to be fair. Tear gas is a prohibited chemical weapon under the Geneva convention. It’s not improper to call it a chemical weapon. It is one, and it has no place in law enforcement. It is a lazy way to scare, scar and traumatize people whom are seen as less than. Those people, you should just arrest them. Not gas them.
Because they refuse to exhibit self-control?
So the fire trucks, attempting to respond to 89 fires, could get past the drunks in the middle of the street who refused to let the fire trucks through?
If drunk fights and sexual battery were normal occurrences at or around UM home games, it’d be all over the local blog that pretends to be our newspaper. I’d wager there’d be a whole lot more arrests each game, too. There are police from at least four different agencies all over town on game days.
Again, only in WARS against SOLDIERS. Police use of tear gas as a means of riot control is exempt under the Ganava Convention.
Not saying its right ethically, but the law doesn’t stand with you.
Right. Too horrible for use in war but use it on your own people and everything is just ducky.
1 Like
89 Fires!!! Oh No! What with the 72,000 calls the Cleveland fire department responded to in 2014 (197 per day) Those 89 fires must have seemed like a holocaust. That’s definitely a good reason to attack innocent celebrants with chemical weapons. Without a fire truck, how will those dumpster fires be dealt with? Are we supposed to just wait a couple of hours for them to burn themselves out? I mean, they are in heavy metal containers that might melt or explode right? Nearby buildings burned down during the party right? I mean, there was actual damage caused by these fires set in large metal fireproof boxes right? God damn it! We need to hurt some people over this. Screw court, let’s just hurt em and hurt em good. They don’t do what we tell them to do so they are are criminals and guilty as hell… right?
Authoritarians will always see people being people as a problem. They have a need to control and be controlled. I guess I wasn’t born with that gene but it sure worries me how many people are.
Stop pissing on my leg and telling me it’s raining. He said it was not a chemical weapon. It IS one.
also, that’s an awful bold face for someone who speaks in support of gassing civillians with what is a chemical weapon.
Yeah, context is everything, keep driving that narrative
Your argument is one agreeable to authoritarians and sadists.
1 Like
Dude does anyone actually read post in here or is it all just reactionary bullshit?
In my post I very clearly stated (I’m going to bold it for you so you can read it easier) “Not saying its right ethically, but the law doesn’t stand with you.”
I didn’t come up with the law or the loopholes the US utilizes against its citizens. You want to rage against someone? Pick up a fucking phone and call your congressman/senator/POTUS and tell them.
Again I never ever stated I was ok with what the police did. if you think I did, please quote the post in a reply.
So, if you weren’t arguing his point, then you posted a reply because of… what? pedantry?
Because he replied to my comment claiming to know my intentions. I replied to clarify.
No, he replied to OtherMichael. You replied to his reply to OtherMichael and he called you out.
Because both he and someone else claimed that the US can’t use tear gas against it’s citizens and it just isn’t true. And he directly replied to my reply thank you very much. If you want to play the troll game please try someone else.
The other person was me and neither I nor he said the US can’t legally use teargas against citizens, only that it was a banned chemical weapon under two conventions to which the US is a party. We both said they had no place in law enforcement.
Considering how many times you have accused people of not reading your posts here, I’d ask the same of you.
2 Likes
But if you had actually read the conventions instead of stopping at “we agree to not use chemical weapons.”, there is very clearly a loophole (one of which I copied into my reply to you) that allows the US to use chemical weapons against what they deem to be “rioters”
That would be the pedantry I mentioned earlier.
No one disputes that but you’d have some strong authoritarian leanings to think it’s reasonable to use chemical weapons on non-violent celebrants or any free citizen for that matter. Arrest the troublemakers and let the other people enjoy their teams victory.
I’m in the midst of being outraged AND overjoyed by the police brutality of pepper spraying & tear gassing of white middle class dopes. I mean college kids.
I wonder what this crop of citizens will think of the cops as they enter the world after college. Hopefully the cops at other schools will emulate this kind of fascist behavior & white people will start to rein in the cops.
And I have to admit being kinda Flounder-like happy at watching white kids get hosed down with chemical weapons.
1 Like
This is a time-honored tradition on many college campuses. One year the police started a riot at my university during our spring-time drunk-fest. No provocations, no burning dumpsters or couches, they just hadn’t fired off any tear gas for too many years in a row. Stuff’s got a shelf-life, you know.
Anyway, the children of privilege seem to quickly forget it ever happened. It has rarely been recorded, though, so perhaps some of these kids’ parents will find the behavior of the police distasteful enough to raise some objections, circulate a petition, or put in a call. Or something.
3 Likes
