Pepper Spray Developer: It Has Become Fashionable to Use Chemicals on People with Opinions
In what appears to be his first television interview on the subject, Kamran Loghman, the developer of weapons-grade pepper spray and the policy for its use by US police departments, appeared on Democracy Now! to condemn how police forces have been using pepper spray on peaceful protesters in the country. He said he was “shocked” and bewildered to see UC Davis police pepper spraying students and the first thing that came to his mind was how the students could be his children “sitting down having an opinion” and being shut down forcibly by chemical agents.
Loghman worked with the FBI on the research & development of pepper spray, which was tested over the course of three years in the 1980s. He described the development during the segment along with the ingredients in pepper spray.
Why pepper-spray was weaponized, he explains:
Prior to that, in the use of force by law enforcement, when you encounter somebody who is aggressive, let’s say somebody who is under the influence of narcotic or alcohol and you arrest them and the highway patrol wants to take him out of the car and they become combatant. At that time, police officers had really little choice. It was either baton or go to deadly force. By introduction of pepper spray, it was very quick. Police officers were trained to do that. They could arrest the individual, take him back to the jail, wash their face and give them proper decontamination and that was the end of the story. And in that regard it was a great weapon. It saved hundreds of thousands of lives in the last twenty years.
Loghman helped produce one of the original training manuals specifying how to use the pepper spray. The manual was required reading for officers looking to get certified so they could use the spray.
According to Loghman, what he saw with the UC Davis police was a “complete improper and inappropriate use” of pepper spray. It is to be used when there is threat to officers or the possibility of property damage. And, what transpired was “not in accordance with any training or any policy of any department” that he knows of, which is why he feels it is his ”civic duty” to speak up and “explain to the public that this is not what pepper spray was developed for.”
Loghman addressed the use of tear gas in Egypt on peaceful protesters—tear gas that has been made in the United States. He talked about the difference between weapons-grade pepper spray and tear gas and commented on the use of the tear gas on Egyptians:
“It is becoming more and more fashionable right now, this day and age, to use chemical on people who have an opinion. And that to me is a complete lack of leadership both in the police department and other people who cannot really deal with the root of the problem and they want to spray people to quiet them down. And it’s really not supposed to be that. It’s not a thing that solves any problem nor is it something that quiets people down.”
Scott Olsen, the protester shown with head injuries, apparently after being hit in the head by a police projectile, has a skull fracture and is in a “serious, but stable condition”, according to a fellow protester with him in hospital.
Adele Carpenter, who has known Olsen since July, said she was told by a doctor at Highland hospital, in Oakland, that Olsen “has a skull fracture”.
Carpenter arrived at Highland hospital in Oakland at 11pm last night, and has been allowed to visit Olsen – a former US marine, who did two tours of Iraq – this morning, she said.
“I’m just absolutely devastated that someone who did two tours of Iraq and came home safely is now lying in a US hospital because of the domestic police force,” Carpenter said.
She said Olsen moved to the Bay area in July. The former marine, 24, left the military in 2010. Olsen is originally from Wisconsin, Carpenter said, adding that his family have been informed about his condition. A “military buddy” is also on his way to visit Olsen in hospital.
Video footage shows Olsen lying prone on the ground in front of police lines. A crowd gathers in an apparent bid to help him, but then scatters when a police officer throws an explosive device into their midst.
context
Submitted by starswereexploding.
IS THIS EVEN REAL. WHAT IS THIS?
I wonder if Ron Paul would approve of this message?
Did anybody read the watermark on the bottom?
Like politics has any integrity over other forms of advertising. Women’s bodies are synonymous with selling a product, and have been for centuries. If a woman (or any person for that matter) opts to take agency of their body in a way that advocates for a candidate they side with, right on. What’s “NOT COOL” is the legislature and mindset that restricts any person’s choice to display themselves as they wish to be seen.
Pardon the paragraph, but this kind of shit just really tweaks my tuning pegs. It’s not the place of a candidate’s privilege (financial, racial, gendered, political power, etc) to objectify a body and pay to have them magazined, billboarded, and tubefed to the public in association with their campaign; but it’s sure as buckshot not the MS Paint master that captioned this photo’s place to police the body which wants and self-elects to associate itself with a candidate.
(via fuckyeahfeminists & nownyc-notcool)
Transcripts
Part One
…2008 financial crash more hard earned private property was destroyed than if all of us here were to be destroying it night and day for weeks. They tell you we are dreamers. The true dreamers are those who think things can go on indefinitely the way they are. We are not dreamers. We are awakening from a dream which is tuning into a nightmare. We are not destroying anything. We are only witnessing how the system is destroying itself. We all know the classic scenes from cartoons. The cart reaches a precipice. But it goes on walking. Ignoring the fact that there is nothing beneath. Only when it looks down and notices it, it falls down. This is what we are doing here. We are telling the guys there on Wall Street – Hey, look down! (cheering).
In April 2011, the Chinese government prohibited on TV and films and in novels all stories that contain alternate reality or time travel. This is a good sign for China. It means that people still dream about alternatives, so you have to prohibit this dream. Here we don’t think of prohibition. Because the ruling system has even suppressed our capacity to dream. Look at the movies that we see all the time. It’s easy to imagine the end of the world. An asteroid destroying all life and so on. But you cannot imagine the end of capitalism. So what are we doing here? Let me tell you a wonderful old joke from communist times.
A guy was sent from East Germany to work in Siberia. He knew his mail would be read by censors. So he told his friends: Let’s establish a code. If the letter you get from me is written in blue ink ,it is true what I said. If it is written in red ink, it is false. After a month his friends get a first letter. Everything is in blue. It says, this letter: everything is wonderful here. Stores are full of good food. Movie theaters show good films from the West. Apartments are large and luxurious. The only thing you cannot buy is red ink.
This is how we live. We have all the freedoms we want. But what we are missing is red ink. The language to articulate our non-freedom. The way we are taught to speak about freedom war and terrorism and so on falsifies freedom. And this is what you are doing here: You are giving all of us red ink.
There is a danger. Don’t fall in love with yourselves. We have a nice time here. But remember: carnivals come cheap. What matters is the day after. When we will have to return to normal life. Will there be any changes then. I don’t want you to remember these days, you know, like - oh, we were young, it was beautiful. Remember that our basic message is: We are allowed to think about alternatives. The rule is broken. We do not live in the best possible world. But there is a long road ahead. There are truly difficult questions that confront us. We know what we do not want. But what do we want? What social organization can replace capitalism? What type of new leaders do we want?
Remember: the problem is not corruption or greed. The problem is the system that pushes you to give up. Beware not only of the enemies. But also of false friends who are already working to dilute this process. In the same way you get coffee without caffeine, beer without alcohol, ice cream without fat. They will try to make this into a harmless moral protest. They think (??? unintelligible). But the reason we are here is that we have enough of the world where to recycle coke cans…
Part Two
….Starbucks cappuccino. Where 1% goes to the world’s starving children. It is enough to make us feel good. After outsourcing work and torture. After the marriage agencies are now outsourcing even our love life, daily.
Mic check
We can see that for a long time we allowed our political engagement also to be outsourced. We want it back. We are not communists. If communism means the system which collapsed in 1990, remember that today those communists are the most efficient ruthless capitalists. In China today we have capitalism which is even more dynamic than your American capitalism but doesn’t need democracy. Which means when you criticize capitalism, don’t allow yourselves to be blackmailed that you are against democracy. The marriage between democracy and capitalism is over.
The change is possible. So, what do we consider today possible? Just follow the media. On the one hand in technology and sexuality everything seems to be possible. You can travel to the moon. You can become immortal by biogenetics. You can have sex with animals or whatever. But look at the fields of society and economy. There almost everything is considered impossible. You want to raise taxes a little bit for the rich, they tell you it’s impossible, we lose competitivitiy. You want more money for healthcare: they tell you impossible, this means a totalitarian state. There is something wrong in the world where you are promised to be immortal but cannot spend a little bit more for health care. Maybe that ??? set our priorities straight here. We don’t want higher standards of living. We want better standards of living. The only sense in which we are communists is that we care for the commons. The commons of nature. The commons of what is privatized by intellectual property. The commons of biogenetics. For this and only for this we should fight.
Communism failed absolutely. But the problems of the commons are here. They are telling you we are not Americans here. But the conservative fundamentalists who claim they are really American have to be reminded of something. What is Christianity? It’s the Holy Spirit. What’s the Holy Spirit? It’s an egalitarian community of believers who are linked by love for each other. And who only have their own freedom and responsibility to do it. In this sense the Holy Spirit is here now. And down there on Wall Street there are pagans who are worshipping blasphemous idols. So all we need is patience. The only thing I’m afraid of is that we will someday just go home and then we will meet once a year, drinking beer, and nostalgically remembering what a nice time we had here. Promise ourselves that this will not be the case.
We know that people often desire something but do not really want it. Don’t be afraid to really want what you desire. Thank you very much!
Last Note
This is only a part of the entire speech he gave today, and if it was recorded in its entirety we’d be very glad to have a copy for transcription purposes.
(via Today Liberty Plaza had a visit from Slavoj Zizek | OccupyWallSt.org)
As (disturbingly) usual, there is little, if anything, I disagree with here. Fucking Zizek.
(via sterwood & estersensehac)
gq:
Don’t Ask, Don’tTELLWith the formal end of DADT less than a month away, GQ’s Chris Heath spent six months assembling an oral-history-of-sorts about what it was like to be a gay man serving in the U.S. military. The resulting piece, which appears in our Sept 2011 issue and runs a bit longer at GQ.com, is funny, sad, horrifying and, above all, surprising. Life under DADT is both everything—and nothing—like one might expect. A brief sample below, from a heartbreaking section of the piece titled “Invisible Partners”:
Air Force #4 (senior airman, four years): “Right now our relationships don’t exist.”
Air Force #3: “I’ve had three deployments [while] with the same person. Every time it’s been ‘All right, see you later.’ All the spouses get together, do stuff. He’s just there by himself, fending for himself.”
Marines #2: “The relationship lasted for about four years, but I always felt like I was disrespecting him, to have to pretend he didn’t exist when I went to work. When I got deployed, he was there with my family when I left. It kind of sucked—to shake his hand and a little pat on the back and ‘I’ll see you when I see you’ kind of thing. And when you’re getting ready to come back, the spouses were getting classes—here’s how you welcome your Marine back into the family—and my boyfriend didn’t get any of that. I had a really hard time adjusting to being home. We tried to make it work for a year but he was getting more and more paranoid about people finding out about us. It killed me that he felt that way because of me. I don’t think we ever really had a chance, ultimately.”
Air Force #3: “When I was deployed, every Sunday we would sit down on opposite sides of the world and we would each order a pizza and we would watch a movie together over Skype. We weren’t doing anything bad except trying to spend some time together. But there was no ‘I love you.’ Certainly nothing sexual, or anything like what some straight guys do over Skype.”
Navy #2 (captain, twenty years): “Personally, I haven’t had a lot of struggles. The hardest thing that I faced was about eight years ago. I was dating somebody for about two years who had gotten out of the army. He was HIV positive, and I didn’t know that, and he ended up dying—it just happened very quickly. I am not positive, luckily. So I had a lot of difficulties grasping with that personally, dealing with his death, and I had to take time off work, but still not tell them. I couldn’t go to the doctor or the psychologist. There wasn’t really anybody to talk to.”
Really want to get this issue of GQ, now! But then I’ll just obsess over how unfashionable my wardrobe is, boo. :[
(via rosalarian & gq)
IGT should definitely get into voting machines. I can’t support this idea enough. The minds in that company and the ethics behind their products are excellent. Having grown up in Nevada, I fully push for a merge of industries. Especially if they can make the machines “I Dream of Jeannie” themed and give a pull handle and jingle to your ballot.
Free beer as you vote.