Oakland Cop Fires Rubber Bullet At Videographer

November 7, 2011 @ 6:04AM

Oakland Cop Fires Rubber Bullet At Videographer

Topics
News

An Oakland police officer fired a rubber bullet at a man who was video recording a line of cops during an Occupy Oakland protest, proving once again they will stop at nothing to escalate tensions with the activists.

Scott Campbell, the man who was shot, uploaded the video to Youtube on Saturday, but the incident took place early Thursday morning after the general strike Wednesday.

The cop who fired the rubber bullet was one of many dressed in indistinguishable riot gear.

Chances are, black tape was covering his name tag.

Unfortunately, this type of behavior is not isolated.

In 2003, police in Miami fired several rubber bullets at an attorney, then laughed abou it as you can see in the video below.

In recent weeks, the Oakland Police Department has been exposed as one of the most violent and aggressive in the nation.

It has essentially declared a full-out war on Occupy Oakland protesters, using flash grenades, tear gas and rubber bullets on protesters.

Two Iraq veterans have been hospitalized as a result of their actions - or at least by the actions of police departments working under their authority during a mutual aid effort.

Because these officers have proven to do all they can to make themselves indistinguishable to one another, it's impossible to tell which agency is doing what during the heavy-handed crackdown against protesters.

On Saturday, the Oakland Police Department settled a lawsuit where a man ended up with broken teeth during a traffic stop.

The city of Oakland has agreed to pay $22,000 to a man who said several police officers broke his teeth while arresting him after a traffic stop.

Desmond Dickerson of Hayward was stopped by Officer Jason Mitchell for running a stop sign and playing music too loud at 60th and Avenal avenues Jan. 30, 2008, city officials said.

Dickerson, then 24, was "yanked out of the car" by at least one officer who handcuffed him and slammed his head into the hood of his car and the ground, according to the suit Dickerson filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco last year.

The impact broke two teeth and cut his lip in two places, Dickerson said.

Comments

Bergman

6 months ago

Police press releases always play up how non-lethal and ultimately harmless all their crowd control tools are. They talk about how they simply give a shock to the system, to jolt someone out of a self-destructive course of behavior. But you can see how dangerous they truly consider such tools to be if you try to use one on a cop.

A cop responds to someone aiming an airgun (and even if you use the same model airgun they themselves use, the reaction is the same) loaded with pepper balls or rubber bullets the same as they treat a TASER or a can of pepper spray being aimed at them. They draw their firearm and either threaten to shoot or simply start shooting.

If those "non-lethal" implements really are so harmless that their use as a compliance-enforcing tool isn't torture or excessive force, why do police respond to such "harmless" things with deadly force?

DavidForthoffer

5 months ago

On average, one person DIES every 400 TASER incidents. That is a FAR HIGHER death rate than any occupation (e.g., deep sea commercial fishing in Alaskan waters).

It is deceptive to claim that TASERs are non-lethal.

nigmalg

6 months ago

Well that certainly would have been awkward if they shot at a CNN news anchor too, huh?

While it might put a cramp in their authoritarian style, or asking too much from these meat-for-brains individuals, officers do have the ability to differentiate between rioters and onlookers. especially when nobody is rushing the line of law enforcement.

Just like they have exceptions for

1.) Professional Media
2.) Residents
3.) Business owners and/or customers

Mind if you if the person filming has spray paint in his other hand, or is known for throwing his camera at police it might be justified to arrest him.

HONORYOUROATH

6 months ago

The government does not have the authority to declare the first amendment unauthorized therefore their orders are unlawful.We are sovereign citizens.Our rights are God given and do not exist at the pleasure of the state.I do not need a piece of paper (the constitution) to tell me what my rights are and no laws written on a piece of paper can take my rights away.The only thing that can take my rights away are force and whether or not I fight or submit to that force.These people are fighting and God Bless them!

It amazes me the apologist knee jerk reaction in defending this police states tyrannical actions.We have our President and Secretary of State condemning foreign governments actions against their people but nothing is said about the actions of our thug cops here in America.

Norwegian Chap

6 months ago

While I agree with some of your sentiment (although not about God given rights, I tend to believe in natural rights, and the natural rights of man), don't compare US law enforcement and the Occupy movements to the uprisings in places like Egypt or Syria.

If that happened in Syria, the police would be firing live rounds. They would be using armored cars and tanks. And there wouldn't even be the slightest chance of due process or a fair trial. Not even the slightest, not a kind harted judge.

While the US jail system is degrading enough (it's a disgrace to be honest), it's no match for totalitarian Syria, or Egypt for that matter.

I share your sentiment, and believe police brutality is one of the most disgraceful crimes any nation embodies, from rape to murder. Because it's the violent instrument of the state itself breaking a law it is supposed to enforce.

But it cheapens the issue to talk about US cops like Syrian riot police. It's not true, and it doesn't help your argument.

HONORYOUROATH

6 months ago

Norwegian Chap,I'm glad we share sentiments on individual liberty and thanks for the response.But I think you should do a little more research on this American police state we are living in.Do you remember Wacohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmOBNnz9Wms,Ruby Ridgehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr94ELW701Q,or more recently the paramilitary raid on the LDS in Texas complete with Armored Personnel Carriers, and helicopters? You should check out Radly Balco's report on SWAT team raids.http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6476
Of course our police are not the same as Syrian police,but it's not to far a stretch to say they are comparable.God is the Creator and author of our rights.

Norwegian Chap

6 months ago

I'm well versed in those, yes. However, it's not really the same. And you know it.

The United States is not a police state as the police are limited from acting in a great number of cases by both constitutional law and/or federal, state and/or local statutory law. A police state has no such legal limits, and you know it.

The mantra that the US is a police state is old and stale, it's not been working since it grew to prominence during the 1960s protest movements, and it's even less relevant today. It's also a bad way of getting people to listen to you.

It just does not help your argument, and repeating it will only make people grow tired of listening.

The revolutionaries of the 70s, the left, were brilliant with propaganda. People wanting much of the same changes these days tend to be less good.

dave

6 months ago

Norwegian Chap

Are you also versed in the Columbine Mine Massacre of 1927 where unarmed workers were fired on with machine guns?

How about the Lattimer Massacre where workers were shot in the back while retreating?

Let's not forget the Bay View Rolling Mills Massacre where the workers wanted a 8 hour day and Republican governor Rusk gave orders to "shoot to kill"

There are many more examples but I'll throw in one more where AIR POWER was used against workers to drop bombs but in this case the workers were armed. This was the Battle of Blair Mountain, West Virginia.

You need to study the conversion from Constitutional republic to tyrannical plutocracy. It started about 1880. The federal reserve act of 1913 and creation of the CIA in 1947 serve as the main crossover points were private plutocrats have access to government power to be used for their own tyranny.

Norwegian Chap

6 months ago

The acts you speak of happened 80 years ago. And they fit into their time. Heck, even in Sweden, strikers were shot. Not by the police but by the army. Five workers were killed by army bullets, some of which came from a machine gun.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85dalen_riots

The times you refer to are very different to the times we live in today. They bare no relevance to your argument, I'm forced to conclude.

Edit: As for the CIA, the same act that established it does, if I am not mistaken, make it very clear that the CIA can not operate on US soil. To my knowledge, they have not done so yet either. They don't need to, the FBI deals with domestic issues, the CIA deal with foreign issues.

Damon

6 months ago

No doubt you're just guessing all that to be true.
You don't know any order was given, and you assume the protesters are committed an unlawful act, or did a lawful act in a violent, boisterous, or tumultuous manner.

Damon

6 months ago

Just watched an interview with Scott Campbell on Countdown.

He says there was no riot and no order to disperse.

He said that what you see in the video is all there was. There were a few protesters behind him. Nothing happening at the time; just people standing around. No riot.

He approached the cops to videotape them, and they told him to move back. He moved back and asked if where he was was okay. They didn't answer, so he assumed it was okay. He began videotaping, and they fired without warning.

Damon

6 months ago

I see. Your "facts" don't agree, so the victim is a liar. Spoken like a true cop.

Damon

6 months ago

I have a statement from the victim, whom I tend to believe over the Oakland Police, who have a long, storied record going back decades. And, there continues to be a broken command structure in that department, because they don't have a real chief or mayor that knows how to oversee a police department. They have too many priors. If they told me the sky was blue, I'd have doubts.

This kid, though, I believe.

So, go ahead, assume a bunch of crap, believe hearsay from press reports, dismiss the victim's statement, swallow what those serial liars the Oakland PD give you, and call him a liar.

http://current.com/shows/countdown/videos/occupy-oakland-scott-campbell-...

Damon

6 months ago

Timeline:

So, priors don't matter in a criminal investigation? You just make this stuff up as you go, do you?

There may or may not have been an order to disperse. For some reason, you choose to believe a blogger rather than the victim. The kid said he didn't hear it, so maybe he simply didn't hear it.

Campbell says was ordered to move back, not move on. He did, and asked if it was okay where he was. (A reasonable response if you ask me -- I've been told a number of times to move by LAPD and LA Sheriff's Deputies. I've responded just as Scott did-- asked the same question, and gotten verbal responses as to whether I was okay or not.)

He began videotaping.

Then, the out of policy assault with a deadly weapon occurred.

We don't know if he filed a complaint. I'm sure the Lawyer's Guild and others will be filing lawsuits and complaints, and the people of Oakland will pay. Lots of money to be made.

I have absolutely no idea what IX(A)(5) has to do with it.

Damon

6 months ago

I don't need to do any homework. He has his own video, clearly showing what happened.

Jonathan Roskos

6 months ago

I can't find any mention of Scott Campbell in the articles Reuters and KCTV5 links.

http://youtu.be/0mFyQL_g1xs

nigmalg

6 months ago

It's not "non-lethal" it's "less-lethal". That distinction is important. Good post by the way.

Kyle