In the spring of last year, Houston police officers brutally accosted a 15-year-old burglary suspect. The suspect was prone on the ground, unarmed and surrounded. A nearby security camera recorded the beating. Two weeks ago, KTRK channel 13 received the footage and broadcast it on the evening news.
Even before the video became public, many wished to see the footage. Since then, there has been vocal public anger and resentment, but no rioting in the streets.
The tape explicitly showed the suspect falling to the ground as he tried to jump over a police car. He was then surrounded and handcuffed as several officers punched and kicked him repeatedly. Approximately 9 months passed since the beating and the public release of the tape.
In that time, many officers had their punishments reduced, some were re-instated and the excuse that the officers were using very mild “pain compliance techniques” was tossed around. Once the video became public, it became obvious that there was nothing mild or light about the “pain compliance”.
What causes police to go off in such a manner is debated. Adrenaline rush plays a part, and many people can identify with losing it in the heat of the moment. And let us not forget that individual officers do not represent the entire police force as a whole. Even so, this does nothing to excuse the officers in question.
The point, however, is the public outcry and the officials’ reactions. What worried police, politicians and judges was that the public would initiate something similar to the 1992 Los Angeles riots.
But this was not the case. Some suppose it was the cold temperatures, or the swift actions of the mayor, district attorney and chief of police (all of whom acted to fire and indict the officers involved in the beating) but the public stayed indoors and there was no curb stomping to be had.
Either way, Houston could do with the people taking to the streets in light of such an incident. Not to say that there aren’t plenty of equally valid reasons to take to the streets right now.
Make no mistake: this is not a call to incite violence. This is a call to remind people of their empowerment.
There is nothing wrong with a little large-scale peaceful protesting to remind those in charge that the people are in greater number, and they do not take matters like police brutality lightly.
'Cop beatings prove that riots are needed'
'Make no mistake: thi is not a call to incite violence.'
'ri·ot
[rahy-uht]
–noun
1) a noisy, violent public disorder caused by a group or crowd of persons, as by a crowd protesting against another group, a government policy, etc., in the streets.
2) Law . a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons acting together in a disrupting and tumultuous manner in carrying out their private purposes.
3) violent or wild disorder or confusion.'
-Dictionary.com
Sounds like it to me. Maybe you picked your words wrong I dunno. But you contradicted yourself so your point is invalid. Keep on writing man
Usually the Daily Cougar editors mess up the titles and misrepresent what the authors say (I know this happens for guest editorials and letters to the editor, so I could see it happening for something like this).
I would guess that the editor added the word "riot" to this piece either by missing the point of the article, or by deliberately trying to misrepresent the author's message.
Either way, if you take away the misleading title, you have to admit this is a good opinion piece.
If this is the case then yes. This is a good piece and I agree with his point.Police burtality is inexcusable and the video is horrifying. However, the editors should pick up on this so the authors do not have their views misrepresented.
the do mess with the titles, in fact they make their own title if one isn't submitted. it's happened to my brother before
Funny how when the tea party protest were either ignored or called horrible names. That was people coming out against government actions they didn't like. Sounds like some people want to pick and choose what is a demonstration and what isn't.
i don't think anyone said they didn't like the fact that people were exercising their ability to protest, people just thought the reason was stupid. i tend to agree with those people. both are demonstrations, there is no picking and choosing. its like the olympics and special olympics. both are sporting events, one is full of retards.
The way the article read to me was that the author felt that there hasn't been any real protest or people feeling empowered have gone out and protest those in charge that they didn't like what was going on. I can tell you have an eloquent way of displaying your own bias. I must say it is refreshing from several others on here.
But still the author is calling for a protest over a punk who was running from the cops. Do many out there think the guy had it coming to him? Yes. Was it right? No it wasn't, he did surrender after getting clipped by the cop car (which I don't mind saying is hilarious) and didn't resist arrest once he was on the ground.
While on the other hand he acts if people are not protesting and exercising their rights to show a government that they are tried of being in the red constantly. For that matter the fact that he thinks officials were worried that they would have a riot much like 1992 in California shows how little this person know of Texas.
Wow, you think people need to riot because some punk got beat up by a bunch of cops? The gangster-wannabe they beat up was not Mother Theresa, that punk was a burglar and a thug and his behind should be locked up in jail.
Listen to yourself. Haven't you ever heard of a little thing called the 8th Amendment? You cannot inflict cruel or unusual punishment especially not on someone who is innocent until proven guilty. And it doesn't matter if he is guilty or not because the police are required to uphold law and order. In this situation they failed.
Normally I'd agree with you however this wasn't such a case. It was a pretty clear and flagrant abuse of police authority. There was no need for the excessive violence on their part. None of it. The video shows that the punk was fleeing, he was no danger whatsoever to the officers and it's pretty clear they had no problems arresting him. So answer me this, why did they have to beat the crap out of him afterwards?
Its obvious that HPD is frustrated. A punk like him will go to trial, serve his sentence which will most likely be a slap on the wrist, and will come back out on the streets to do what he does best–rob and this time, maybe kill someone.
So? Frustration does not justify or warrant beating him up in such a fashion after he was already detained. Assuming he would commit another crime after getting out is a moot point, anyone can commit a crime at any time, by your logic everyone deserves to be beaten down by cops at any point in their lives because they could potentially kill someone.
okay, i like this new zed.
hrrmm yes fascinating but on the other hand, cops are brutal thugs with guns and tasers who will never be prosecuted for any crimes whatsoever so who's the bigger threat to society.
spoiler alert: the cops, you bootlicker.
And then people like you support the people who want to take away your right to defend your self and family, then tell you to rely on the police for protection. Talk about a double standard. A citizen shouldn't be armed and should rely on law enforcement for their protection of life and property. But then those same people cry out against cops and call them the greatest threat.
lets run with this. i am a person of authority, and i think you are a moron. zed agrees. i come to your house and beat the living daylights out of you. because zed is just like you in this case, a third part arbitrary judge of character with no experience, even though its against the rules to beat you up, i get to do it anyway? sounds like my kind of rules. where do you live?
and no i am not afraid of your size/gun/cop friends/security system/reporting of my post/intimate training in random martial art so lets move past that because i am apparently a flagrant vigilante who doesn't bother to respect any governmental system in favor of justice/vengeance based on what i read about someone this one time.
clearly he is a punk who put the public and police officers lives in danger by running, and clearly they exercised police brutality which is awful and should be punished appropriately. and cakewalk is an asshole for generalizing all cops and has yet to be saved by one when he needs them they will be there as he hides in a corner pissing his pants.
he is so a punk… he was guilty. he didn't deserve a beating but we can still call it what it is. he's a criminal punk and those cops were totally out of line. the whole thing is bad news.
Suggesting riots is a crime. There are legal ways to deal with execessive use of force by HPD. Federal charges are needed in the HPD cases. That will lead to legal reform. Riots will only lead to additional deaths and damage for Houston.