jafo at cheetah.net
Tue Nov 4 00:06:39 EST 1997
In a comically exaggerated post, Daniel J. Lavigne wrote:
> Mark Denman <mdenman at pacbell.net> in Message-ID:
><345E244D.5D6A at pacbell.net> responded:
>>Did I miss something? I never saw anybody blinded on *my* television. I
>>saw a gross misuse of pepper spray in a very ill-thought-out plan to
>>avoid physical force. I also didn't see any kids - I saw college age
>>I guess we were watching different shows. You saw "kids" (which is
>>meant to evoke the image of pre-teens and which various groups have
>>extended all the way up to 24 years old (that's how Handguns Inc says
>>that so many "kids" are killed each year)) and I saw the truth. You saw
>>them being "blinded" and yet none of them are now blind.
>taxfree at planeteer.com (Daniel J. Lavigne) responds:
>We were watching the same report. Fortunately, my TV is somewhat dated
>and does not have a selective interpretation dispenser.
Uh oh. Why is my bullshit alarm starting to go off?
>One of the people who is being restrained by two thugs with a third
>rolling up her eye lids to swab her corneas with the chemical in question,
>each of which is much larger and visibly more muscular than she, appeared
>to be no more than 16 years of age. Were she somewhat older, even by 10
>years, that age would not excuse the actions perpetrated upon her and her
>Punishment of prisoners or people under arrest is not an option for
>They are trained to use a minimum of force to remove protesters from
>such situations. What would you next allow such "police officers" to do
>if the pain from applications to the eyes did not provided the desired
>Would you then have these "police officers" disrobe the dissidents and
>apply that chemical on and into their vaginas and anuses in order to
>obtain the "desired result"?
>How about forcing them to swallow that chemical?
>Why not allow them to inject all persons subject to police power
>with whatever substance such "police officers" feel is required to
>establish their "immediate supremacy"?
>Why not, Mark, simply allow "police officers" to lawfully shoot anyone
>who so much as dares to raise their voice with contempt?
>Such actions are a daily part of life in America to-day
>because such as you, by the millions, will blind your own eyes to any
>thing that may tend to wake you from your cowardly lethargy.
>In Texas they use hot lead. In New York they use plunger handles.
Bullshit. In one instance, in New York, some asshole cops apparently
used a plunger handle, an act for which they will pay dearly.
>In other states kangaroo trials are used to great effect against minorities
>and dissidents. Canada is not alone in sentencing the innocent to life
>long terms in jails that are manned by the same type of evil that would
>endanger your eye sight.
While pepper spray is certainly painful, is there any single case
where it's been of permanent, or even long-lasting, damage to an
individual's eyesight? Forget the blatant appeal to the emotions;
what are the facts?
<snipped; see thread>
>Wake up Mark! There was no resistance on the part of the protesters
>other than pleas that the police officers act as human beings and
>whimpers of "please don't". For such pleas and brave determination
>you would allow such illegal and unlawful retribution?
Why didn't they just get up and walk away?
>What would you have requested the "police officers" to do had the
>protesters told them to "Fuck Right Off You Cowardly Bastards And Deal
>With This The Right Way!"? What then Mark? Wake Up!
And what, Daniel, would be your definition of "The Right Way"?
>To a safer, saner world. To Duty.
>Daniel J. Lavigne
>International Humanity House
Oh, brother. I, too, have questioned the necessity of using pepper
spray in this particular instance, but this neurotic knee-jerk
sixties-style evil-pigs gimme-an-F anti-establishment bullshit not
only hasn't convinced me, but is causing me to lean the other way.
More information about the Ag-forst