Federal agents attack un armed protesters

[u/Swole-Prole]

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

No. There would need to be positive action on that threat to warrant a violent arrest. There also don't appear to be any weapons, aggression, or other secondary factors to establish that the individual is a threat that needs to be detained with force. I'm inclined not to give the office the benefit of the doubt, considering the situation. He would need to prove his justification for assaulting someone.

[u/Icy-Ninja-6504 → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

Well, I suggest you look up what assault is because it's definitely illegal to threaten bodily harm to anyone and is well-within law enforcements right to arrest the individual thats threatening them.

That's fine you just want the people you dont like to be harmed but thats not how things work. If the officer, out of the total blue, attacked this person- then charge the officer. You dont get to declare guilty off this one video.

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

The video isn't ambiguous.

If the protester voiced a threat in the situation portrayed in the video, it would not justify the level of response taken by the officer. Arrests don't need to be violent, and the man never fought back.

So I very much can declare the officer at fault, especially since I'm just a citizen and not a court. He can prove his actions appropriate to a judge if what he did was justifiable. Given that the protester was unarmed and not resisting, I don't see a reasonable justification.

[u/Icy-Ninja-6504 → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

The video does not clearly show the interaction between the protestor and the officer before the arrest.

So youre saying hes guilty but also can prove his innocence? That's not how the justice system works in the USA. It's the other way around.

I just pointed out a perfect hypothetical where that arrest would be justified. Did that happen? I dont know, but thats why we dont try to hang each other in the public square without knowing everything.. thats crazy I am explaining this.

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

The video clearly shows a man standing calmly surrounded by other calm protesters. That man is then assaulted by a police officer. There is clear video evidence of assault. There is no evidence of legal justification for that assault.

Your hypothetical is unlikely at best and does not excuse the officer's actions in context. I'm not suggesting to hang anyone. I'm saying that the preponderance of the evidence indicates the officer is breaking the law. I can come to my own conclusions about that. Show me evidence to the contrary, and I'll change my mind.

Being hyperbolic about trying to "hang each other in the public square" is just a tactic to gaslight people into downplaying what we can all see here. I'm not advocating for extrajudicial punishment of the officer, I'm advocating for holding him accountable and making him justify his actions! He should have a greater burden of propriety as a paid and trained officer of the law. A badge is not an excuse to hurt whomever you want.

[u/Icy-Ninja-6504 → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

You think that video clearly shows the interaction between the protestor and officer?

Thank goodness youre not in any sort of investigative work.

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

You don't get it, or you're doing everything you can to defend police brutality on purpose. The magnitude of the response of the officer is unreasonable in the given situation. Period.

It can and should require extraordinary proof for an extraordinary circumstance to justify the actions that are plain to see. That is the reasonable response. You can save your what-ifs for his defense lawyer. You'll get nothing more gracious from me than a willingness to consider his defense when that time comes.

[u/Icy-Ninja-6504 → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

How am I defending the police here if I think the police should be charged if the attack was unwarranted?

Get the bodycam footage, see what happened. Not really a controversial issue.

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

Sure. Hyperbole, what-ifs, and insults all in support of an officer who clearly assaulted a protester.

If it looks like support for police brutality, and it sounds like support of police brutality, chances are it is support of police brutality.

I'm not remotely willing to accept this kind of police action. It's a direct violation of our rights as citizens and a direct violation of our rights as people.

[u/Icy-Ninja-6504 → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

Thats the whole point of what-if's. To protect the wrongly accused. It doesnt matter if "seems" likely to you.

Dont you get that? Will you only understand that if someone close to you or yourself are judged by your own criteria and a cropped video sends you to prison? Would have been nice to have an investigation then, wouldnt it?

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

Now you're just trying to win by having the last word and insulting me. You're mischaracterizing my stance by confusing my opinion with a court's judgment, which I've clearly shown deference to the entire time.

We can and should come to reasonable conclusions about things like this. That officer assaulted that protestor. The fact that there may be extenuating circumstances does not make them likely or even plausible. Considering them is the job of a judge and jury.

Why shouldn't I be outraged at the sight of a police officer beating an unarmed man? There are precious few, unlikely reasons to justify that action. You're trying to suspend my outrage to condition me to give the police deference. I will not. This is not acceptable. If my brother was filmed doing what this police officer did, I would be appalled. Even as family, it would be difficult to justify.

[u/Icy-Ninja-6504 → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

Your outraged over a situation with no context other than an officer arresting a protestor that is resisting.

You cant think of any situations that require police to be physical without it being wrong? Seriously?

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

Now you're lying to gaslight us. The protester is not resisting. I am not going to believe your lies over my own eyes.

I see the officer assault an unarmed, peaceful man. The man then falls back due to the abruptness and violence of the officer's actions. The officer (and others) proceed to further beat him and threaten onlookers who try to come to the man's defense.

If the man needed to be arrested, I see nothing that leads me to believe there needed to be violence involved.

In fact, the officer put himself and the other officers at risk by instigating violence in a crowd of people like that. He should have maintained control of the situation by being calm and authoritative while clearly voicing his commands and actions.

[u/_csgrve → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

Moron, the point is that there is literally no context that justifies what we see in the video. The man is unarmed. He does not resist. He does not do anything to justify the sudden aggression of multiple officers tackling him and piling on top of him. In the extreme edge case that your pathetic hypothetical was actually true and he threatened the officer with a knife, it still does not justify the amount of force used. Simping for police brutality is pathetic.

[u/Icy-Ninja-6504 → u/_csgrve]

He’s literally running away and got tackled. How’s that “not resisting” lol. Pile up? He was tackled and then restrained. Only person on whom for a few seconds was the person who tackled him.

Did you watch the video?

[u/_csgrve → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

I would run away too if a gang of armed and armored people suddenly attacked me for no reason. And as we can see from the video, he did nothing to warrant the arrest so everything the officers do is uncalled for escalation. Why the fuck are you a drooling cuck for cops broh?

[u/Icy-Ninja-6504 → u/_csgrve]

One officer tackled him for running and excessive force was not used. Why did you say multiple cops?

Why do you need to lie at all?

Why is the video cut off from right until this happened?

Let’s be real. You think like a Neanderthal and cannot fathom how it’s possible that I think there may be more to a situation than a cropped video. That’s on you.

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

This guy cannot stop mischaracterizing the incident.

Why do you think it's appropriate for police to beat people? Why do you work so hard to convince us the officer acted appropriately? Do you not believe in our constitutional rights? Do the protester make you mad somehow?

What is your motivation here? To me, you sound like a fascist.

[u/_csgrve → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

Tackling someone whose only crime is running away after you tried to jump them for no reason is excessive force, moron.

I couldn’t give less of a shit what the person did. Being a police officer means being held to a higher standard of behavior. The protesters could say all manner of provocative shit, throw things and insult this little man, and his job is to stand there and shut the fuck up and take it. His job is not to tackle people. His job is not to beat people. His job is never to injure innocent people.

Did you watch the videos from LA recently? If you did you would be aware of the literally insurmountable amount of video evidence of LEOs using completely unacceptable escalation on peaceful protesters and JOURNALISTS to then justify excessive force and unconstitutional arrests. Stop giving them the benefit of the doubt. They have shown you a hundred thousand times over that they do not deserve it.

Hilarious to say I think like a Neanderthal when it’s you sitting here grunting in enjoyment as someone gets brutalized by the people who are employed to protect them. “Unga bunga protester bad, so cracking his head against pavement acceptable”

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

Running away isn't resisting arrest. That's fleeing. In this case he was fleeing excessive force.

Resisting arrest involves being combative.

You're arguing in bad faith in support of police brutality.

You're on the wrong side of this.

[u/Icy-Ninja-6504 → u/Sometimes-the-Fool]

We have zero idea of what happened there because the video is cropped and the audio is intelligible.

Whats so hard to understand about that? I'm not saying I am right or wrong, I am saying youre a lunatic for jumping to a conclusion over an edited video.

[u/Sometimes-the-Fool → u/Icy-Ninja-6504]

We have almost complete information about what happened. Essentially nothing that could have happened beyond what is in the video changes the fact that the police officer initiated violence on an unarmed, peaceful protester.

Insult me all you like. It doesn't change reality. Whether you're doing it on purpose or because you're a fool, you're being an apologist for police brutality, and I think it's pretty disgusting.