted feelings about this...on one hand Fox News is beat up, the other is innocent people are getting hurt.

Good find Mr. Thrawnnumbarz

Finally, people actually complaining about a REAL injustice by the police rather than fueling the fire and exaggerating police actions.

I don't really see this "Patty" getting batonned. Or it's hard to see?

She's the camerwoman, and you don't see it in the footage she's recording.

Actually, I think it happens at 0:45. Look at the person in the black shirt on the right.

Now we need Lee in here explaining why it is necessary for police forces to do this.

"qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum".

Right...that quote was for international relations, not police/civilian, you know, because police aren't supposed to ever be at war with civilians.

what the hell...

Double time! It's tussle time!

I haven't watched the video but I assume this is from the LA riot the other day. The camera people got the **** beat out of them because they think that when they have a camera or a press badge that they're immune to the GTFO of the way clause when you see a group of police in riot gear.

Ok I'm watching it now...let me rephrase with what actually happened and I'll try to use the same words as the reporters.

"The marches were peaceful until the crowd began to spill out into the unclosed streets and private property creating a hazard to drivers and property owners. Police invoked the GTFO of the road clause. We're here a few blocks away from where it actually happened (ie. in the streets) to make it look like nothing happened and make you think it started in the middle of the park where nobody cares."
...ugh I can't do it anymore
Anyway a group of protesters became the bad apples of the group and the police tried to stop them. Well of course the nearby people instantly go into "OMG RIGHTS ARE BEING VIOLATED! THROW THINGS AT THE COPS AND LET THOSE POOR PEOPLE ESCAPE THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO ARREST."

Anyway point is if you don't attack the police, they won't break up your peaceful demonstration and once they DO start to break it up because of that, you GTFO and don't hold your ground or you'll be hit until you get the bright idea to leave or until the cuffs get locked on.

The press think they have some sort of immunity to get in the way of police action, they DO NOT.

*Edit* Haha..."I never heard (the order to disperse)"
I guess the guy yelling "MOVE" into the megaphone should have used the word "Disperse" instead and maybe they would have understood it. Or maybe its because he didn't do it in spanish so all the illegals had no idea what they were saying and in their country its normal to move TOWARDS cops in riot gear.


HOWEVER, there was no reason to use the beanbag shots against random targets. That is NEVER acceptable as a form of crowd control.

Theory remains the same, doesnt it?

I would say that the idea of "build up a military force as a deterrence to your foes" is different from "harm innocent civilians because some other civilians were breaking civil peace."

Nonsense. Obviously if you want peace you have to beat up the innocent civilians and protesters. That's the only way to get the damn hippies out of L.A.!

Well, I agree about the hippies part. It's not like they pay taxes anyway...

Tell you what - don't attack the police, and if you're told to GTFO, GTFO. Then you don't have to worry.

Fifteen officers were injured, btw. Why doesn't the headline read 'Fifteen officers injured by "peaceful crowd"? Hmm.

Because making the police appear as savages makes for better ratings. Duh.

Not to start anything, but...

Because the officers were shooting rubberbullets?

Or, the police could deal with the people attacking them instead of taking the "everyone here is hostile, clear the entire area out" route.

15 officers were injured firing "less-than-lethal" rounds into an unarmed crowd? That's a shame.

well I'm not taking a side on this, but I will say that our media's way too liberal and anti-goverment/police (especially FOX news), so I'm sure we're not getting the whole story.

So basically I'm with Duo on this one..

(wait did I just take a side?)

It should be noted that that is the local fox affiliate, not the Fox News Channel.

I'm guessing they're just mad cause they got beat up. Heck, I would be.

sure, but it's "We just got yelled out and roughed up a bit for being somewhere we shouldn't have been anyway, so let's make the cops look bad"

instead of what they're trying to portray which is "Here we were valiantly bringing you a story and those mean ole po-po's beat us up for no good reason"

I'm still trying to figure out how the camera folk were "where they shouldn't have been." Police scream "Get out of here!" while firing trauma-inducing ammunition into the crowd, the camera people move towards their van, police line surrounds van, suddenly "well, ****, you shouldn't have been there, camera crew, you don't have the right to be there."

Nice going, cops.

240 rounds fired into the crowd...oh...and zero arrests.

Yeah, sounds like they were there to keep the order.

NO MERCY.

Yeah, I saw this a few days ago.

It was a few people who were behaving bad and EVERYONE had to pay for it. Horrible, just horrible.

I don't have to arrest anybody to bring order to a situation and that statement is COMPLETELY misleading. I want to know how many citations were issued since the media doesn't realize that it doesn't take handcuffs to arrest.
A speeding ticket is an arrest and your signature is your bond and promise to appear within 30 days for the infraction.
A misdemeanor ticket (trespassing, simple assault) is the same except you have 72 hours to appear and I'm going to be a little more inclined to take you to jail in order to make certain that you do appear.

Bottom line, I don't even have to issue a citation to bring order if I don't want to depending on the situation and if its possible to charge anybody. Besides, throwing rocks at a police officer is a felony in most situations and I've got better things to do than charge someone with a life-changing felony for a rock if I'm not bleeding, not to mention the bs the defense attorney is going to spew about rock ballistics not matching the hand it was fired from and questioning my ability to remember the event and know exactly which person threw it.

You're right. Because they might have issued citations, firing 240 rounds into a crowd when only a select few were doing anything illegal more than justifies it. After all, shooting innocents brings peace to an area pretty quickly.

And you were there Roach so you know how many people were out of hand?

Mob Mentality 101. If 3 or 4 people act up in a group, the rest follow suit.
Seriously how naive are you? You're being spoonfed what the media wants you to think.

Right, it's completely out of the question to believe that there was a crowd of people in a public park celebrating something peacefully, with groups of people towards the outskirts harassing police, the police use force to "prevent the situation from getting out of hand" and that certainly the rest of the crowd couldn't have been confused as to what was happening. No sir, Mob Mentality 101 dictates everyone in that park as a hostile! (You know that "mob mentality" thing works for the police too...)

Sure maybe that's how it happened. Or maybe the news reporters got a bit miffed cause they got pushed out of the way in the confusion of the riot, so they decided to strike back at the police.

Could have happened either way and you weren't there and you don't have both sides of the story to judge what happened, so why don't you keep an open mind about it?

Just because Roach agrees with the media on this matter doesn't mean the media indoctrinated him to think that way. You are making the assumption that Roach hasn't critically thought this through on his own. That's not a safe assumption to make when we're talking about Roach.

My "open-mindedness" ended as soon as they fired 240 rounds into a crowd without being sure 100% of that crowd deserved to be hit with "less-than-lethal" round. You notice how I keep putting that in quotes? That's because the military keeps that in quotes. That's because it's very possible to kill someone with those rounds. And as soon as police forces are firing things into a crowd without being 100% sure that 100% of the members of that crowd are hostile, they are putting innocents at risk of dying. And no matter who you are, you will never ever convince me that it is okay for the police force (who's purpose is to protect the population) to put possible innocents' lives at risk. The LAPD needs to learn from other large city police forces and figure out how to keep peace without shooting people.

Just a minor note here -- there were what, 25,000 people at the rally? 600 officers, and 240 less-lethal shots fired. That's less than .5 shots per officer, and less than one shot per hundred people. It is entirely possible that most of those shots were justified, is it not?

I wasn't there, so I don't know. However, neither were you. The media tends to come down hard on police, since it makes for a better story. Keep that in mind.

Right, except, Lee, would you like to go into the trajectories of "less-than-lethal" rounds?

My point is, LAPD should take some ques from other large city police departments, who, instead of showing up in shock gear, saturate the area with undercover cops who quickly and quietly deal with trouble-makers in a crowded area without:
1) Putting innocents at risk.
2) Creating a situation where "mob mentality" may take over and a violent reaction may erupt.
3) Looking like trigger-happy buttholes that have nothing better to do than showing how much authority they have. (I know, #3 is the least fair of all of them, deal with it :P)

Nope - but if an officer told me to move, I'd be moving...not pushing my luck.

You make valid points - however, I still believe that the media is painting LAPD in a much worse light than they should be.

Police do not have a magical badge of absolute power, Duo. "GTFO clause" is not something people in service of the public should practice. You're blurring the lines between "for your own good" and "because I can."