Thread: An interesting twist in the UC Davis pepper spray incident

Originally Posted by Jefe

No, I believe there are other forms of active resistance to arrest. Trying to run away comes to mind. But resistance to arrest and a child's resistance to behave themselves aren't really comparable, are they?

They are when the question of what constitutes "active resistance" is at hand.

Originally Posted by lutherf

The difference being a single 30 pound 3 year old as opposed to a group of 100 plus pound adults and an indoor incident as opposed to an outdoor incident....no, I wouldn't pepper spray the kid. The question, though, was one of whether the act of resistance was passive or active. Would you care to address that issue?

There's rally nothing to address in this case. these are two entirely different situations. One's a three year old throwing a temper tantrum in a store, the other is students protesting the cost or school. No real comparison.

The three year old has no idea what active or passive resistance is. He only knows he got his feelings hurt.

Originally Posted by lutherf

So your 3 year old is throwing a tantrum in the grocery store. You tell him to knock it off. He sits down and grabs on to the grocery cart so that you would have to physically remove him from it. Active resistance or passive resistance?

*ponders*

ahoy Lutherf,

sounds like 'tis time to mace that three year old in the face!

YARRRR!!!!!

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by wooyarn

There's rally nothing to address in this case. these are two entirely different situations. One's a three year old throwing a temper tantrum in a store, the other is students protesting the cost or school. No real comparison.

The three year old has no idea what active or passive resistance is. He only knows he got his feelings hurt.

Hey man...y'all were the ones tossing around different opinions of what "active resistance" is and I'm just trying to sort out where everyone's head is on the subject. Jefe has offered that "active resistance" doesn't necessarily have to include "posing a threat". Anyone else have an opinion on the matter?

Originally Posted by lutherf

They are when the question of what constitutes "active resistance" is at hand.

Ok.. upon some further thought and reading, I believe these protesters (and your bratty 3yo) are engaging in active resistance. Going limp would be passive, locking arms with others is considered active. I don't think that's is justification for pepper spray, though.

Originally Posted by Jefe

Ok.. upon some further thought and reading, I believe these protesters (and your bratty 3yo) are engaging in active resistance. Going limp would be passive, locking arms with others is considered active. I don't think that's is justification for pepper spray, though.

OK. So are we all settled now that the question of what is or isn't "active resistance" is separate from the one of what level of force is necessary/prudent/warranted in a given situation?

Originally Posted by lutherf

OK. So are we all settled now that the question of what is or isn't "active resistance" is separate from the one of what level of force is necessary/prudent/warranted in a given situation?

I'm all set - I can't speak for anyone else, though. Just don't pepper spray your three year old kid, ok?

Originally Posted by Jefe

I'm all set - I can't speak for anyone else, though. Just don't pepper spray your three year old kid, ok?

Actually, in most of the situations I see where a 3 year old is popping a gasket in public I'd be more inclined to pepper spray the parents than the kid but that's a whole different issue.

Originally Posted by wooyarn

There's rally nothing to address in this case. these are two entirely different situations. One's a three year old throwing a temper tantrum in a store...

...and the other is a group of nineteen year olds throwing a tantrum on the quad.

In the case of my four year old, when he throws a tantrum in a public place he's inclined to get a wack on the ass.

Would you have been less upset if Sgt. Pepperspray had put those college students over his knee?

Originally Posted by lutherf

OK. So are we all settled now that the question of what is or isn't "active resistance" is separate from the one of what level of force is necessary/prudent/warranted in a given situation?

I can agree that the students linking arms is active resistance, however using pepper spray was not called for and in fact pepper spray can under certain conditions cause serious injury including death. Yesterday Mrs M posted a link that shows what I feel would have been a better way to deal with this. It would get the students up and moving and at the same time giving the students a choice of how much pain they wanted to endure.

Police Chief Magazine - View Article

Before each arrest, the officers warned the demonstrators that they would be subject to pain compliance measures if they did not move, that such measures would hurt, and that they could reduce the pain by standing up, eliminating the tension on their wrists and arms. The officers then forcibly moved the arrestees by tightening police nunchaku, commonly known as "nunchuks," around their wrists until they stood up and walked. All arrestees complained of varying degrees of injury to their hands and arms, including bruises, a pinched nerve, and one broken wrist.

Originally Posted by soot

...and the other is a group of nineteen year olds throwing a tantrum on the quad.

In the case of my four year old, when he throws a tantrum in a public place he's inclined to get a wack on the ass.

Would you have been less upset if Sgt. Pepperspray had put those college students over his knee?

I see what you did here. You took only a part of my post and made a perverted joke. How clever of you.

Sgt. Pepperspray, lol.. wasn't that a Beatles album or something?

Originally Posted by wooyarn

I can agree that the students linking arms is active resistance, however using pepper spray was not called for and in fact pepper spray can under certain conditions cause serious injury including death. Yesterday Mrs M posted a link that shows what I feel would have been a better way to deal with this. It would get the students up and moving and at the same time giving the students a choice of how much pain they wanted to endure.

Police Chief Magazine - View Article

Before each arrest, the officers warned the demonstrators that they would be subject to pain compliance measures if they did not move, that such measures would hurt, and that they could reduce the pain by standing up, eliminating the tension on their wrists and arms. The officers then forcibly moved the arrestees by tightening police nunchaku, commonly known as "nunchuks," around their wrists until they stood up and walked. All arrestees complained of varying degrees of injury to their hands and arms, including bruises, a pinched nerve, and one broken wrist.

Interesting. You are, as I'm sure you are aware, suggesting that a method of addressing the issue at hand which did cause physical harm would be preferable to one which didn't. I can't really say that I understand that kind of rationalization but, then again, I don't know where most of you guys come up with your ideas.