Watching The Cops
See other Watching The Cops Articles
Title: Report: Oakland cops pointed guns at sleeping baby
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/31/oak ... pointed_guns_at_sleeping_baby/
Published: Feb 2, 2013
Author: Natasha Lennard
Post Date: 2013-02-02 15:35:57 by Capitalist Eric
Keywords: None
Views: 55121
Comments: 91
According to an independent report investigating Oakland police misconduct, two cops pointed their guns at a sleeping 1-year-old while investigating a misdemeanor crime. The incident was flagged by Independent Monitor Robert Warshaw, who is responsible for auditing the OPD’s progress in complying with a Negotiated Settlement Agreement to resolve allegations of police misconduct. According to Warshaw’s most recent report, the OPD’s compliance decreased for the second quarter in a row. As well as highlighting the police department’s failure to investigate Occupy Oakland complaints, Warshaw’s report briefly mentions a troubling incident: [D]uring a search warrant, two officers pointed their firearms at a sleeping 19-month-old child who, of course, posed no immediate threat to the officers or others. The crime being investigated, according to the reports, involved a misdemeanor offense. The report also notes that in the past quarter, five incidents reportedly took place in which Oakland police pointed their guns at citizens when no crime had been committed. As the East Bay Express notes, this incident, alongside Warshaw’s broader findings, stand “in stark contrast to recent statements by Mayor Jean Quan.” Last week, the mayor told press, “The reality is that we’re making progress, this police department is changing.” Oakland police have a storied history of aggressive treatment of residents. Forty-four officers faced disciplinary action over their behavior during Occupy Oakland protests, which included seriously injuring an Iraq War veteran with a beanbag projectile shot at his head at close range.
Poster Comment: Our tax dollars at work. Feh.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Capitalist Eric (#0)
WGAS?
Uh Welcome. This should be interesting.
Could be, if you don't delete everything.
Could be, if you don't delete everything. No schitt, gotta save this for posterity purposes.. LOL...
Leftards "greener" pastures ------ a place where their lack of intelligence isn't brought into question on every post!!
You need some traffic here. I see a few lame retreads, old CT freaks and faux conservatives, but you know this place is dead.
I usually delete threads that name call visitors here. Keep it on topic and nothing gets deleted.
It's slow but not dead.
You never attained the ability to grow or borrow a pair of balls, did you retread?
I can assure you that he is no retread.
It's on life support. Mcgoon, the leftist lunatic, uses it as his personal blog.
No you can't.
I said "Queer Progressive Canary", and you naturally assumed it was yutard. You called it out.
Yes I can as I personally know him.
That makes no difference. You can't prove it so don't even get started.
You Calfags are, retread bushbot/hondouche.
Yes I can as I personally know him. You're wasting your time Stone... He's just like the Leftards he doesn't want to know the truth!!
Leftards "greener" pastures ------ a place where their lack of intelligence isn't brought into question on every post!!
You wouldn't recognize the truth if it bit you in your cellulite-laden ass. When is Ron Paul going to introduce articles of impeachment for the traitor occupying the White House, chickenshit?
Ron Paul is retired from the HOR, moron.
Pssst....Pssst... Ron Paul isn't in congress anymore. What do you think of his son Rand?
He's our representative, and I'm still out on that one....
(“You can't always control who walks into your life but, you can control which window you throw them out of.”)
Why would you be out on that one? He has all the right positions and deals with them with conviction. He is not a phoney like most up there today.
You're the one who voted for Mitt not me...
Leftards "greener" pastures ------ a place where their lack of intelligence isn't brought into question on every post!!
He couldn't even do it prior to retiring, could he, hondouche? Why not?
Ask me when he accomplishes something significant.
You're admitting you voted for Obama.
Sorry I took so long to get back, my guys cooked dinner tonight and I'm staring at a quarter pounder, double decker cheese burger....lol... Anyway! Rand sought fundraising help from GOP lawmakers who voted for the massive 2008 financial bailout, flip-flopping on a campaign promise to shun those lawmakers. During the primary, Paul pledged not to accept contributions from any senator who had voted for the financial bailout. That promise was included on his campaign website, but he's taken it down since then. He was a strong opponent of the National Defense Authorization Act 2012 with its inclusion of the “indefinite detention” powers, but he did another flip/flop and voted “Yes” in favor of the same bill for 2013. I could be wrong, not sure, but libertarians, in my opinion, tend to be compromisers, and I have no faith, nor trust, in anyone who compromises their convictions. He will lose my support completely if he continues to fold like a cheap suit on issues he claims to stand by. JMHO!
(“You can't always control who walks into your life but, you can control which window you throw them out of.”)
I don't believe that Rand paul voted for the NDA. If I recall correctly he voted against it. As for the other stuff about pledging not to take support from Senators that Supported TARP. I have never heard or seen anything about that. Rand Paul 2016
The flip flopping is due to the fact that he's not a libertarian, but a neocon progressive, IMO. There is very little similarity to his father Ron, who is pro American.
"That contest is won," said Benton. "He won the primary and he didn't take money from senators who backed the bailout. Now they're coming to support him, and he's not going to turn down support from Republicans. They're not looking for a seat at his table. They're supporting him because of his positions, and because of his steadfast commitment to principle." It sounds like his pledge was so that he distinguished himself as not being owned by the same people who voted for TARP. They don't own him. He still votes the same way. That doesn't bother me as it seems like a pledge for the primary. That is my opinion.
It's really not required to welcome everyone, especially known assholes. Why not throw the gaywad overboard?
. There is very little similarity to his father Ron, who is pro American. Rand Paul isn't flip flopping on anything. He has all the same positions. He is better then his father. Ron paul was stupid being for legalization of Heroin and drugs like that. Rand is smarter. Ron Paul was kind of naive when he talked about Muslims and said Iran was peaceful. Rand is much smarter saying that he isn't taking anything off the table in dealing with Iran. Ron Paul looked like a total loon on Morton Downey Juniors Show. Rand doesn't come across as a fool. On abortion, murder Ron paul says it is a states matter. That is a stupid position. Ron Paul didn't favor a constitutional amendment banning abortion. Rand does. Rand Paul's positions are superior across the board, politically and morally. I like Ron Paul and would vote for him. But to be honest some of his positions are nutty.
Can't we all just get along? ;)
Like you, twink?
Then why didn't Ron introduce articles of impeachment for your boy, Obama, retread Calfag, bushbot/hondouche?
Almost everything is smarter than bushbot/hondouche.
The real question is why doesn't Paul Ryan introduce articles of impeachment. Why hasn't that little shrimp introduced them. Hasn't he sided with Obama several times since the election?
As for the other stuff about pledging not to take support from Senators that Supported TARP. I have never heard or seen anything about that. http://www.examiner.com/article/sen-rand-paul-voted-yes-for- the-650-billion-2013-ndaa Sen. Rand Paul voted yes for the $650 billion 2013 NDAA December 5, 2012 Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) angered many of his father’s supporters by voting for the 2013 NDAA. Doug Stafford, Paul’s chief of staff, stated that Sen. Paul believes that “the full panoply of due process rights should apply to all persons, not just American citizens.” Sen. Paul, however, still voted for the passage of the NDAA. ****************************** Below (votesmart.org) is one site that posted Rand voted 'NAY', this is where the confusion comes from. HR 4310 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 - Voting Record U.S. Senate KY: Jr Sen. Rand Paul, Republican- Nay (“You can't always control who walks into your life but, you can control which window you throw them out of.”)
You should debate honestly. Obama is not Hondos boy. Romeny wasn't either but that doesn't make him an Obama supporter. He wanted someone to the right of Romney which I want too. I went ahead and voted Romney because he was light years better. But Romney still was lacking. Hondo and others own their vote and not voting my way or your way doesn't make them Obama supporters. Well maybe a tiny bit.
Why not ask him? Unlike Ryan, Paul was a longtime Texas US Representative and presidential candidate with strong, vocal and monetary support.
WTF do you or bushbot/hondouche know about integrity and honesty? Neither of you display either of it on internet forums.
Noted. You are correct. Apparently it passed unanimously.
Comments (42 - 91) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestNatasha Lennard - British-born, Brooklyn-based journalist covering radical politics - Writer - Covers Occupy and radical politics for Salon.com.
#2. To: yukon (#1)
#3. To: A K A Stone, *Yukon neo-Progressive Vermin* (#2)
Welcome. This should be interesting.
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#4. To: hondo68, A K A Stone (#3)
Welcome. This should be interesting.
#5. To: A K A Stone (#2)
Uh Welcome.
#6. To: hondo68 (#3)
Could be, if you don't delete everything.
#7. To: yukon (#5)
but you know this place is dead.
#8. To: CZ82 (#4)
#9. To: yukon (#8)
did you retread?
#10. To: A K A Stone, mcgowanjm (#7)
It's slow but not dead.
#11. To: A K A Stone (#9)
I can assure you that he is no retread.
#12. To: A K A Stone (#6)
delete threads that name call visitors
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#13. To: yukon (#11)
No you can't.
#14. To: A K A Stone (#13)
I personally know him.
#15. To: hondo68 (#12)
"Queer Progressive Canary"
#16. To: A K A Stone, pukon (#13)
No you can't.
#17. To: CZ82, A K A Stone (#16)
he doesn't want to know the truth!!
#18. To: yukon (#17)
When is Ron Paul going to introduce articles of impeachment
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#19. To: yukon (#17)
When is Ron Paul
#20. To: A K A Stone, yukon (#19)
What do you think of his son Rand?
#21. To: Murron (#20)
He's our representative, and I'm still out on that one....
#22. To: yukon (#17)
You wouldn't recognize the truth if it bit you in your cellulite-laden ass.
#23. To: hondo68 (#18)
Ron Paul is retired from the HOR, moron.
#24. To: A K A Stone (#19)
What do you think of his son Rand?
#25. To: CZ82 (#22)
You're the one who voted for Mitt not me...
#26. To: A K A Stone (#21)
Why would you be out on that one? He has all the right positions and deals with them with conviction. He is not a phoney like most up there today.
#27. To: Murron (#26)
He was a strong opponent of the National Defense Authorization Act 2012 with its inclusion of the “indefinite detention” powers, but he did another flip/flop and voted “Yes” in favor of the same bill for 2013.
#28. To: Murron (#26)
libertarians, in my opinion, tend to be compromisers
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#29. To: Murron (#26)
Paul campaign manager Jesse Benton confirmed that the pledge is no longer operative, and explained that it was meant for the primary, when Paul was drawing a bright line between himself and Trey Grayson.
#30. To: A K A Stone (#2)
Say hi to your mom for me.
#31. To: hondo68 (#28)
The flip flopping is due to the fact that he's not a libertarian, but a neocon progressive, IMO.
#32. To: Biff Tannen (#30)
It's really not required to welcome everyone, especially known assholes. Why not throw the gaywad overboard?
#33. To: Biff Tannen (#30)
known assholes
#34. To: hondo68 (#28)
There is very little similarity to his father Ron, who is pro American.
#35. To: A K A Stone, hondo68 (#31)
Rand is smarter.
#36. To: yukon (#34)
#37. To: A K A Stone (#27)
I don't believe that Rand paul voted for the NDA. If I recall correctly he voted against it.
#38. To: yukon (#34)
Then why didn't Ron introduce articles of impeachment for your boy, Obama, retread Calfag, bushbot/hondouche?
#39. To: A K A Stone (#36)
Why hasn't that little shrimp introduced them.
#40. To: A K A Stone, hondo68 (#38)
You should debate honestly.
#41. To: Murron (#37)
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]