Comment on 'Palestine Action activist struck officer with sledgehammer', court hears
Zombie@feddit.uk 1 day agoI’m not sure why that justifies attempting to smash someone’s spine by, not once, but twice swinging and hitting someone.
Just take a step back. Do you support violence? Of any kind? I’m guessing not given your baton comments. So violence presented with a sledgehammer in the name of Palestine Action should also not be something you apologise for.
Yes. Violence is justified if it prevents greater harm or in self defence.
Do you support WW2 veterans? They perpetrated huge amounts of violence, to prevent the Nazis performing greater harm.
Violence is sometimes justified.
We haven’t seen the evidence, I’m willing to concede if the video shows unjust use of force. But they haven’t released the evidence to us yet, and in my eyes seem to have put a huge deal of spin doctoring on this story to illicit an emotional rather than rational response.
At the moment, without the evidence ourselves, cops bash people’s heads in every day, who cares if the reverse is done to them whilst trying to stop the machinery of war and genocide?
Do you support WW2 veterans? They perpetrated huge amounts of violence, to prevent the Nazis performing greater harm.
False equivalency. The act of violence was against Elbit system in smashing their equipment. Not the policewoman called to prevent a criminal act. You’re basically trying to hand wave war crimes by saying anything that you do in war is justified. How does breaking someone’s spine contribute to stopping genocide on Palestine? Listen to yourself.
cops bash people’s heads in every day, who cares if the reverse is done to them whilst trying to stop the machinery of war and genocide?
Nobody is looking to justify unlawful violence by the police. And we should all care because I bet nobody wants to live in an increasingly violent community where people think it’s ok to beat people up because they disagree with them.
Why was it not possible to smash up the machines and building as a way of protest but when confronted by security and police stop and hold their hands up? They would have achieved their aims of going after the companies contributing to genocide. But they had to actively assault people as well? I don’t understand that logic. It’s a frighteningly violent logic.
PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk 1 day ago
I’m not seeing your point here.
Are we supposed to be okay with them not having them? Then, expect them to attend violent incidents with nothing but witty banter to protect themselves with?
I’m not a huge fan of anyone having weaponry to hand but given some of the nastier incidents that the police service need to attend, having a tin of pepper spray and a aluminium stick with the training to use them (or not use them as a case may be) is considerably fewer options that most worldwide forces have.
Zombie@feddit.uk 1 day ago
Yes.
The police are the state’s internal violence department (the military being the external violence department). The state however has a terrible track record of using violence appropriately. Why should we accept this as okay and normal?
Yes, the police have other roles that are deemed noble like arresting rapists and murderers, or mundane like giving speeding tickets and littering fines. But their principal role throughout their history has been violence. Not what you see in The Bill, Heartbeat, or the hundreds of other police propaganda TV shows in the UK, but hitting people with sticks and dragging them into isolated concrete cells. Sometimes that may be the appropriate response, but throughout their history, very regularly, it has not been. It’s not as bad as America, but our cops do have still quite a large degree of “qualified immunity”.
I’ve even met off duty cops who bragged about beating up the “hippies”. They love a good protest because it’s an excuse to let off some steam and bash some skulls. Much the same as football hooligans but state sponsored and approved.
Palestine Action are a direct action protest group who targeted military sites to try and stop genocide. They did this fully aware that they will be met with violence. State sponsored violence and potentially privately funded violence. It appears, to me at least, that they brought the sledgehammer to destroy equipment and when met with state violence they panicked and used what was in their hand to defend themself. After all, they are opposing state sponsored violence which results in thousands of daily deaths, how can they not expect to receive similar from a state which is supporting that?
Was it wise? Probably not.
Is it the terrifying, weapon wielding, hark back to the middle ages, violent attack it’s been portrayed by those it benefits to portray in that way? No.
If they had a baton in their hand instead of a sledgehammer when the police stormed in it wouldn’t be so catchy a headline. It clearly wasn’t brought just to fuck people up, it clearly wasn’t used at its full potential or there would be officers dead.
A protestor in the name of preventing genocide was smashing military equipment with a hammer, and when attacked by the state violence department for doing so, used what was in their hand to defend themselves. Those that have never wielded a sledgehammer may view this as terrifying but those that have used them can see that the police’s portrayal doesn’t add up (I used to use them regularly for work). A sledgehammer brought for the purpose of violence would result in far more considerable injuries than what happened here.
PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk 1 day ago
I mean, there’s a lot to unpack there and for the most part, it appears to me that your view of policing and mine are vastly different, but you’re entitled to your own view and I’m not arsed one way or the other.
This though? Absolutely not. You’re justifying life-changing violence to fit narrative you’re presenting. If smashing someone - anyone - in the back with a fucking sledgehammer isn’t a “middle ages, violent attack”, then swinging at them again certainly is.
I think this is where the disconnect in the logic lies. I’m quite sure it wasn’t brought for violence, but the issue is that the person turned their attention on the cop, and then used the sledgehammer as a weapon. They have made the conscious decision to change their intent from smashing up whatever they wanted to, to intentionally caution injury. Regardless of anyone’s experience using hammers, swinging a bit of heavy metal on the end of a big stick at someone is going to ruin someone’s day at the very least, or in this case, fracture someone’s spine. Anyone who claims that “oh I didn’t think that was going to happen” ought to lodge a special defence of insanity.
All this, and judging by journalists reports, there isn’t any clear evidence of state-sponsored violence to be seen.
Motive or otherwise, some clown has slammed a sledgehammer into someone’s back twice and is now hiding behind Palestine Action’s statement of purpose.
Zombie@feddit.uk 1 day ago
Aye, I understand my disdain of policing isn’t the norm. I’m not even completely against having a police force, but there is a severe lack of accountability and consequences for the current police in their many unjust, often illegal, actions.
I think the only constructive thing left to say, without seeing the evidence ourselves, is two things.
One) is to note this article is written almost entirely from the state’s perspective which illicits an automatic sense of right and sympathy in readers.
Two) is to reiterate that we have, as a society, no qualms about the thought of people being smashed over the head with a police baton, but when the reverse happens it’s viewed as barbaric.
If the video is released we can judge for ourselves, but at the moment, I’m firmly in the camp of “they do it to us regularly, in the name of preventing genocide why can’t we do it back?”
If video evidence proves otherwise, fair enough. But they’ve not released it and seem to be making a huge deal of the term sledgehammer when it could be any blunt force instrument.
craftymansamcf@lemmy.world 1 day ago
The only reason the incident is violent is because of the police. Their lack of attendance will almost always improve an event, and lack of violent weaponry will reduce unnecessary escalations that seem to be intended policy.