I was appalled yesterday to read that using pepper spray on students engaged in a nonviolent protest could be considered standard police procedures properly applied.
From an AP story in USA Today:
Charles J. Kelly, a former Baltimore Police Department lieutenant who wrote the department’s use of force guidelines, said pepper spray is a “compliance tool” that can be used on subjects who do not resist, and is preferable to simply lifting protesters.
“When you start picking up human bodies, you risk hurting them,” Kelly said. “Bodies don’t have handles on them.”
After reviewing the video, Kelly said he observed at least two cases of “active resistance” from protesters. In one instance, a woman pulls her arm back from an officer. In the second instance, a protester curls into a ball. Each of those actions could have warranted more force, including baton strikes and pressure-point techniques.
“What I’m looking at is fairly standard police procedure,” Kelly said.
The video of a nonchalant police officer walking back and forth in front of a line of passive students seated on the ground while spraying then with a canister of pepper spray was shocking.
Perhaps the important question for us–could it happen here?
The Honolulu Police Department has stocked up with some 25,000 pepper spray doses in advance of APEC, and we have a responsibility to ask whether their use would also be “standard police procedure” in a peaceful Honolulu protest.
Does HPD have rules of engagement governing their use of these weapons? I suggest asking your Honolulu City Council member the question. Perhaps a hearing on the subject is in order.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
HALT!! – Or I’ll Shame & Humiliate myself!
You better start taking down those silly tents RIGHT NOW or I”ll Self Destruct!
For consideration… “US Federal Appeals Courts ten years ago declared pepper spraying peaceful protesters to be an illegal violation of their 4th amendment rights to be free from excessive force and that officers who cause such felony assault are liable for their actions and do not receive protection of sovereign immunity as their actions are excessive use of force which the 4th amendment prohibits.” HEADWATERS FOREST DEFENSE v. COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1332957.html
Mark, thanks for the link to the ruling. I strongly recommend it to the others.
Hawaii is covered by the 9th circuit. Do you know if there have been subsequent rulings, perhaps heading in the other direction?
I worry that the judges in this case may now be outliers in their respect for the human rights of demonstrators. I fear the viewpoint of CHarles J. Kelly, the police official quoted by Ian above, may be reflective of the dominant view among the forces of repression, among our internal security forces.
The scary thing is that we don’t know what law enforcement is capable of doing if they are acting under emergency orders as a federal sanctioned mob. They have already shown that movement can be easily locked down.
I have no doubt that given the wrong set of circumstances and the wrong people in charge — that my dog and myself would get sprayed down even if we were just out looking for a drink of water. While I have faith that justise can be had in the end, I simply don’t trust the government when they got to make immediate decisions involving personal liberty. There is just very a poor record of them getting it correct.
The war on drugs has caused the increased militarization of the police and has resulted in an ‘us v them’ situation. This has triggered a lack of respect for law enforcement. The police are part of the 99% and if they look at the federal budget, they will see that community policing is taking a hit. Maybe when the police start losing their jobs they will realize that they are indeed partof the 99%. The protesters are brave enough to speak for the many. I applaud this civic action we haven’t seen for decades!