OPINION: When police have gone too far

Mike Burnham

 

When I was a 3-year-old, I developed a fondness for a four-letter word that begins with the letter F. My parents warned me and tried teaching me differently, but the word had such a fun ring to it I didn’t stop.

Eventually, a few healthy shots of pepper sauce on my tongue purged the word from my lips — served me right.

Thankfully, I had parents responsible enough to teach me this lesson at a young age: persistent rule breaking may be met with forced compliance. It seems, however, not everyone learns this lesson.

This past week, an unfortunate group of college students at the University of California-Davis were blessed with the opportunity to be taught by police officers what their parents may have overlooked. As it turns out, much larger misdemeanors than using the F-word merit much larger doses of pepper.

A crowd of Occupy protesters on the UC-Davis campus were illegally pitching tents and obstructing walkways. When the police arrived and the protesters refused to leave their site they were showered with pepper spray and forcefully removed.

Since then, there has been a national outcry against what has been labeled as police brutality, and many want the police officers involved to lose their jobs.

Brutality, I think, is too harsh a word to describe the use of pepper spray. However, one can’t help but watch the video of a police officer walking down a line of crouched students and calmly spraying them without thinking it’s an excessive use of force.

While the details of the situation are still murky, it appears law enforcement made an error. Yet, while I do believe those authorized to use force in our society should exercise a judicious amount of restraint, it is erroneous to think the police are the only ones at fault.

While I don’t agree with much of the Occupy protests, I am not against demonstrations in general. The right to participate in political activism is a foundational right in the U.S.

This country’s laws provide legal venues for demonstrators to express their cause. Rarely are there legitimate reasons to break laws in demonstrating. The UC-Davis case was not one of those instances.

Let’s be honest, protesters want to be arrested, pepper sprayed and beaten. It gives their cause legitimacy and press coverage.

While it may sound conspiratorial to say these peaceful protesters want to be assaulted, it’s not a new or unique tactic.

In the 1770 Boston Massacre, American colonists taunted, harassed and begged British soldiers to shoot at them. Eventually, they got what they wanted and five colonists were killed. While tragic, it accomplished exactly what the protesters wanted. The Boston Massacre was a key event leading up to the American Revolution.

Why else would the UC-Davis protesters insist on breaking petty laws and taunting the police if not to incite forceful retaliation? Was obstructing the flow of pedestrian traffic and pitching tents on campus a crucial component to their political cause? Obviously not.

If it is true the protesters initially broke the rules in ignorance, they would have left when police made an appearance. Clearly, the protesters at UC-Davis got exactly what they were looking for. Then again, perhaps, this entire situation can be chalked up to the indignation of youth and bad parenting. Should students be pepper sprayed because an important lesson was overlooked in child rearing? Perhaps not, but maybe the parents should be.