LAPD Demonstrates Inept Tactics During Peaceful Assemblies
by Joseph Miranda
BRUTALITY: Inappropriate attacks against protesters only fuel radical causes
The editorial "LAPD's treatment of protesters is unacceptable" (Viewpoint, Nov. 30 2000) requested that people present at the October 22nd demonstration against police brutality give their accounts. Well, I was one of the demonstrators, and here are my observations:
The LAPD attack on the demonstrators was more a sign of police incompetence than anything else. During the confrontation at the rear of Parker Center, a group of demonstrators attempted to march around the building. Several of the more militant protestors started chanting and, for some perverse reason, burning their own banners. The police proved incapable of isolating these militants from the rest of the demonstrators who were marching peacefully. Instead, the police attacked the peaceful marchers with rubber bullets, and then pushed the march back using their batons and horses. The demonstrators stood their ground in front of Parker Center, sitting down in the street and continuing the protest with no small defiance. Meanwhile a small army of heavily armed police looked on, seemingly prepared to refight the Battle of Waterloo.
The police action backfired as it radicalized many of the more moderate demonstrators in the march. Aside from the usual radical and anarchist groups, also present were contingents from Amnesty International, the Greens, the Libertarian Party, and assorted community organizations. The LAPD's excessive use of force sent the protest organizers' message far better than did all the chants, banners and speakers. If the police can not handle small groups of demonstrators without losing control of themselves, then how can they deal with more serious situations?
This incompetence on the part of the police seems to be part of a pattern. I happened to be at the demonstrations at the Democratic National Convention this last August. The police continually over-reacted to trivial incidents and under-reacted to serious ones. A case in point was the police attack on concert goers at the official protest area outside of Staples Center on the night of August 14th. The police again proved incapable of isolating several militants involved in throwing debris. Instead, they attacked an otherwise peaceful assembly leading to widescale disturbances. The result? The people creating the disturbances got away, scot free, while innocent citizens were injured by police batons and rubber bullets. Every otherwise peaceful citizen shot with a rubber bullet was one more recruit for the radical groups, thank you very much LAPD. On the following days of the convention, there were even more militant demonstrations as protesters demanded that the police be held accountable. I'll note that an exception was in the conduct of some of the older police officers who showed a little more self discipline and handled crowds peacefully. But this type of intelligent policing is on the decline.
Much of the problem is the result of the "war on crime", which creates an "us versus them" mentality, completely unacceptable in a democracy. It's becoming clear that the police, far from being neutral enforcers of the law, are partisan players, actively involving themselves on the side of the powerful.
Given the current atmosphere of "zero tolerance", "get tough", and "three strikes", the police officers involved in these attacks, as well as their commanders and the politicians ultimately responsible for their conduct, ought to be arrested and charged with assault, conspiracy, violations of civil rights, etc. Of course, they won't be. There are two laws in this country, one for citizens and another for the government.
Given the trend of the last year, with demonstrations against the corporations, the politicians and the government growing, we should be seeing even larger protests in the future. If the police can not act professionally in the face of citizens practicing their right to protest, democracy is in serious trouble.
