Trump tries to smear Martin Gugino, Catholic Peace Activist

[Usagi]

I don’t think police are being pelted with rocks and bricks because they’re accused of bad things; most directly, they’re being pelted with rocks and bricks because lawless violent rioters are assaulting them.

For no reason? Or because police across the country have been seen to get away with assault and murder under the cover of their jobs and people are fed up?

(Yes, I consider the rioting reaction to be excessive, but if people defend the police for being human and having emotional reactions despite presumably being trained in things like de-escalation, surely we can extend at least the same courtesy to citizens without any such training who are pushed too far?)

As I see it, you’re asking police to act like social workers, i.e. Inquire after the welfare of those who accost them. That’s not the police’s job.

We probably do ask the police to serve too many roles. That’s actually one of the issues that has bubbled up out of the protests, with the result that a lot of people are talking about restructuring response options so that some things are actually handled by social workers.

Though, they are police and not soldiers. The people they’re dealing with are the ones they signed up to protect (and indeed, indirectly, their employers), not The Enemy. There should be a lot more occasions on which the job calls for them to speak kindly and reassuringly to someone than ones that call for armoring up and steamrolling whatever is in the way.

This person intentionally accosted police and interfered with them; he’s lucky worse didn’t happen to them. The police across the US showed enormous restraint collectively; some would say they showed too much restraint.

Okay, hold up. The police started this. Not just the killing of George Floyd, for which the responsible parties will get their day in court. Minneapolis police sprayed (assaulted) protesters who were just sitting on the ground, complete with masks and social distancing. There are far more accounts of police going after people who were nonviolently sitting or standing around (even bystanders and journalists who weren’t part of the protests) than of them heroically standing up to perfidious rioters and looters. (And when they have nabbed somebody who was committing an actual crime, nobody particularly complains.)

How much less restraint could police be showing? “Kent State 2.0,” as was mentioned above? You realize that would be definite outright murders on the police’s part, not in any way justified and certainly not likely to de-escalate the protests, right?

 

[Usagi]

If it was a pro-life protester in an anti-abortion rally that was treated the same way by cops, would the rhetoric be the same?

Will the pro-lifer have it coming too?

Unfortunately, that kind of talk does tend to pop up whenever one’s political opponents come up against the authorities.

I haven’t seen it for pro-lifers recently, but certainly there were people salivating about what they thought police ought to do to the anti-lockdown protesters a couple weeks ago who support the current protests wholeheartedly. (And I feel sure there are people strongly emphasizing “just do what the authorities tell you to do” on this thread who were on the side of those earlier protesters, so it goes both ways.)

Now, I’m glad there was no violent police response to the anti-lockdown protesters, but the mere fact that there wasn’t, despite even more provocative behavior in some cases (in that one infamous picture, screaming in police faces with a rifle on one’s back), when there has been police escalation in the current situations even before violence on the protesters’ part, does support the notion that police response is noticeably different when different people and causes are involved.

 

[Usagi]

Would you like an antifa supporter running up to you taking your picture from less than a foot away?

That would probably be disorienting and disturbing, sure. (Though I’m not sure how I’m supposed to know the random guy is an “antifa supporter.”)

On the other hand, I’m not in a situation where I already know my every action is being recorded by multiple people and where I am backed up by a bunch of other armed and trained people. I have a lot more to fear from the weird stranger than an entire line of police do.

Further, the additional concern was that he was attempting to scan or even jam the police communications. Antifa loves to eavesdrop on police communications, precisely as the linked video above demonstrates.

That was a concern of those police at the time, in their “split second to react,” or that was something that’s been speculated since?

Also, you can listen in on police communications from your house with the right hardware, and if you’re a smart cookie interested in jamming them, probably do that from a nearby building (with rather less legal hardware). There is no need to send someone to get within arm’s reach of a bunch of people who could kill you where you stand.

Once again, people are engaging in more endless debates about “how a split-second encounter could have been done SO much better.” That’s not fair to police, particularly after police have been repeatedly spit on; assaulted; had rocks and bottles thrown at them, etc., over the last 2 weeks.

The ability of police officers to react appropriately in crisis situations, and whatever flaws might exist in the larger system that shapes their training and attitudes toward doing so, is exactly what is at issue in these protests. And so far the police in general have not done a great job of showing they’re not essentially licensed bullies who kind of enjoy going into battle against the people paying their salaries.

What I’d rather see is a bit of love & respect for the Las Vegas cop shot last week at a so-called “peaceful protest” who will need to be on a ventilator for the rest of his life…

I don’t think anyone who has been injured or killed in the course of the protests is lacking for love and respect, though some people may just not know about every incident. The man who shot that officer is in custody, rightly charged with attempted murder among other things, and it is unclear whether he was actually part of the protest.

 

[Nepperhan]

Please elaborate on this. From what little I know, that is exactly how they should be when confronting a mass of people when they are outnumbered and heavily restricted in what actions they can take.

A hollow square is how 18th century European armies moved forward not stopping for fallen comrades or dead horses. It was designed to withstand a cavalry charge and had different lines so some soldiers could be reloading their one-shot muskets while others were firing. Basically the infantrymen were wide-open targets.

Police moving protesters even from forbidden areas do not need to use such unrelenting tactics. If one person stops to help a fallen person the group is not going to be overrun. In this case the police were moving forward which is all the more reason why stopping would not be a bad tactic for a person. The police were not covering themselves in a withdrawal.

 

[VonDerTann]

I’m sorry, I respectfully disagree with essentially everything you say.

I’ll have to write more fully later. Time doesn’t permit more than a bit.

–No, police didn’t “start this.” Really, George Floyd “started this” by being a career criminal who had multiple arrests and who had done hard time; who passed a fake $20 bill while having various illegal drugs in his system; who got so foul when challenged that the store clerk called 911 on him; and who apparently - like Freddy Gray - beat his head against the wall of a police cruiser, leading the police to subdue him essentially any way they could.

–Interesting that to you, it’s somehow legitimate for people to throw bricks at police and burn down their precinct house, but if the police - who are spit one; cursed out, and repeatedly provoked - shoot these animals it would be “definite murder” (and you put that in italics to underscore it).

–Respectfully, you have zero proof anyone is “pushed too far” by police, and you can’t point to one instance of a police officer, say, being wrongfully exonerated for anything they’ve done. If anything, it’s police who are pushed too far, by being spit on, yelled at, doxxed, and having bricks thrown at them, while they’re expected to stand there like statues.

–I’m curious - what do you say about lawyers throwing Molotov cocktails at a police van?

 

[Nepperhan]

Take a look at how many police officers have been murdered recently, and tell us that they ought to chill out when they are confronted by someone when they are in formation.

They ought to chill out when confronted.

 

[StudentMI]

I’ll have to write more fully later. Time doesn’t permit more than a bit.

I think you said plenty. Great post.

 

[Nepperhan]

Antifa thugs and various agitators are always taking pictures of officers, whether to doxx them or for other nefarious purposes (such as to assault them on camera; film the police response; the edit out the attack and scream “brutality!”

If you watched looters on TV, what did essentially all of them have? Their phones out, recording.

I personally watched looters in my neighborhood. Not one had a phone out. I never saw a looter on television recording the event, either.

 

[neophyte]

Pulling out a cell phone is not accosting an officer.

You ought to stop using words that you don’t know the meaning of.

 

[VonDerTann]

The police are supposed to “chill out” when shot at; when gasoline bombs are thrown at their vehicles; when spit on (during a pandemic, no less); when bricks are hurled at them?

 

[MikeInVA]

They ought to chill out when confronted.

You have it so backwards. Protesters need to “chill out” when the police, who are placed in their position of authority by the mayor, are trying to provide for the safety of all citizens. When they fail to follow the orders of the police they are no longer protesters but rioters.

 

[Nepperhan]

The police are supposed to “chill out” when shot at; when gasoline bombs are thrown at their vehicles; when spit on (during a pandemic, no less); when bricks are hurled at them?

My, my my. Have you ever seen the training of and the attacks on civil rights protesters?

To answer your question: In a word, yes.

 

[Nepperhan]

You have it so backwards. Protesters need to “chill out” when the police, who are placed in their position of authority by the mayor, are trying to provide for the safety of all citizens. When they fail to follow the orders of the police they are no longer protesters but rioters.

Protesters, when violence occurs, need to put a lid on that stuff, too. They need to chill out.

 

[VonDerTann]

Could you please explain exactly how a police officer is supposed to “chill out” when shot at?

When a gasoline bomb is thrown at their vehicle?

When a brick is hurled at them?

Seriously, to you…what does “chill out” mean, exactly? Can they draw their weapon? Can they say “hey you! Please don’t do that again!” Can they duck? Must the police run away?

Can the police permissibly return fire? In your world…does a police officer actually need a gun? I mean, they’re supposed to chill out when shot at, so why carry a gun at all?

How about YOU, a non-police officer? Could YOU allowably do those things? What exactly would you do if so targeted?

Just trying to understand what “chilling out” means…

 

[Nepperhan]

Seriously, to you…what does “chill out” mean, exactly? Can they draw their weapon? Can they say “hey you! Please don’t do that again!” Can they duck? Must the police run away?

I was asked to: “tell us that they ought to chill out when they are confronted by someone when they are in formation.” i said yes. Then you raised the ante. The answer remains the same.

The police chill out by holding the line. I’ve seen it otherwise. The occasion was eventually accurately termed a “police riot” in Chicago in 1968.

I guess you are unfamiliar with the term and theory of holding the line. Facing protesters, even when they become violent, is not an occasion for tit for tat. And yes, I have been in a situation in which I held the line, if you must know.

 

[VonDerTann]

See, you’re ducking the questions now. You said police need to “chill out” when confronted with bullets and gasoline bombs.

I just asked what exactly that means and gave examples, asking if those examples were permissible/required etc.

Now, you’re being evasive by saying they need to “hold the line,” whatever that means.

I’m just a simple guy trying to understand exactly how a police officer is supposed to “chill out” when a lit gasoline bomb is flung at their vehicle; when they get assaulted, etc. Sheesh, I asked sincere questions and you didn’t answer. Could you, please?

 

[blackforest]

See, you’re ducking the questions now. You said police need to “chill out” when confronted with bullets and gasoline bombs.

Why are you bringing up bullets and gasoline bombs when this thread is about an unarmed guy with a cell phone?

It’s a classic tactic of a narcissistic abuser to commit the abuse and then pretend to be the victim. We’re not seeing systemic narcissism with police brutality, and people defending Martin Gugino’s assailant are enabling it.

 

[Nepperhan]

See, you’re ducking the questions now. You said police need to “chill out” when confronted with bullets and gasoline bombs.

I just asked what exactly that means and gave examples, asking if those examples were permissible/required etc.

Now, you’re being evasive by saying they need to “hold the line,” whatever that means.

I’m just a simple guy trying to understand exactly how a police officer is supposed to “chill out” when a lit gasoline bomb is flung at their vehicle; when they get assaulted, etc. Sheesh, I asked sincere questions and you didn’t answer. Could you, please?

No, I’m not being evasive and no you’re not just a simple guy asking sincere questions to get information. I was asked if I thought the police ought to chill out and I said yes. Now, if you want to speculate about the appropriate response an officer should make when he or she is stabbed in the eye with an ice pick, I’m not going to speculate or jump through your rhetorical hoops.

 

[VonDerTann]

Don’t answer for him/her, please, and stop trying to redirect me away from legitimate questions.

He said police need to “chill out” or “hold the line” when confronted with gasoline bombs, bullets, etc., and I’d like to understand exactly what that means.

Threads take all sorts of turns. I’m just going where the other posters took it.

 

[VonDerTann]

My questions are most definitely sincere.

I just really really want to know how a policeman “holds the line,” or is supposed to “chill out” when a Molotov cocktail is tossed at him/her. I don’t even know what “hold the line” even means. What is a police to do in that event?