Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ferguson, MO

Options
  • 14-08-2014 5:38am
    #1
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭


    Following #ferguson hashtag on twitter, apparently it's all gone tits-up in Ferguson after a cop shot a black kid in what's widely believed to be an unwarranted attack.

    Whatever about the rights of what happened there, (hopefully whatever enquiry will lay that bare) I'm gobsmacked at Ferguson PD's crowd control tactics. Lethal force visibly used to attempt to deter protesters. It all strikes me as untrained good ol' boy's sons given a shedload of Murrican guns and told "here, show them varmint foodstamp collectors who's boss". I would love to hear some PSNI opinions on this. I actually think, for better or worse, they're one of the best experienced forces in the world for this sort of thing.

    What really pisses me off about all this, is the amount of goodwill, trust, and cooperation with decent cops that this shower have thrown in a garbage can and sh*t upon. How much trust in police work is this going to cost around the US/world?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Lethal force visibly used to attempt to deter protesters.

    Lethal force has not been used on protestors as far as I'm aware.


  • Options
    #3
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    Lethal force has not been used on protestors as far as I'm aware.

    Sorry, I mean having it threatened visibly, in an overt aggressive manner, instead of being out of sight, ready to move in at the first sign of actual lethal danger to officer or public.

    Compare recent vids of Ferguson with this:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uec9-BJj1ho


    Training to deal with far worse, with far fewer toys, better tactics, and better results.


  • Options
    #4
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    American police are simply a product of their environment. When the people you police have access to military grade weaponry as a right, there's no point carrying a six shooter around.


  • Options
    #5
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    What a difference a day makes.
    Compare last night:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5sRrzKG4-8


    To this afternoon:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=707ckG_JPjM


    Now that's police work.


  • Options
    #6
    Five Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    American police are simply a product of their environment. When the people you police have access to military grade weaponry as a right, there's no point carrying a six shooter around.

    I do agree. However, policing in the USA has accelerated towards becoming para-military. They seem to be adopting a stance that they are at war with the communities that they their to serve and protect.

    I find it bizarre that somebody thought it was good policing to have an armoured personnel carrier blocking a protest with a sniper sitting atop of it pointing at the crowd. WTF?

    If I call from old hill Street Blues episodes, they had APC's back in the 70s and 80s but at least they painted them blue and white. No difference in the steel but a huge difference in public perception.

    While I understand that the local population have the right to bear arms, police forces should not be a war footing with their communities and getting rid of the military style uniforms and equipment needs to happen.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    markpb
    Registered Users Posts: 9,250 ✭✭✭markpb


    If you're criticizing their policing, don't forget barricading the roads into the city and asking the FAA to close the airspace above it. These and other sterling decisions are why the St Louis county sheriffs no longer have any jurisdiction in Ferguson. Appointing the state highway patrol was an odd choice but it seems to be working reasonably well.


  • Options
    #8
    rockonollie
    Registered Users Posts: 1,626 ✭✭✭rockonollie


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Lethal force visibly used to attempt to deter protesters.

    I never knew that tear gas and flash bangs are considered "lethal force"......seeing as the "peaceful" protesters have gone to the level of throwing molotov cocktails at police, the use of tear gas, flash bangs is more than warranted.


  • Options
    #9
    bravestar
    Registered Users Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭bravestar


    https://wpmedia.o.canada.com/2014/08/police_shooting-missouri_33656941.jpg

    Poor misunderstood peaceful protestors


  • Options
    #10
    Capri
    Registered Users Posts: 4,499 ✭✭✭Capri


    I'm getting reminded of the RUC 'B specials' (Ferguson police) tactics compared with the PSNI (MO Highway patrol ).
    Strange to use the Highway patrol to police riots but there's evidently better training for the Highway patrol than the local 'good ol' boys' :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #11
    rockonollie
    Registered Users Posts: 1,626 ✭✭✭rockonollie


    Capri wrote: »
    I'm getting reminded of the RUC 'B specials' (Ferguson police) tactics compared with the PSNI (MO Highway patrol ).
    Strange to use the Highway patrol to police riots but there's evidently better training for the Highway patrol than the local 'good ol' boys' :rolleyes:

    The highway patrol were brought in initially because the commanding officer is black, there's also the problem on animosity between the protesters and the Ferguson PD


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    wotswattage
    Registered Users Posts: 592 ✭✭✭wotswattage


    rockonollie wrote: »
    I never knew that tear gas and flash bangs are considered "lethal force"......seeing as the "peaceful" protesters have gone to the level of throwing molotov cocktails at police, the use of tear gas, flash bangs is more than warranted.

    This is the lethal force people are talking about:

    Ferguson-Weapons.jpg

    Now I've seen the pictures of the 'peaceful protesters' with the petrol bombs too and I won't make any excuses for them, but this whole situation has clearly been handled badly by the local police..


  • Options
    #13
    rockonollie
    Registered Users Posts: 1,626 ✭✭✭rockonollie


    wotswattage wrote: »
    This is the lethal force people are talking about:

    Ferguson-Weapons.jpg

    Now I've seen the pictures of the 'peaceful protesters' with the petrol bombs too and I won't make any excuses for them, but this whole situation has clearly been handled badly by the local police..

    Ok, you seem to have a problem understanding what 'lethal force' is...... having a gun is not using lethal force..... shooting and killing someone with that gun is.....I say again, lethal force has not been used by police dealing with protesters in Ferguson at any point.


  • Options
    #14
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    rockonollie wrote: »
    Ok, you seem to have a problem understanding what 'lethal force' is...... having a gun is not using lethal force..... shooting and killing someone with that gun is.....I say again, lethal force has not been used by police dealing with protesters in Ferguson at any point.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRm9qKKWuks


    But sure it's not lethal force till someone, y'know, dies.

    Anyway, I explained myself earlier. Lethal force was threatened, if not used bar the above.

    No such thing as shoot to wound. If you have a firearm out, then you shoot to kill. Even if you mean to shoot to wound, you are likely to kill, and that has to be an acceptable outcome.


  • Options
    #15
    bravestar
    Registered Users Posts: 1,082 ✭✭✭bravestar


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRm9qKKWuks


    But sure it's not lethal force till someone, y'know, dies.

    Anyway, I explained myself earlier. Lethal force was threatened, if not used bar the above.

    No such thing as shoot to wound. If you have a firearm out, then you shoot to kill. Even if you mean to shoot to wound, you are likely to kill, and that has to be an acceptable outcome.

    Actually, it's shoot to stop. There is a difference.


  • Options
    #16
    Five Lamps
    Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    rockonollie wrote: »
    Ok, you seem to have a problem understanding what 'lethal force' is...... having a gun is not using lethal force..... shooting and killing someone with that gun is.....I say again, lethal force has not been used by police dealing with protesters in Ferguson at any point.

    The poster said "Lethal force visibly used to attempt to deter protesters" which I would take as lethal firepower on show to protestors. As opposed to other equipment used in public order situations - water cannon, tear gas, baton rounds etc. The Ferguson police showed complete lack of policing ability in this situation.

    The next question is at what point would they open fire or would they open fire at all? I'm guessing that was just for show and all they did was further inflame the situation.


  • Options
    #17
    wotswattage
    Registered Users Posts: 592 ✭✭✭wotswattage


    rockonollie wrote: »
    Ok, you seem to have a problem understanding what 'lethal force' is...... having a gun is not using lethal force..... shooting and killing someone with that gun is.....I say again, lethal force has not been used by police dealing with protesters in Ferguson at any point.

    Ok, I don't have any problem understanding what lethal force is so don't go making accusations. I was simply explaining that other people obviously weren't talking about the tear gas and flashbangs when they referred to lethal force.

    If the PSNI placed snipers up on the roofs of armoured cars and pointed guns at citizens you could be damn sure there would be escalations.


  • Options
    #18
    S.R.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 667 ✭✭✭S.R.


    It has started again.


  • Options
    #19
    timmywex
    Registered Users Posts: 2,626 ✭✭✭timmywex


    S.R. wrote: »
    It has started again.

    Indeed, been listening in on scanners on and off all morning. Best wishes to all working over there.


  • Options
    #20
    Capri
    Registered Users Posts: 4,499 ✭✭✭Capri


    http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-30202289
    The trouble with the timing of Ferguson decision

    The announcement that a St Louis County grand jury would not indict Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for the killing of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown came a little after 20:00 local time, under the cover of darkness.

    What followed next was something protestors and law enforcement officials had assured the public they were dedicated to avoiding. Riot-gear-clad police officers and armoured vehicles cleared the streets with tear gas and smoke canisters, as looters smashed store windows and cars burned - a night of chaos and violence.

    The outcome was tragic - but did the timing of the announcement contribute to the conflagration? The grand jury reportedly had reached their decision by early afternoon........


Advertisement