- People hitting a car because cops retreated and allowed them to hit the car. Police chose not to engage. Only moral high ground if police choose to put life at risk by engaging people with weapons, I guess.
- Single police man surrounded by protestors decides to go to his knees because that’s a good idea? I have my doubts.
- Something burning. Kind of like at the Maidan shortly before it escalated to all-out violence. Note that US police seem to have been able to peacefully contain the situation, though. But they only get the moral highground if they let things escalate to the point where guns are drawn, apparently.
- Arms around cop? Is he giving him a hug? I thought attacking police led to lethal force?
- A glass jar isn’t a weapon? I thought cobblestones were weapons justifying shootings. Note that objects are usually thrown from a distance, and not from right in front of the officers, where the visible protestors are standing. At least one protestor was armed, but no one was shot.
If you don’t care why protestors do or do not use weapons, then I don’t care why police do or do not shoot protestors. All that matters is that the US has not shot any protestors in a long, long time, much less killed over 100. If you have evidence to the contrary, post it up. Whatever the US is doing to control crowds and protestors so that lethal force does not become necessary is working.
Again, the US hasn’t shot protestors in a long, long time. Any suggestion that they would or that the Maiden protests would have played out the same way in the US is purely speculative, and almost certainly wrong. Why do you think the US invests in things like directed energy/noise machines, water cannons, tear gas, bean bags, rubber bullets, etc., if not to use them instead of live ammunition? Protestors would almost certainly not get the opportunity to use guns against the police in the US, especially since the police had a long time to prepare for these protestors in the Maidan. Suggesting I try to replicate this is absurd, as it would require assembling hundreds of protestors over multiple weeks before attempting to bring weapons, as only this would invoke a similar crowd-control response from the police. It is extremely unlikely anyone in such a crowd would ever get into the position of being able to raise the barrel of a firearm against the police if this had played out in the US.
Here’s an example of how [police-protestor violence was avoided in London in 2011][1], even when protestors attacked police and [threw things][2] at them:
Pictures of police officers standing and watching as youths smashed and looted shops have puzzled the public.
But Steven Kavanagh, the Metropolitan police deputy assistant commissioner, denied those images were a sign of the force being soft on rioters: “The Met is not namby pamby,” he told the Guardian.
He added: “The face of policing has changed, 25-30 years ago it would have been a different response, we’d have gone to baton rounds and water cannon straight away. Now we are more measured.”
He said the police faced contrasting demands from the public: “There are two extremes, the hang 'em and flog 'em brigade, and those who say these are frustrated youngsters.”
Twenty-five years ago, Kavanagh said, officers might have “let anger get the better of themselves”, and go wading in, but he said there was now a more disciplined approach, with officers not charging in as they were “holding the line” to protect firefighters putting out blazes that threatened life.
The Vancouver police acted similarly during the Stanley Cup riot.
[1]: London riots: police debate how far they should go to regain control | England riots 2011 | The Guardian
[2]: http://www.dzinepress.com/2011/08/photographs-london-under-riots-looting-and-violence-captured/
And by your standards, who does have the moral high ground? I guess Israel would be a good example (among many), since security forces there regularly have rocks thrown at them, and whereas you say US police would unquestionably shoot in those circumstances the Israelis typically don’t shoot, much less kill dozens.
