The Instigator
ptosis
Pro (for)
The Contender
Doom-Guy-666-1993
Con (against)

Is the local sheriff using Excessive Force on the Dakota Pipeline Protesters?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Argument Due
We are waiting for ptosis to post argument for round #3. If you are ptosis, login to see your options.
Time Remaining
01day05hours07minutes26seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/30/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 day ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 124 times Debate No: 97508
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)

 

ptosis

Pro

Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier: "My Job Is To Enforce The Law"

Sunday night: police used tear gas, rubber bullets and large water hoses in sub-freezing weather. Organizers said at least 17 protesters were taken to the hospital.

Wednesday: Anyone delivering supplies to oil pipeline protesters in North Dakota could face fines, the local sheriff"s office warns.

Is it against the law to supply water, tear gas antidote, and food to protesters? Nov. 30 2016 weather is currently 40-mile-per-hour winds and below-freezing temperatures.

Sheriff Kirchmeier: said, "Social media has been very bad and it has turned out like law enforcement is building the pipeline," he said. "I can"t stop the pipeline. My job is to enforce the law."

Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambault called the confrontation an act of terror against unarmed protesters that was sanctioned by Kirchmeier.

If vote Pro/Yes then you agree that excessive force is being used.
If not Con/No then you disagree that excessive force is being used.
Doom-Guy-666-1993

Con

The thing is, the protesters are putting themselves in that position, IED'S, trespassing, destruction of private property, and they can leave at any time, so. why is it the police officers being bad?
Debate Round No. 1
ptosis

Pro

1) Why is it the police officers being bad? = Unlawful use of excessive force.

Reference: http://legalbeagle.com...
"The Civil Rights Act of 1871 was initially written to protect freed African-Americans in the south from the Ku Klux Klan. It makes it illegal to interfere with any of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Since the fourth and fourteenth Amendments limit the use of force, the Civil Rights Act is useful in cases against police brutality.

EXAMPLES:

A - LRAD, unlawful use of, not according to manual that states: 300.1 Use of Force princples
(a) Officers shall use advisements,warnings, andverbal persuasion before resortingto force.
(b) Force shall be de-escalated immediately as resistance decreases.
(c) When feasible based on circumstances, officers will use disengagement:area containment; surveillance, waitingout a subject; summononing reinforcements; and/or calling specialized units, inorder to reduce theneedfor force and increase officr and civilian safety.
(d) Officers shall allow individuals timetosubmit to arrest before force isused wherever possible.

From lradx.com, it is stated that it is not to be used as a weapon. It is a violation of rights to free speech and assembly by using the LRAD on protesters by using "piercing, continuous, high-pitched sound that may cause permament hearing damage rather than short, intermittent annoucement used as commuication between police and protesters.

B - Use of water cannons on protesters just standing around and not actively in by the local Sheriff as an 'ongoing riot' at 20F during the middle of the night without warning.

C - Targeting reporters, medics with rubber bullets who are simply doing their job.

D - Using more force than ordered under the emergency order issued Monday by Governor Jack Dalrymple for the camp's evacuation due to a coming blizzard. The Corps has ordered the protesters to leave federal land, but the Corps says it has no plans to forcibly remove anyone.

(a)
"They have deliveries, retailers that are delivering to them " we will turn around any of those services," Maxine Herr, a spokeswoman from the Morton County Sheriff's Department, has said, as cited by Reuters.
Trucks with "anything that goes to sustain living there," including food, building materials as well as propane tanks, will be turned back.
They need to evacuate," Herr said, as cited by the Bismark Tribune. "The executive order is clear that it"s public safety. If they ignore it, they have to live with the consequences of potentially freezing to death."
(b)
"A spokesperson for North Dakota Gov. Jack Dalrymple also reportedly said that the governor had no intention of blocking food and supplies from entering the camp. According to AP, spokesman Jeff Zent said that Dalrymple"s emergency evacuation order, signed Monday, has been "misconstrued" by some as a green light to block supplies, but that was 'not the governor's intent.'"

(c)
Apparantly, the Morton County Sheriff"s Office is not simply "enforcing the law" and is showing an appalling lack of concern as much as the Governor Dalrymple"s order citing "safety concerns and the potential danger to human life for those camping on federal property without proper shelter during harsh winter conditions."
(d)
https://www.aclu.org... " pirit-camp
And in the current trial by media, Morton County Sheriff"s Office has activated the one of the most militant responses ever in North Dakota"s history. "It's highly problematic and is not a proper use of law enforcement resources. " Additionally, the use of militarized armored vehicles, riot gear, and tactics by law enforcement at protests that consist of peaceful prayer and nonviolent direct actions is a blatant misuse of these tools and will likely encourage police to use force against citizens when force is not necessary for the situation." - Jennifer Cook,

2) Trespassing, "The protesters were ousted from the camp that authorities said was on private property in the path of the pipeline late Thursday afternoon, Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier told the AP."

How could you charge anybody for trespassing on treaty land? This is stolen land. Not guilty. The Standing Rock Sioux tribe has lost ancestral lands in one broken treaty after another, and even in outright theft. The first treaty, in 1851, established the Great Sioux Reservation. It was quickly abrogated with one rewrite after another, each resulting in further land takeaways from the Sioux.

Therefore the protesters did not putt themselves in that position, not trespassing destroying someone else's private property they have no other place to go. They are unable to leave at any time

3) IED's, what IED's? They are unarmed. That is a total lie. I find it suspect that the Sheriff's office said that "We cannot have protesters blocking county roads, blocking state highways, or trespassing on private property.", when it is the police themselves are blocked off the bridge that cuts off theonly access to the reservation from ambulances and fire services.

And if the protesters did trespass and block, according to
https://popularresistance.org... " -highways/
"Blocking major roads in the United States, however, is much more rare. Most notably, the Selma to Montgomery marches that were pivotal in the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s used U.S. Route 80, a move that was upheld in a ruling by Federal District Court Judge Frank M. Johnson, Jr. His opinion was deeply controversial at the time: "The law is clear that the right to petition one"s government for the redress of grievances may be exercised in large groups," said the judge, "and these rights may be exercised by marching, even along public highways."

http://www.chicagotribune.com... " story.html

Sunday's clashes between authorities and protesters started in the early evening, when some protesters tried to move trucks blocking the Backwater Bridge, saying they were preventing emergency services from accessing the reservation. Authorities say they have left the bridge closed since late October because they are concerned about its structural integrity.

It seems highly insincere reasoning by the police who are standing on the bridge with armoured weaponry if such a rickety bridge." The corporate trolls are calculating the blocked bridge will allow the construction to continue. And they are doing it with reckless disregard of human safety and dignity.

Sophia Wilansky had been hit by a concussion grenade. The Morton County Sheriff's dispatcher said that police only used nonlethal weapons against the protesters. So didn't deny using concussion grenades.

In summation I conclude this first round with the following:

Amnesty International USA is now present at the Standing Rock Dakota pipeline protest to monitor the degree of force used in law enforcement.

Where a small minority tries to turn a peaceful assembly into a violent one, law enforcement officials should protect the peaceful protesters and not use the violent acts of a few as a pretext to restrict or impede the exercise of the rights of a majority," - AI's letter to Sheriff Kirchmeier

UN Special Rapporteur Victoria Tauli-Corpus press release issued by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR):

Dear Cop: "Enforcing the law" is not automatically legitimate or moral. The most vicious tyrannies in history (under Mao, Stalin, Hitler, etc.) legalized their oppressions, which were then committed "law enforcers."

From https://leb.fbi.gov...- " nforcement
If officers receive positive reinforcement after they perform certain actions, even illegal ones, they likely will behave similarly in the future despite organizational policies or prohibitions. {John R. Anderson, Learning and Memory: An Integrated Approach, 2nd ed. (New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, I
Doom-Guy-666-1993

Con

They are blocking roads, trespassing, threatening, making IED's, all of which is illegal, and then they assault officers and security, they are putting their selves in that position, and then the woman who supposedly got hit by a concussion grenade, from the people i talked to, it sounds like she had a propane tank, and also concussion grenades don't do that, you would have 1 or 2 small fragments of shrapnel and burns, but a IED, that well do that to you, and i know darn good how wounds look from similar devices, our Sargent got hit by one.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Quadrunner 13 hours ago
Quadrunner
Also, Con claimed destruction of property. I don't recall any proof of that. Refute it if it isn't true.
Posted by Quadrunner 13 hours ago
Quadrunner
In the interest of providing a challange to the Pro-Side, I warn Con, that I would vote a devastating loss as it is. You need to provide counter evidence that police are following protocol, because Pro is providing a solid argument that you've failed to refute thus far. It is out there if you take the time to look for it, but you'll have to hunt.

Pro-Fantastic presentation. Don't forget to directly refute any claims that police are responding to protester violence. If you don't Con has a fair chance.
Posted by DrRisen 19 hours ago
DrRisen
@ptosis Don't redirect. My argument is sound. The people are still committing a crime. If the police aren't following general procedure is NOT relevant.
Posted by ptosis 1 day ago
ptosis
@ DrRisen accessory after the fact. The local cops are not showing their name badges.
A cop can refuse self ID if:
An investigation is jeopardized
A police function is hindered
There is a safety consideration

No legitimate reason to cover badge on duty. According to https://cldc.org...

" (N.D. Cent. Code Ann. " 39-03-05), North Dakota State Troopers are required to display, at the very least, a badge number.[2] Failure to display the badge number or attendant serial number is, apparently, a Class B misdemeanor.[3] ... Not one single officer displayed a badge number. No name plates. Nothing. There was not identifiable information apparent from the uniform other than the uniform itself."
Posted by ptosis 1 day ago
ptosis
@y Tom-The-Hypocrit :challenge me to a debate on this, instead of trolling via comments
Posted by DrRisen 2 days ago
DrRisen
To Pro: Yes, yes it is illegal. Its accessory to a crime.
Posted by Tom-The-Hypocrit 2 days ago
Tom-The-Hypocrit
This is why if I lived in America I would be conservative.

1. you listed nothing about the protesters actions during these events and there could have been some stages of the protest that required these measures

2. I am unsure if you know what the word "supplies" means? It means food, water and probably shelter. Now, the law-enforcement authorities don't want people to be assisting with supplies because letting them get through would lead to weeks of enraged feminists and lefties and disturbing everyone else. Therefore they stop the supplies from getting through. I can't believe you actually think that's abusing their rights.

3. Terror is using force to prove a political point. This is a political point. And the are using force. If you are implying that the police are terrorists that is impossible, because they are removed from political standpoints and entrusted with the duty to uphold the law. The protesters are closer to the mark.

4. They were breaking the law. They deserve anything thats coming for them if they decide to abuse the the law as defined by the constitution. Which reminds me, didn't you use the constitution as legal backing in your attack on police officers? Contradiction?

5. The police are doing their job. The uses of force need to escalate the move. If the didn't after these measures, then even harsher methods need to be implemented. People can't say that their immune to the law. If they break the law they will be apprehended whether they like it or not. It's up to them whether they want to continue to break the law.

Please refrain from attacking the law and then using the law to defend yourself. You look like a fool.
Posted by ptosis 2 days ago
ptosis
WPLC lawyer Rachel Lederman said Monday, "The civil rights violations that night were deliberate and punitive. - http://www.commondreams.org...
Posted by ptosis 2 days ago
ptosis
http://www.nydailynews.com...

A class action lawsuit has accused Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier and other North Dakota law enforcement agencies of using excessive force during a Dakota Access pipeline protest where a Bronx woman nearly lost her arm.

The National Lawyers Guild claims at least nine plaintiffs suffered from injuries, such as seizures, facial burns, broken bones, bruising and eye damage during a violent clash last week. And more risked hypothermia when police blasted protesters with a water cannon during the Backwater Bridge melee on Nov. 20.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.