No. Seriously. Liberal World intrudes: LAPD officer’s head injury raises debate over helmet use
When local protests broke out this month over the Israeli invasion of Gaza, Los Angeles Police Department officials decided that officers at the scene should not immediately wear their riot helmets out of concerns the gear might escalate passions among the demonstrators.
Fuzzy headed liberal thought. Essentially blaming the officers apparel for the fact that these pro-Palestinian/Hamas/terrorist demonstrators, quite a few who are Democrat voters, are violent nutjobs.
But the decision has now generated controversy after a protester hit an officer with the wood post of a protest sign during a march in Westwood.
The unidentified Hollywood Division officer, who was not wearing a helmet, crumpled to the ground and was later taken to a hospital after complaining of dizziness.
He is expected to make a full recovery, but the incident has drawn complaints from other officers and the Police Protective League about the LAPD’s policy of limiting when tactical gear is worn during demonstrations.
It’s good that he is going to make a full recovery, but, should he have even been in the situation in the first place? Especially when the marchers were in favor of terrorists?
Some argue that for those exercising free speech, the gear is intimidating and anxiety provoking, suggestive that police are poised and primed to battle it out with the crowd.
The police are poised and primed, since most of these types are marches are by terrorist supporters and/or the unhinged Left. The very few Conservative marches there might ever be will be peaceful.
Top LAPD commanders said their main priority is the safety of officers. But they argue that the types of tactics officers use for crowd control should be based on the individual situation. Many situations require tactical gear, they said, while others might not.
Exactly. If it is a Gay Pride parade, I doubt the helmets are needed. If it is a pro-Palestinian, yeah. Necessary.
