Mass Arrests, Tear Gas, Sound Weapons used Against West Illinois University Students

reply to post by Freenrgy2


If somebody breaks the law all you have to do is arrest them.

Excessive Force: Excessive force by a law enforcement officers is a violation of a person's rights. Excessive force is not subject to a precise definition, but it is generally beyond the force a reasonable and prudent law enforcement officer would use under the circumstances.

Anything beyond the force reasonable, appropriate force would have been an arrest with the use of handcuffs. Unless there is resisting of arrest, at that time appropriate force may be used at the discretion of the police officer. What you saw here was force not only before the initial reaction but also excessive as mace was not needed sound was not used to make an arrest but simply to attack the students. There was no rioting, but partying they are not the same things and it was reported before the party that the police would be there in force. Meaning they had a predetermined intention to use force. The very concept of using force as opposed to arrests is then in effect excessive as it is intended to replace the appropriate order of arrest without the citizen resisting. Also important to note that not all at a party are criminals just for being at said party. Therefore the use of any force on these individuals is excessive. You can not deem that an individual is guilty until proven innocent and that weapons should be used in mass to attack all people in the area just for being in the area.

reply to post by The_Phantom


Supreme Court ruling on an Officers use of force -

What did the officer perceive the exact moment the use of force occured. Hindsight being 20/20 is not an allowable factor when reviewing an officers use of force.

While I respect your opinion and effort to paint a picture, once again you are failing to understand the laws involved, and the Supreme Court rulings that guide our use of force.

Based on the Constitution's Fourth Amendment, the 1989 Supreme Court ruling on the use of deadly force said the standard is "not capable of precise definition or mechanical application." The act should be assessed based on what an officer knew at the time of the shooting rather than hindsight. The court called it "reasonableness at the moment."

The case is Grahm V. Connor

Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court, in which the Court determined that an objective reasonableness standard should apply to a free citizen's claim that law enforcement officials used excessive force in the course of making an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of his person.

This case also established the doctrine that the judiciary may not use the Due Process Clause instead of an applicable specific constitutional provision:


"Because the Amendment provides an explicit textual source of constitutional protection against this sort of physically intrusive governmental conduct, that Amendment, not the more generalized notion of 'substantive due process,' must be the guide for analyzing these claims."

reply to post by Xcathdra


The case cited is related to injuries sustained during an arrest being made. The force used at the party was predetermined by the police on a wide scale as the decided amount of force not only outside of an arrest attempt, but in place of it. With attempts for arrests being made after the use of force, as I already pointed out that in itself makes the force excessive.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

The case cited is related to injuries sustained during an arrest being made. The force used at the party was predetermined by the police on a wide scale as the decided amount of force not only outside of an arrest attempt, but in place of it. With attempts for arrests being made after the use of force, as I already pointed out that in itself makes the force excessive.

edit on 4-5-2011 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)

And you would be wrong... again.

The ruling covers an officer use of force and sets the guidlines for reviewing that use of force. An officer arriving on scene is by defitinion a level of force. An officer is allowed to use force when making an arrest, and the level of force is contingent upon the level of resitance + 1, which is key.

Review of that force and actions are based on the ruling above, and use the reasonableness standard of what the offiers perceieved at the moment they used the force.

Hindsight 20/20 is not an allowable factor when reviewing actions.

That coupled with all of the articles and subsequent youtube footage shows the exten of the incident.

The block party went south when some of the drunk students ruined it for everyone else.

reply to post by Xcathdra


An officer is allowed to use force while making an arrest. Using a sound weapon on people is not making an arrest, it's attacking people for being in the area, that is where you are wrong. Being in the area is not a crime, in America you are not guilty by association.

Jeff was drunk at the party, Tina was at the party, therefore Tina should be attacked by the police.

reply to post by The_Phantom


Again you would be incorrect. Force is allowable when removing people who refuse to disperse as well. Less than lethal means were employed at people who refused to clear the area. In a situation like this, people who refuse to disperse who are in the line of the gig line are in fact refusing to obey a lawful command.

Again, officers use force everytime we deal with the public. The "use of force" starts with a marked patrol vehicle, our unforms, and our verbal commands.

Your black and white view on this is the problem, coupled again with your non understanding of the law, elements of a crime, what a riot is etc.

Let me spell it out a little bit further -
Polce tell people to disperse and leave the area - Verbal commands given
Students refuse that command - refusing to obey a lawful command

The Police moved into to secure an area and to restore some semblence of order so people can freely move through the area without suffering injury from the drunk students / non students.

The moment the officers started to move, and the moment the students who refused to leave the area came within distnace of the officers, were at that point interfering, or obstructing, the officers actions.

They were given warnings multiple times before riot police arrived, and once they arrived riot police gave verbal warnings for people to clear the area. The students had ample warning to leave, and as the article states, the bulk of students did leave the area.

The ones remaining were in violation of the law. The methods employed by the police are consitent and within policy as well as State and Federal law, and is in compliance with 42 USC 1983.

Would you prefer they used batons?

I think the fact they gave multiple warnings to disperse, employed pepper spray as well as sound technology shows the extent they went to to end the situation as quickly and as safely as possible.

Again, the ones who made the decision, freely, to refuse to comply made that decsison on their own. They had the choice to leave, they opted not to. They had the opprotunity to end the situation on their own, and refused to comply.

By freely choosing to ignore lawful commands, they started the sequence of events that resulted in the officers actions.

The only people to blame here are the students and non students who chose poorly.

reply to post by Xcathdra

So what you are saying is in fact, NO, you dont understand how the law works, you dont understand how the FEderal Government and State Government works, and in reality you are one of the far right wing nuts who are cherry picking arguments and laws in an effort to justify illegal behavior...

Actually my simple and perennially confused friend I know precisely how the law works, as well as the origins of the corporate government as well as the function of the States in relation to the Territory of Washington DC.

In reality I am one of the foremost authorities on the subject having done extensive research and writings that factor the history, laws, finances and investments in the United States, Inc and its principle investors from the very beginning when there were but a handful of white Europeans living in the ‘New World’.

I have pored over the documents of the registrars, the letters between the London Bankers and the Presidents and the Governors, meticulously studied the treaties, and traced the enterprise back over centuries to its very roots.

I am here to tell you that you not only have any idea what the United States, Inc. is, who precisely owns it, and controls it, and to what purpose and end, but further that you do not know the difference between unlawful and illegal either.

People such as yourself are the worst danger there is to freedom loving people, you are over reliant on selective sources, dogmas and the systematic brainwashing of the corporate government.

Worse yet, you imagine that some piece of polished metal, a gun, your bad attitude and desire to dominate and control others gives you some authority and intelligence that you do not in fact have, and sorely lack.

I have come across sovereign citizens before, and for the most part they have been pleasent.

Most people are pleasant when approached with respect and dignity,

So again.. you have no idea what you are talking about, you have no idea how the laws work at the federal or state level, and your continued argument in this thread bears that out.

Once again, an armed henchmen of limited intelligence, with no real understanding of history, with no true situational awareness, and no true knowledge of how and why the nation was constructed and what the real underlying principles that govern it are, really should not attempt to dispense advice to those who do, especially when said advice has not been solicited and only makes them laugh at you.

If you dont like the laws in this country, you ahve a few choices -

As the armed henchmen now wishes to offer limited choices for those with unlimited ones.

Take part in the process and make the changes

The prescribed process for lawful peaceful change has long ago been corrupted by corporate and foreign powers and is a path to lunacy, frustration and the defeat of the status quo.

Dont take part and do nothing but bitch its not fair

Such empowering options someone with your intellect imagines. Put much thought into that one?

Leave the country that you apparently hate and start your own somewhere else.

Yes this was what George Washington and company decided to do, leave the land and start a nation somewhere else.

Your anger and lack of emotional mastery is what undoes you friend, your ability to think clearly and lucidly is limited by that abject failure.

Our Government is intended to have gridlock at the Federal level. Its designed that way to ensure the minority opinion is heard. The premis is for majority rule in this country.

Once again incorrect, our Government is a Corporate and Military Enterprise that offers the illusion of freedom by providing the similiar kind of limited choices to people of a similiar quality as the choices you offered above.

You can vote for the pre-selected already corrupted politician on the right picked, groomed and financed by select corporate interests , or you can vote for the pre-selected already corrupted politician on the left picked, groomed, and financed by the very SAME select corporate interests.

The nation is not governed by the people, but rather a complex set of international financial agreements born of it's birth in staggering debt and it's existence on borrowed money.

Debts that can't be fully paid because the taxation is used to off set the cost of the investments in the infrastructure by foriegn entities and corporations and because the enterprise is run externally by these entities in ways designed to keep it bankrupt.

This is your real government, a foreign controlled entity, based on deceptions and fraud, that relies on dogmas to lull the people into false senses of hope and freedom with a false history and propaganda aimed at infecting the masses who are purposefully educated through the presentation of very limited sources of information to become overly reliant on dogmas and myths.

Most of the citizens in the nation are in fact serialized and numbered free range slaves, counted and regulated through the Department of Commerce.

This is your real nation, and those with real courage who want to make the world a better place would have the courage to learn this, because the information is out there, and to resolve to change this.

You sir are simply an armed henchmen of the state employed at ensuring and perpetuating this obscene and corrupt enterprise at the expense of your fellow human being, simply for a pittance and your own ego and desire to control others for your Masters.

Why would anyone but a fool take advice from you?

Please explain to us why the actions of the students are valid. Explain why its ok for their behavior, which is what provoked the police response, contrary to the way you want to spin it.

The studends were equally born onto this planet that we all share, and were embodied under natures laws to be able to enjoy its bounty and to celebrate their and it's existence, they were harming no one in that process, and only a fool could not see that no, in fact they were not hurting anyone, and no one was being hurt until the Riot Police started a merciless assault on their freedoms and liberties.

What you will never be able to do is explain how the polices actions were valid.

We know this party happens every year, we know that kids get drunk at it, we know they make a mess and make noise, and we know the next day they clean it all up and life goes on just the same.

What did the police accomplish, nothing but an intrustion on life, liberty, freedom, and the private property of citizens to bully, assault, intimidate, cower, terrorize, defame, defraud, rob, kidnap and sully our most precious commodity, our youth, our future.

Shame on you.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Your paranoid delusions are humerous...

The students and non students were in the wrong, they failed to disperse, and in the end made a poor choice.

The articles support that, youtube video supports that, and even an eye witnees account, which you dimssis because it doesnt support your delusions, states it.

Continally spouting your anti government rhetoric only reinforces the fact you have no concept of how laws work, and have no respect for laws either.

It makes sense why you would go after government action while embracing violence and anarchy. It supports your own selfish goals, and any person who disagrees with you is the enemy.

This thread is about the riot and incidents surrouding it.

Its not so you can spin your bs about evil government and sovereign citizen BS. I see your taking a que from Rham Emmanuels book - never look an incident go to waste. In this sense, you are using what occured to push your own agenda..

typical..but not surprising.

reply to post by Xcathdra


"sovereign citizen BS"

America was built by people who believed in anti-government, sovereign citizen bs.

reply to post by Xcathdra


You have failed to establish your prima fascia argument, as well as your alleged credentials as an oath sworn armed henchmen of the state.

The video evidence, as does the ignorance you so foolishly cling to speaks for itself.

You represent part of a system that is armed and a menace and intoxicated to a far greater extent than those students were on your own perceived notions of power.

Yet those who wield real power know that real power is simply something you usurp, determine to use, and do so through the courage to take action.

Those actions might not always be legal or lawful under the constructs of the laws of the land and its King(s) and in this case this holds true for the armed henchmen who did not have the lawful or legal right to order the dispersal but through a usurpation of personal power deemed and conspired to that end nonetheless.

The power drunk henchmen of the state, mindlessly employed to that end, in unthinking mass, are the ones in fact who broke the law, and were in a much better position to do so with arms, and high tech weaponry, a pre-existing plan to do that, and a unified chain of command.

The above is where their power emanated from in this case not nature, not God, and not the State, and the perversity of the thin blue line and those who would defend it simply attempts to obscure that.

Look around, your arguments have been soundly defeated in this thread again and again and again, by a broad swath of outraged people with their own eyes and minds who have seen the evidence for themselves.

Your Masters should endeavor to teach you some new tricks, your ability to execute the ones you have presently been taught is negligible at best.

Thanks.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
...snip - nothing but paranoid delusional anto government hate mongoring.......snip

Your arrogance is humerous, and your argument supporting it is even funnier. In a different thread you used the number of stars you receive to justify your position. The simple fact you think that makes you correct in what you say speaks volumes to your ability to comprehend and understand complex issues.

Again, you are using this incident in an effort to push your agenda and nothing more. The reason you have been ginoring the student actions is because it would undermine your argument against the government.

The students were out of line, drunk and refused to elave the area..

It really is that simple.... The Police were within policy, state law and federal law when it comes to their methods used.

If you dont like that, then I suggest you get involved with the system and persuade people to make changes. Absent that you are being disingenous with your argument in this thread because the only part you are seizing on is officer action while ignoring the events that led up to the police response.

This is evident when people provide you with facts and news article, you you dimiss those articles. You come up with the riciulous argument of show me where it says this or that, and when we do, you dimiss the source. There is youtube video that shows more than the OP, and you only seize on the video that supports your paranoid delusional arguments, while ignoring and calling into question the credibility of others.

You seize on the words of a poster who states they were there, while dimiss the words of another who states they were there who had a different view on events.

Your entire argument is a sham and nothing more, and you are exploting a situation in an effort to justify your beliefs in a sovereign citizen movement. That movement is based on inaccurate information, interpretation of laws no longer in existance, and a very ignorant view of the Constitution (which is reinforced by the fact sovereign citizens demand freedom, while arguing about plain text readings of the US Constitutiton, while ignoring the fct a plain text reading would make black people 3/5 of a person and would remove the right for women to vote).

The students got drunk, a few got out of hand, and they ruined it for everyone else who was behaving.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

"sovereign citizen BS"

America was built by people who believed in anti-government, sovereign citizen bs.

And there is a process in place to make changes. Sovereign citizens want to live within the US and take advantage of what it has to offer, while excluding themsleves from those very same laws -

Yup, they sounds very Pro Crown anti revolutionary to me as well.

Especially those sovereign citizens who kill police officers because they are pulled over for speeding.. Quite the appropriate actions there...

What do those morons have to do with what occured in Illinois?

Originally posted by colbyforce
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

You rock dude. This zombie won't give up. Typical.

Says the person who is blindly following the fool. What do you know about the topic at hand? What do you think should have occured.

Do you find it acceptable to get so drunk as to start fires, destroy property and attack people with beer bottles?

reply to post by PapagiorgioCZ


Nothing exists in a vacuum, although when confronted with law enforcement procedures this truism is somewhat called into question. Context, context, context. Thanks for that.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Again, you are using this incident in an effort to push your agenda and nothing more. The reason you have been ginoring the student actions is because it would undermine your argument against the government.

Oh you mean you suspect I am engaged in one of the options you did not list in the armed henchmen prescribed remedies?

Nay my lost and angry misguided friend, I have not ignored the brutalized and assaulted and defamed students at all, in fact I have defended their right to assemble, partake in libations, revel and to celebrate and noted honestly and fairly based on the video evidence that they were a threat to no one and harming no one.

You have igrnored the actions of the students as you struggle again and again to not only misrepresent them, but the arguments of those who would wisely defend them and their rights.

The students were out of line, drunk and refused to elave the area..

So you are saying if the students lined up in military formation and dressed in uniforms like the heavily armed law breaking henchmen of the state did you would have enjoyed that martial display?

Perhaps they refused to 'elave' the area, because they didn't know what that word means!

Regardless the police lack the constitutional ability to disperse an assemblage of citizens from private property without a true declared emergency having come into play.

It really is that simple.... The Police were within policy, state law and federal law when it comes to their methods used.

This is not evidenced by any court ruling, internal revue, or suit brought by the injured parties of the police misconduct, it is simply your wish as an armed henchmen of the state for people capable of bringing suit against the state, the police, and other responsible parties for this egregious and erronious assault to believe this in hopes that they can be fooled and disuaded by such poppycock.

If you dont like that, then I suggest you get involved with the system and persuade people to make changes. Absent that you are being disingenous with your argument in this thread because the only part you are seizing on is officer action while ignoring the events that led up to the police response.

I suggest you surrender your badge, make an act of contrition, seek professional therapy, and then take a couple years to wonder the world and discover nature and the beauty in the world, you would so readily and eagerly sully with vile slanders and misguided falsehoods.

Many would say my advice to you is much more sound and warranted.

This is evident when people provide you with facts and news article, you you dimiss those articles.

News articles are not facts they are simply the non-binding opinions of writers.

You come up with the riciulous argument of show me where it says this or that, and when we do, you dimiss the source.

You failed to display EMT's were hurt by thrown bottles or even that bottles were thrown at EMT's you provided a single statement of one individual stating such occured, yet failed to name one EMT who felt threatened, and failed to accuse one specific student that is alleged to throw a bottle.

Heresay and innuendo is not fact, as any Judge or Attorney will tell you.

That your source came from an official spokesperson of the very police that now have to cover their collective behinds against lawsuits that are sure to come, makes it all the more suspect.

Try not to be such a dullard.

There is youtube video that shows more than the OP, and you only seize on the video that supports your paranoid delusional arguments, while ignoring and calling into question the credibility of others.

Once again heresay and innuendo, as well as a poor attempt at slander and misrepresentation.

You seize on the words of a poster who states they were there, while dimiss the words of another who states they were there who had a different view on events.

Do you really expect anyone to believe that someone joined ATS to make their very first post to this thread who said "I was at the party and we were all out of line and deserved everything the police did to us".

By the way as a cautionary word, Skeptic Overlord is working on software to spot sock puppets and posters who create multiple accounts to 'talk to themselves' or 'bolster their own arguments'.

You might want to refrain from such dishonest attempts in the future.

Your entire argument is a sham and nothing more, and you are exploting a situation in an effort to justify your beliefs in a sovereign citizen movement.

Is there anything you won't attempt to misrepresent in your wild and wide ramblings, you keep trying to state that no one knows the laws but you, I keep responding that I do and where all the laws emenate from, and now you want to misrepresent that too.

Do you realize how pathetic that is?

That movement is based on inaccurate information, interpretation of laws no longer in existance, and a very ignorant view of the Constitution (which is reinforced by the fact sovereign citizens demand freedom, while arguing about plain text readings of the US Constitutiton, while ignoring the fct a plain text reading would make black people 3/5 of a person and would remove the right for women to vote).

Many in the movement are suffering under false beliefs and assumptions, that is true, however many in the movement actually do understand the principles of common and admirality law, where and when the nation switched to admirality law which is contract law, and how to avoid entering into and being a party to said contracts and agreements.

Many also know the older superceding legal definition of words on the contracts and the court employs and can speak to their frauds and deceptions in accurate ways that gives them a certain power and leverage over the courts who would like to hide these constructs from the average petitioner, plaintif and defendent.

You would throw every baby in existence out with the bath water you first purposefully muddy.

The students got drunk, a few got out of hand, and they ruined it for everyone else who was behaving.

That is a pathetic over simplification, an ode to accept collective punishment, and a pure deflection away from what actually occured and the excesses and obcenities of the unlawful police action that brutalized, terrorized, assaulted, defamed, robbed, kidnapped and other wise injured peaceful law abiding citizens well within their rights to assemble and partake in libations.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


So you have nothing to share in relation to the article and incident? You have no concept of how the laws work. You have no conept of supreme court rulings that deal with officers use of force and how that use is reviewed.

And you are still ignroing the actions of the students. You have ignored their actions since the begingin, while pushing your anti government rants. I will say it again, having a bunch of stars does not make you correct, nor does it make you intelligent. Learn the law would you please?

Students held a block party
Students at party were drunk
Some students had alcohol poisoning
Some students started fires
Some Students destroyed city property
Some students attacked EMS with beer bottles
Some students attack Police with beer bottles.

None of this is in dispute. The news articles and subsequent follow ups, in addition to media releases by the Police involved (several egencies) and the President of WIU all coroborate what occured.

Please stick to the topic and take your anti government recruiting sovereign citizen BS elsewhere. It has nothing to do with the thread, and has nothing to do with student actions that forced the reponse and encounter with police. There was no group punishment, as the articles AND witness accounts state the bulk of the students left the area.

The ones who refused to leave were the ones affected.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by colbyforce
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

You rock dude. This zombie won't give up. Typical.

Says the person who is blindly following the fool. What do you know about the topic at hand? What do you think should have occured.

Do you find it acceptable to get so drunk as to start fires, destroy property and attack people with beer bottles?

"If you stuck a lump of coal up Cameron's a$$, in 2 weeks you'd have a diamond." Ferris Bueller's Day Off....

Take the day off on me, brother bear.

reply to post by colbyforce


So you are going to ignore the questions then... Typical when you cant defend your point.

I ask again

What do you know about the topic at hand? What do you think should have occured.

Do you find it acceptable to get so drunk as to start fires, destroy property and attack people with beer bottles?

Please answer these questions..

Originally posted by colbyforce
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

 

You rock dude. This zombie won't give up. Typical.

Thanks friend, no he never does, he just keeps misrepresenting articles, laws, and other members statements until the cows come home.

It's always in misguided defense of the indefensible.

The Students weren't hurting anyone or anything and were minding their own business until the Riot Police assaulted them.

Anyone with functioning eyes can see that.