(no subject)

[theweaselking]

Utah National Guard break up a legal, insured rave - and when the crowd do not resist and begin to disperse quietly, they release dogs, fire tear gas, and begin beating anyone taking pictures and confiscating the cameras.

They didn't get them all.

Hey, look, eyewitness accounts and the official version in the Salt Lake City Tribune, courtesy of (surprise, surprise) Fox News Channel 13.

But, hey, just watch the video.

Comments

Recompressed the video, plus utah contacts

[(Anonymous)]

Hi all,

I've re-compressed the video as a smaller mpg and hosted it on my own site, along with contact information for utah decision makers in case anyone else wants to make a stink.

My feeling is that if the Utah County Sheriff's Office knows that the World Is Watching, they (and other rural law enforcement jurisdictions) won't try to pull this sort of backwoods heavy-handed crap.

http://www.queviva.net/utah2005

[speck.livejournal.com]

:(

[unnamed525.livejournal.com]

Ah ... the smell of fascism in the afternoon ...

[aimisdirty.livejournal.com]

Big deal. Based on the footage shown? Big deal.

Any reason for the people being restrained was not caught on camera. The camera turned, and they were being restrained. More than likely, they took a shot at the guys with guns. Legal and insured means nothing, if you start passing around drugs.

I know folks who go to those types of raves. They're the types who claim 'police brutality', if a cop gives them a passing glance. I would call bullshit on 95 percent of the stories coming out of this. Excessive? Maybe. But people who are into drugs are criminals. And many of these people frequent raves. A show of force to discourage criminals from being violent and taking lives is perfectly acceptable.

[surrealestate22.livejournal.com]

i've been to plenty of illegal parties that get shut down (it happens quite often, but hey, whatever) for one reason or another, and let me tell you it NEVER takes assualt rifles, swat gear, and tear gas. you don't see them swarming the red zone for coke or rock concerts for pot...

[aimisdirty.livejournal.com]

Why? Is it unreasonable to expect that criminals (drug users) might be armed, and use force to try and escape capture? When law enforcement or military (referring to the military as it is being used in a domestic capacity - not an actual military operation) raid a place, they do it with overwhelming force and speed. They do that so that they DON'T have to resort to lethal force - by giving the criminals an opportunity to react.

They shout. They put people on the ground and in handcuffs. It is a valid psychological tactic to keep things as non-lethal as possible. It's unfortunate that some innocent citizens got caught up in the raid. But I'm fairly certain that almost everyone there was likely aware of illegal activities that might have been going on.

[surrealestate22.livejournal.com]

no point in repeating myself. see above.

[a-invi.livejournal.com]

Where is your evidence that anyone at the rave other than the cops were being violent? There is none.
I happen to go to raves, occasinally, and i'd say that the vast majority of people who frequent such places are going to dance and have a good time, peacefully and in harmony with naturee and their fellows.
Man, that is such a blight. Gotta wipe it out.
I've also had friends who were police officers. We are all part of the same human family.
Oh and that dreaded marijuana. grows in ditches, and... causes the munchies?? Also the study that claimed ecstacy causes holes in the brain has been withdrawn. Of course that didn't get the mass coverage of the original, faulty story. i'm sure federally approved stuff like vioxx and aspartame is much better for ya. (because the tv tells you so)
But yeah these kids are a real threat to our sovereignity. We should lock up anyone who likes to liquid to techno. Gosh-durned freeks. They are gonna bring the walls of tha yoonaverse itsalf down apon us.
...If you jaywalk or go 5 over you are technically a criminal too. i'm sure that despite your best intentions, you too, my friend, have broken a law or two in your existence.
..As if a criminal who is set on taking a life would be dissuaded by seeing some cops bust up an outdoor dance party. Oh yEah Man,sure...!

[aimisdirty.livejournal.com]

Read some material regarding LE tactics (from a reputable source, please). Then come back and try again. You don't know what you're talking about.

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

> But people who are into drugs are criminals. And many of these people
> frequent raves. A show of force to discourage criminals from being violent
> and taking lives is perfectly acceptable.

When was the last time you saw a violent *raver*? When was the last time you heard of a 50 Cent concert being raided, when they *know* a good chunk of the audience is high, dealing, *and* armed?

And when the official story contains verifiable falsehoods (we didn't swear at them, nobody was kicked, the owner of the property called to report 400 trespassers) and includes such gems as arresting the security guards for confiscating drugs and confiscating cameras belonging to people who have not committed crimes - and beating the people who use them?

No, they needed to clobber the DANGEROUS harmless unarmed people to get a couple of people who might be criminals - and take all the cameras watching.

[a-invi.livejournal.com]

That is a really cool icon ;:)

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

I'm not questioning that what they did was good tactics, given the desire to raid a rave and arrest dangerous criminals.

I'm questioning the assertion that there *were* dangerous criminals, that the raid was planned and executed based on a real belief that there were dangerous criminals, that the force was justified and only applied to people resisting - and when the official story contains verifiable lies AND there's evidence that the cops did further illegal things to try to make sure their story was the only one, I feel that this questioning is entirely justified.

[aimisdirty.livejournal.com]

Where is your evidence that the police used unreasonable force? There is none. They were not running around beating people. They were using reasonable restraint techniques. Also, there was no plan to use tear gas - as none of them are wearing gas masks or other protective gear. Shoving a cop is violence. Spitting on them, tossing stuff on them, etc, are all considered assault. Whenever a group of people claiming that they are assembling in 'peace and harmony' get together, you can bet that there are idiots amongst them who will engage in those types of activities.

The drugs are illegal, period. If you use them, you're a criminal. If you traffic in them, you're trash. Pot is harmless? Right. So then why are there so many gang killings and law enforcement killings connected to it? Can you get me drunk by having a beer while standing next to me? Because potheads smoking up can potentially get me high. That is assault, as far as I'm concerned I'll make you a deal: You can be a pothead, and I can punch you in the head in self-defense if I so much as smell it on you. Fair?

Ooooh. Ecstasy is harmless! Hyperthermia isn't a familiar term for you, is it? Neurotoxicity of the drug hasn't been proven, or disproven. But all signs of testing in non-human primates indicates that the drug is extremely unsafe.

Of course I have broken laws. But there are different classes of laws for a reason. Taking drugs is a serious offence, because you put not only yourself but others at risk as well. Drugs are also the direct cause of many violent acts. Home invasions to steal drugs and other items to pay for their drugs. I've seen potheads and people who take ecstasy regularly. They aren't all there.

Criminals panic. If they see the police coming and they feel cornered, they will likely take rash actions. If the LE unit comes in hard and fast and takes people down before they have the chance to react, that threat is inherently reduced. Criminals don't normally go after police officers. But if they feel that they'll go to jail for a good long time, they will often try and fight or run. You're advocating that LE units should be nice and fluffy and friendly to criminals, just on the off chance that they aren't violent? Convenient, since it isn't your life on the line every day, working for a drug interdiction team.

[aimisdirty.livejournal.com]

It isn't questioning. It is a series of accusations. Drugs are at raves. People who are involved with drugs are known to be violent. That is the point. You don't KNOW until you get there and actually respond. And you don't want to give people a chance to respond when there is a good potential for violence.

[aimisdirty.livejournal.com]

When someone is high on drugs (I don't care whether it is pot or ecstasy), they aren't thinking straight. Raves (not all, I'm sure - but enough) have a lot of drug dealing going on. If you can nail the dealers to the wall and track down the suppliers, then excellent.

I look at this like I look at the techniques used for hostage rescue. You restrain the hostages (innocent ravers), because you don't know if the HT(s) (drug dealers) are trying to conceal themselves amongst the crowd. Until people are searched and cleared, the area and people in it remain a threat.

How do you know that they're harmless? It looked like a fairly large crowd, in low-light conditions. Could you see if one of them was carrying a pistol? What about any of them? I sure wouldn't be able to.

Obviously, something caused this raid to be initiated. You don't assemble expensive tactical operations for kicks. So randomly going in to concerts is a poor comparison. I'm sure that if they had sufficient probable cause, or a specific tip to go on, that they'd do it. And rightfully so.

And again, I didn't see much clobbering going on. I saw people resisting arrest, which required multiple personnel to help restrain them with minimal force. And they weren't going after large groups. They were going after specific individuals, suggesting strongly that those individuals had done something to deserve it. Assault, blatantly having drugs displayed, etc.

[sadslacker.livejournal.com]

I notice in your replies, you seem to avoid discussing the illegal suppression of filming and the illegal confiscation of said film. Police have no right to interfere with the citizens not directly under arrest if they choose to stand off to the side and film. It is not obstructing justice in any way(the excuse I've personally heard a columbus cop try to use) nor does it violate any rights of those being arrested. The only legal reason they could have to confiscate film is if it is possible that it could be evidence and only if the filmer was being arrested. I sincerely doubt that anyone was selling drugs while they were pinned to the ground, so the footage really can't be seen that way as well.
The very fact that the authorities in this situation attempted to suppress footage that would stand legally in court as evidence of the arrests themselves leads me to distrust their motives, techniques and execution. If what they are doing was legal and proper, taping it would do nothing but further protect them if any of the arrestees complained after the fact of wrong doing. Much like the surveillance cameras placed in cruisers now.

[a-invi.livejournal.com]

You're blaming gang killings on pot? Wow.
You obviosly are basing all your beliefs upon what you see on your filtered news networks instead of personal experience. Anyone who knows anything will tell you that pot mellows people out. There are many much, much more hazardous drugs, legal through prescription, that cause much worse distortions of reality. Alcohol is responsible for millions of deaths yet is still legal. WHy the double standards.
Because the drug war is a front.
All the problems you speak of, which are valid, are easier solved with legalisation. It's been proven time and time again. If you do your research, you will find that our country was founded on hemp and ganja was demonized by government propoganda at the behe$t of big biusiness (namely duPont) because of a bill that was going to transfer all paper production to hemp (more economical in many ways) thereby rendering duPont's treepaper business passe.
And i still don't buy that some ecstacy dealer is going to confront a slew of officers with violence. What's with the preemptive strike mindset everywhere? (do before done unto)

[aimisdirty.livejournal.com]

Bullshit. I'm basing it on the firsthand experience of a former DEA drug interdiction officer, who has been shot at more times than you can imagine. The guy is now a tactical firearms instructor, and has far more insight into this particular topic than anyone else I have seen comment on it.

There are numerous home invasions, killings, and violence when it comes to pot. Organized crime is so heavily involved in it, that it isn't funny. I don't buy the whole conspiracy thing when it comes to pot.

I agree that alcohol abuse and other forms of drug abuse are a problem. But they are legal. Once pot is legal, talk to me again. As far as I'm concerned, people who use illegal drugs are criminals. People who traffic in them are worse. I've seen what 'harmless' drugs like pot and ecstasy do to people. The 'harmless' arguement is BS.

You don't buy that a criminal who is happily breaking some fairly stringent laws might carry a weapon and use it to try and evade capture? Really? Because it happens with drug dealers and LEOs during raids all of the time. If it were a pre-emptive strike, they'd put bullets in peoples heads. Here, they are just taking precautions.

[aimisdirty.livejournal.com]

I agree with you. Folks are allowed to film if they want and aren't interfering. But as you mentioned, the videos likely contain footage of illegal activities. And actually, they /can/ seize that type of thing without arresting the person carrying it. At least in Canada. There merely needs to be reason to believe that the footage contains illegal activities that are related to the investigation.

[a-invi.livejournal.com]

Ok you are talking about high level dealers, not your average joe who smokes weed (most americans have tried pot).
I don't disagree with you that these things happen, but i don't think there source is the plant. I think part of the problem is the fact that the immense depth and breadth of the black market drug trade is allowed to continue, illegal and thus hidden from scrutiny. If hemp were legalised and sold by prescription like anything else, or allowed to be grown for personal use with a permit as was done in california and elsewhere, there would be no black market pot trade. The current method does not solve the problem, only clears away with temporary (or permamnet) retribution which only makes things worse overall.
Now why why would spome entity go and do such a thing, unless the had a stake in that very supposed enemy (in actuality useful tool)
Speaking of tools, hemp is an excellent one for many causes. It is not only harmless, it is useful in practical, non-reality-disorting ways. Imagine that!
The U.S. Government
distributed 400,000 pounds of cannabis seeds to American farmers in 1942 to aid the war effort.
http://www.crrh.org/cannabis/industrial.html

[a-invi.livejournal.com]

People who are not involved with drugs are known to be violent

[(Anonymous)]

One of the promoters friends (a very small female) was attacked by one of the police dogs. As she struggled to get away from it, the police tackled her. 3 grown men proceeded to KICK HER IN THE STOMACH.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/22/13030/7546

[sadslacker.livejournal.com]

Here in the states, unless you are arresting the filmer or have a specific court order for seizure, you cannot seize private property. A nuance you are probably missing being from Canada, that leads many to trust the motives of this police action is the fact that this happened in Utah. Utah as a state is as close to a state run theocracy as you can find in the US. Mormons hold seats at every level of government and can/do attempt to legislate their morality into state and local law. If there is any doubt of this, a quick google search on the topics, Utah+mormons should point fingers to info quickly.
The fact that someone felt it necessary to send in National Guard units to raid a party is disturbing. Those are soldiers, not peace officers and are not properly trained to deal with civilians. One weekend a month and three weeks in the summer does not make a person properly trained to deal with 17 year old panicky teenagers whilst carrying a automatic weapon. This smacks more of a scare tactic to keep those "rebellious, godless youth" too afraid to party.

[sadslacker.livejournal.com]

I did some checking, the news report is a definite farce. Here is the booking records for the 24 hour period that the rave occured during. Notice the lack of weapons charges or even rampant drugs charges for that matter? This was certainly a dangerous event that required armed troops to raid.
http://www.co.utah.ut.us/Dept/Sheriff/BookingDateSearchResults.asp?date=08212005&Submit2=Submit

[aimisdirty.livejournal.com]

*Laughs*

Yeah, dude. That's an unbiased 'article', alright. And it is full of bullshit. In groups of one or two? Yeah, I could see some inappropriate conduct from the police. 90 LE professionals, many with tactical training? Bullshit. The promoter is spewing bullshit from his mouth, because he knows that people will buy into it. I might have had /some/ sympathy for him before this.