Muskogee police in Oklahoma pepper-spray 84-year-old grandmother.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Have to say any Police that requires pepper spay to subdue an 85 year old lady is rather incompetent and should possibly consider a carer change before they kill some poor old biddy.

There may not be an age restriction on the use of such weaponry against the elderly and infirm but there dam well should be both from a moral and also medical standpoint.

Just a thought.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: tinymind

Dude you cannot bad mouth religion.....we are bound by medieval doctrines.....i mean how else do we move forwards >?

I'm not as much worried about "moving forward" as I am about people treating one another in a humane fashion while we are here.

Let's make it an issue when others continue to treat other humans in a less than humane fashion.

a reply to: Shamrock6

iF THAT'S THE CASE, i THINK ABOUT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT UNDER THE dEMOCRATIC BANNER.

Accidentally hIT CAPSLOCK. FI..

a reply to: andy06shake

and just how are they gonna do that, just let her run around the house bumping off at the gums saying don't touch me mother___, don't ___ with me, don't___-ing touch me after being told to stay where she was and after having a gun pointed directly at her head, she still kept on getting in their way while they searched the house. what if she was to reach in a drawer some where and pull a knife or gun. old people can kill you just as quick as young people.

short of psychically handling her, which would have been the case if they would have let her go on, it was clear to see that she had no interest in letting them do their job, it would have escalated. and then if she would have been hurt, broke a arm. broke leg, hip. all of you people would be crying about they didn't need to man handled her.

she got lucky all she got was pepper spray in her face and not body slammed to the floor.

i will say it again, only fools resist cops, you are not going to win and take your life in your own hands.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: tinymind
a reply to: gladtobehere

I think there is something which all of you have over looked and is likely the very basis of the police officers actions in this case.

The old woman is BLACK !!!

And we all know how dangerous these old black women are.

Your right she may have BLM or at least some sort of faction of it....good riddance !!!....hell she may have converted to Islam if she had not been stopped in her tracks

Then its alright to slam something like Islam, just not a religion like christianity.

I don't guess "what's good for the goose - is good for the gander" after all.

Or maybe its just a case of "the pot calling the kettle - black".

Or maybe we should not forget the phrase "all men are created equal".

Or maybe we should remember that "actions speak louder than words".

I could go on , but I guess you get my point.

a reply to: tinymind

Religion is partially why our current system is failing.....i was drunk last night and my attempt at sarcasm may have been flawed....

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

She was not running around the house, she's 84 for Christ sake the only running she could be doing is in her dreams. And why should she not be able voice concern in her own home?

And it's never foolish to resist tyrants even if they take the form of Police and it is rather painful. Only a tyrant would pepper spray a pensioner. The nation would not even exist if people did not choose to resist tyranny.

Ever stop to consider the police should have spoken to her in a non aggressive manner and possibly manage to explain the situation without having to resort to using chemical agents on an aging civilian that was obviously no threat?

Your right i suppose, she did get lucky, lucky they did not shoot her in the face and plant a weapon on her corpse.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Civil Disobedience

Thoreau

The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse concomitants,(7) etc. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw or a lump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs. Yet such as these even are commonly esteemed good citizens.

a reply to: charolais

Wouldn't the civil way have been for them not to put the officers in that situation and cooperate?

a reply to: andy06shake

You don't get to voice concern in your home when officers are legally entering it...

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: andy06shake

You don't get to voice concern in your home when officers are legally entering it...

Today's decision reflects the constitutional requirement that, in the face of verbal challenges to police action, officers and municipalities must respond with restraint. We are [482 U.S. 451, 472] mindful that the preservation of liberty depends in part upon the maintenance of social order. Cf. Terminiello v. Chicago, supra, at 37 (dissenting opinion). But the First Amendment recognizes, wisely we think, that a certain amount of expressive disorder not only is inevitable in a society committed to individual freedom, but must itself be protected if that freedom would survive.

Supreme Court Justice William Brennan

a reply to: Bedlam

You absolutely misunderstand that case and how it applies to this one.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Bedlam

You absolutely misunderstand that case and how it applies to this one.

Seems pretty straightforward. In HvH, the police found that questioning their actions, even when that questioning is loud, confrontational, and intended to distract them, can't be acted against as 'obstruction' in a broad sense.

Questioning the police, even during an arrest, even if it irritates the policemen on scene, is freedom of speech and is protected under the 1st.

a reply to: Bedlam

Failure to comply is NOT questioning the police in a loud voice. As I stated you misunderstand both that case and how it applies to this one. That much is obvious.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Bedlam

Failure to comply is NOT questioning the police in a loud voice. As I stated you misunderstand both that case and how it applies to this one. That much is obvious.

Your words "You don't get to voice concern". Absolutely incorrect. Now you're scoot scoot scooting the goalposts toward failure to comply.

a reply to: Bedlam

Read the post I was replying to. Obviously I was being sarcastic as there was no sinple "voicing concern" going on. She was intentionally not complying in order to block officers. This should have been easy for you to comprehend since that is the subject of this thread.

So as I stated, you completely misunderstand that case and how it applies to this one. Even then you still misunderstand the point of the case you are using. Do you know the context this is based on? It's obvious you don't.

a reply to: Bedlam

actually it was andyoshake that said "voice her concern" ray just quoted him.

in the video, the first thing said to her was stay where you are mam. the cop called her mam. that is a sign of respect. the fist thing out of her mouth was a bleep, in listening to her in the moments after that i'm sure it was mother ___er.

from that first bleep on she was interfering with a arrest. she knew her son came running in the house from the cops who just pulled up seconds to minutes after he did. then tried to talk him out before going in.

she was interfering the whole time.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Bedlam

Read the post I was replying to. Obviously I was being sarcastic as there was no sinple "voicing concern" going on.

Sorry - I read your flat statement that you could not voice concern if police were entering a home legally. I didn't look at the back trail.

Officer Comments after pepper spray incident.

Seems like They weren't even sure on procedures on entering and then to be recorded as saying "We can spin it" makes them look not just incompetent but Criminal....

a reply to: ATruGod

How exactly does it make it look criminal?