There are many. Police can use violence to enforce compliance, prevent harm, and other reasons. Protests and protestors have to follow the law, and they don’t always.
If you listen to the video, there‘s a German police voice instructing the protestors to follow police instructions. Sadly the video is cut in a way, where you don’t get to hear the actual police instructions.
There is no context, so it’s impossible to say if this was legal or not.
Well, actually there is in a self-defense scenario.
So the question of the thread starter is legit: what happened in the seconds before the punch?
Video cutting looks very selective to me. Ragebait instead of solid police violence documentation one could work with…
Police is required to use the minimum necessary force to an eminent attack . There is no way you can convince me that the punch was the right actions. Simply restraining her would have worked
And without context we will never know if this is the case or not.
I read the reports on the event. This in general has not been a peaceful anti-war demonstration. There have been attacks on policemen, one got hurt.
The video could be connected to that.
And without further context and the deliberate video cutting, every relevant party (meaning press and state prosecutor) will assume that.
So: Where is the full video, so that this action may have actual consequences?
You can easily know when a video is off. With you same dumb logic, we don’t have context about why the policeman was hurt. There is justification to punch the protestor just like there is no justification for that policeman to be hurt. I always hear about that context bs only when it comes to gaza and when a context is provided showing the anti genocide person is not at fault. No excuses are provided and the people like you vanish
Part of the problems is, they have not been anti-genocide persons. The date of demonstration might give a hint what they have been celebrating instead.
An actual anti-genocide demo a few days later would not have been forbidden in the first place and also would have had a positive effect.
This demonstration as it was organized and happened on the other hand was a real field day for right-wing media and significantly fueled anti-palestinian ressentiments.
I hate that.
You country is famous for police brutality and support for the settler colonialism in Palestine. It is sad that you are in complete denial . Those guys are definitely anti genocide and you are definitely a facism supporter
Maybe decorating the announcement flyers for an october 7th event with pictures of paragliders doesn’t give anti-genocide-vibes to most people…
And this has nothing to do with fascism.
Despite being not fond of this particular event, I am actively trying to find enough evidence to perhaps prosecute this policeman’s actions.
What are you doing to actually help here?
Are you fucking kidding me? If felt endangered by her he wouldn’t have punched her and just left, he’d have arrested her or left the situation entirely. Ergo it’s not self-defense, ergo he had no reason to legal or moral reason to punch her. The fact that he just left means he could’ve done that from the start.
So if this is the case, why is the video cut in such a selective way?
And why is she tackled down by half a dozen policemen afterwards?
I read the reports on the event. They let the majority of the people just go home after some time. With the exception of those that commited criminal offenses. Like attacking policemen.
We just don’t know, because a crucial part of the video is missing.
Find me the rest and I will happily personnaly alert the state attorney to this incident.
But in this form, the evidence just is too thin.
So, anyone: Give me more! I want the raw data!
I just explained why we can make a judgement without the context and you’re there not addressing anything I said. You haven’t shown why we need to care about the context.
So if this is the case, why is the video cut in such a selective way?
And why is she tackled down by half a dozen policemen afterwards?
Don’t know, don’t care. Probably to declutter the video. Again, the only thing justifying such an action would be a credible threat of death or injury that he couldn’t disengage from, and we can plainly see that was not the case, because we literally see him fucking disengaging right after. Context is only necessary to resolve ambiguity, and there is nothing ambiguous here.
With the exception of those that commited criminal offenses. Like attacking policemen.
Well forgive me for not trusting the words of riot police out of all people.
But in this form, the evidence just is too thin.
We can see an instance of assault by a police officer on video but it’s “just too thin,” right…
You haven’t shown why we need to care about the context.
Why we need to care:
With context, the video might be sufficient to raise a charge against the policemen by the state prosecution.
Without, it is basically worthless.
They let the majority of the people just go home after some time. With the exception of those that commited criminal offenses. Like attacking policemen.
If a cop gets a hangnail while beating a protestor, they’ll say it was the protestor’s fault and charge them with assaulting an officer. They have charged people for breaking a cop’s hand, after the cop punched them in the face. I remember when I heard an old retired cop say that he and his buddies would knee someone in the balls, then refer to it in their reports as “the suspect violently groined my knee”.
deleted by creator
There is literally no legal reason for a policeman to punch a protestor
what about self defense, protecting others, enforcing the law, etc? stop talking about topics you know nothing about
Removed by mod
I was talking generally, not case-specific
There are many. Police can use violence to enforce compliance, prevent harm, and other reasons. Protests and protestors have to follow the law, and they don’t always.
If you listen to the video, there‘s a German police voice instructing the protestors to follow police instructions. Sadly the video is cut in a way, where you don’t get to hear the actual police instructions.
There is no context, so it’s impossible to say if this was legal or not.
Nobody is arguing that force cannot be used. It should simply not be excessive, and punching is clearly is
You were literally making that argument, just now! You deeply unserious person.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Well, actually there is in a self-defense scenario.
So the question of the thread starter is legit: what happened in the seconds before the punch?
Video cutting looks very selective to me. Ragebait instead of solid police violence documentation one could work with…
Police is required to use the minimum necessary force to an eminent attack . There is no way you can convince me that the punch was the right actions. Simply restraining her would have worked
And without context we will never know if this is the case or not.
I read the reports on the event. This in general has not been a peaceful anti-war demonstration. There have been attacks on policemen, one got hurt.
The video could be connected to that.
And without further context and the deliberate video cutting, every relevant party (meaning press and state prosecutor) will assume that.
So: Where is the full video, so that this action may have actual consequences?
You can easily know when a video is off. With you same dumb logic, we don’t have context about why the policeman was hurt. There is justification to punch the protestor just like there is no justification for that policeman to be hurt. I always hear about that context bs only when it comes to gaza and when a context is provided showing the anti genocide person is not at fault. No excuses are provided and the people like you vanish
Part of the problems is, they have not been anti-genocide persons. The date of demonstration might give a hint what they have been celebrating instead.
An actual anti-genocide demo a few days later would not have been forbidden in the first place and also would have had a positive effect.
This demonstration as it was organized and happened on the other hand was a real field day for right-wing media and significantly fueled anti-palestinian ressentiments.
I hate that.
You country is famous for police brutality and support for the settler colonialism in Palestine. It is sad that you are in complete denial . Those guys are definitely anti genocide and you are definitely a facism supporter
Maybe decorating the announcement flyers for an october 7th event with pictures of paragliders doesn’t give anti-genocide-vibes to most people…
And this has nothing to do with fascism.
Despite being not fond of this particular event, I am actively trying to find enough evidence to perhaps prosecute this policeman’s actions.
What are you doing to actually help here?
Are you fucking kidding me? If felt endangered by her he wouldn’t have punched her and just left, he’d have arrested her or left the situation entirely. Ergo it’s not self-defense, ergo he had no reason to legal or moral reason to punch her. The fact that he just left means he could’ve done that from the start.
So if this is the case, why is the video cut in such a selective way?
And why is she tackled down by half a dozen policemen afterwards?
I read the reports on the event. They let the majority of the people just go home after some time. With the exception of those that commited criminal offenses. Like attacking policemen.
We just don’t know, because a crucial part of the video is missing.
Find me the rest and I will happily personnaly alert the state attorney to this incident.
But in this form, the evidence just is too thin.
So, anyone: Give me more! I want the raw data!
I just explained why we can make a judgement without the context and you’re there not addressing anything I said. You haven’t shown why we need to care about the context.
Don’t know, don’t care. Probably to declutter the video. Again, the only thing justifying such an action would be a credible threat of death or injury that he couldn’t disengage from, and we can plainly see that was not the case, because we literally see him fucking disengaging right after. Context is only necessary to resolve ambiguity, and there is nothing ambiguous here.
Well forgive me for not trusting the words of riot police out of all people.
We can see an instance of assault by a police officer on video but it’s “just too thin,” right…
Why we need to care:
With context, the video might be sufficient to raise a charge against the policemen by the state prosecution.
Without, it is basically worthless.
If a cop gets a hangnail while beating a protestor, they’ll say it was the protestor’s fault and charge them with assaulting an officer. They have charged people for breaking a cop’s hand, after the cop punched them in the face. I remember when I heard an old retired cop say that he and his buddies would knee someone in the balls, then refer to it in their reports as “the suspect violently groined my knee”.
Then showing the context shouldnt be an issue then, should it?
Yes and no amount of context will justify the punch
But perhaps justify an actual prosecution and consequences. That’s the crucial point here.
Without, state attorney will just believe the policeman’s statement and close the case.
Don’t you see the issue. Police are believed no matter what till there is evidence other. No wonder why Germany is famous for it
My point exactly.
So, dear video uploader:
Give us this evidence!
Policemen give us the evidence that your punching was justifiable
l get the impression, that you don’t actually want to change something, but just like to be enraged.
This is sad.
Removed by mod
Woman comes at you with a knife, and you’ll just take the stabbing to be… polite? lol Cool Story, bro beans.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod