DeSquirrel
|
posted on August 28, 2002 12:34:21 PM new
Capsaicin/Capsicin
These are part of a family of long chain organic molecules. They are what make "hot" peppers hot to the taste.
"Pepperspray" was developed for use by police as opposed to what they previously used: ie: "tear" gas originally developed for military use and very nasty indeed.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on August 28, 2002 12:54:37 PM new
Yes, pepper spray is especially lethal to both adults and children who have asthma or bronchitis - and also to people who are under the influence of drugs. I was really surprised to read that the police officers in Portland used it with such wild abandon. If that allegation is true and the spray is not being used as directed, I think that pepper spray should be banned.
I also wonder why parents would take children to such an event. As an explanation, the article suggested that violence was not anticipated. What a dangerously naive assumption!
Helen
|
aposter
|
posted on August 28, 2002 01:09:01 PM new
Capsaicin/Capsicin
I know what that is, my Dad uses a natural
Capsicin cream to relieve a very nasty case of shingles. The heat relaxes the muscles I believe.
I just wondered if anyone knows what the other chemicals are.
[ edited by aposter on Aug 28, 2002 02:36 PM ]
|
Helenjw
|
posted on August 28, 2002 01:25:05 PM new
http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/24/09/allen2409.html
Those claims may not be all that reliable. In a 1995 report, the Army warned that "manufacturer literature ... is often misleading, incomplete or inaccurate," and in some cases "manufacturers refuse to disclose the components of [their] products." Indeed, Def-Tec, one of the country's largest suppliers, declines to release information on concentration of pepper and tearing chemicals in its dozen products deployed in Seattle. It also won't disclose which solvents or propellants were incorporated, except to refer to three generic product-safety data sheets that the Seattle police are required by law to release.
When it comes to health aspects of any of the chemical weapons, used either singly or in combination, Downs notes, "there is almost no independent research going on." "They all spin the data," adds one federal official. "One manufacturer will say the other's is toxic, but mine is just fine."
|
DeSquirrel
|
posted on August 28, 2002 01:36:35 PM new
Ok, so we're all agreed:
From now on we gotta shoot 'em.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on August 28, 2002 01:44:01 PM new
Nonsense...
As one doctor said, there is no justification for use of toxic and potentially cancer-causing agents for crowd control for civil disobedience. There are better ways to deal with political speech."
|
aposter
|
posted on August 28, 2002 01:55:49 PM new
Helen, I just got the same thing while searching. One company told how it was safer and non-toxic, but never said what the carrier was.
Desquirrel: From now on we gotta shoot 'em.
Are those the only two ways? Spraying or Shooting? Geesh. How about listening to them for a change?
The last protest I was in the government moved their meeting site at the last minute so fewer protesters showed up, had carefully organized time slots so the food industry &
government agencies got their say and left little time for "little people" to comment.
[ edited by aposter on Aug 28, 2002 01:55 PM ]
|
aposter
|
posted on August 28, 2002 02:37:08 PM new
http://www.protectiondepot.com/Propellant.htm
Our Propellant
Dymel 134a/P is a liquid propellant and mixes well with the total formula of the active ingredient.
============
www.dupont.com/dymel/pharma/productinfo2.html
DuPont Chemical
The chemical composition of Dymel® 134a/P is 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFA-134a) and the pharmaceutical grade has stringent purity and handling requirements.
(used in inhalers for asthma apparently)
==============
This is from the U.K:
http://physchem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/TE/1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane.html
Safety data for 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane
Stability
Stable. May cause damage to the atmosphere. Incompatible with active metals, strong oxidizing agents.
Toxicology
May be harmful by inhalation. Chronic exposure may cause reproductive damage. High levels may cause CNS damage. Contact with liquid may cause skin burns. Asphyxiant at high concentration.
|
nycyn
|
posted on August 28, 2002 02:39:57 PM new
>>I also wonder why parents would take children to such an event. As an explanation, the article suggested that violence was not anticipated. What a dangerously naive assumption!<<
Well, they weren't exactly the Yippies, Helen. 
People should not have to set their default positions to anticipate police violence. The "Authorities" should be taught a hard lesson to not let it happen.
I think most in here will never forget Kent State.
|
Helenjw
|
posted on August 28, 2002 03:12:04 PM new
People should not have to set their default positions to anticipate police violence. The "Authorities" should be taught a hard lesson to not let it happen.
True..."People should not have to set their default positions to anticipate police violence"...but I do. And I wouldn't consider using my children as a teaching tool. The "Authorities" with their rubber bullets, pepper spray, horses, and batons would undoubtedly win the battle and my child would be the victim. To hell with that!
Helen
|
gravid
|
posted on August 28, 2002 04:36:54 PM new
If you can not pursue a public protest then the only smart thing is to take your protest out of the public eye. A private communication will make sure the reasons are understood. It is also safer not to have even one helper or partner. Then you can't be infiltrated by a agent.
|
nycyn
|
posted on August 28, 2002 04:37:23 PM new
Aw Hel-len, gimmee a break, would you? Would it kill you to let me live in an ideal world for 30 seconds? Would it? WOULD IT?
|
Helenjw
|
posted on August 28, 2002 04:50:46 PM new
OK, nycyn, you have the right to a period of temporatry insanity in which you may believe that this is the best of all possible worlds...not to exceed thirty seconds!!! Then back to reality!!!
Helen
|
nycyn
|
posted on August 28, 2002 06:01:23 PM new
>>you have the right to a period of temporatry insanity in which you may believe that this is the best of all possible worlds...not to exceed thirty seconds!!! Then back to reality!!!<<
Not to worry, honey, last night Reality wore so heavy on me that if we ground me up and distributed me to 100,000 people they'd all die instantly.
Ever read "Cheng and Eng"?
Chyn
|
birdlady54
|
posted on August 28, 2002 06:30:38 PM new
Give it to 'em, DeSquirrel!! Sounds like most of you guys believe there are muted helicopters hovering over your homes listening to everything you say so the government can think up some plot to mess with your life. I say, " GET A LIFE!"
|
snowyegret
|
posted on August 28, 2002 06:48:20 PM new
I see those helicopters almost every day over my backyard. I usually wave. Sometimes, they wave back. 
Of course, I am pretty close to an airfield. And make aluminum beanies.
You have the right to an informed opinion
-Harlan Ellison
|
DeSquirrel
|
posted on August 28, 2002 06:57:06 PM new
This thread is typical of most here. It starts off with what we know ie:
Several hundred demonstrators were involved in a protest which turned violent due to the actions of a few of them and the police responded with pepperspray.
We know this from news reports and film. Then "invention" takes over.
It ends up as:
Thousands of protesters were peacefully demonstrating when they were attacked by the police wielding chemicals designed to maim them and their children. In the end many people were arrested for "protesting".
|
snowyegret
|
posted on August 28, 2002 07:03:20 PM new
Philly now has Free Speech Zones for protesting. A sad situation for the home of the Liberty Bell and where the Declaration of Independence was signed. Too bad they're postage stamp sized, and far away from the sites. The most recent big fracas here involved proposals to tear down Chinatown to build a new stadium. 
You have the right to an informed opinion
-Harlan Ellison
|
Helenjw
|
posted on August 28, 2002 07:35:27 PM new
Free speech ONLY in a designated spot???
Surely that ordinance will be reversed!!!
|
nycyn
|
posted on August 28, 2002 07:35:52 PM new
Birds and Squirrels, big-brained beasts they.
Most likely the St. Patrick's Day parade in NYC is rowdier than that whatever handful of provocative protesters there may have been.
I'm with gravid.
Cyn
|
Helenjw
|
posted on August 28, 2002 07:49:52 PM new
Right, Nycyn
|
krs
|
posted on August 28, 2002 08:54:46 PM new
From the father of the pepper-sprayed children.....:http://portland.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=18010&group=webcast
|
DeSquirrel
|
posted on August 28, 2002 10:18:09 PM new
My gullibility level is much too high for that story.
Let's see the "Portland Independent Media Center" where
"coverage of major issues and events through open publishing. anyone may post their stories"
publishes a story from "[email protected]"
My favorite part was when the evil cop (black no less!) sprayed the 10 mo. old from 3 feet away. I wonder if he had to hold the tyke's little head to get it in his eyes. Probably had a thistle in his teeth as he hissed
"Pepperspray, I doan need no steinkin, pepperspray!"
Well Ken, at least you'll have the comfort in knowing with all the media coverage, film, and 911 tapes, at least he'll be vindicated with a few mil in the civil suit.
Or arrested for child abuse.
|
krs
|
posted on August 28, 2002 10:28:47 PM new
Try it again, chipmonk of the attack the source last resort, it doesn't say "the evil cop (black no less!) sprayed the 10 mo. old from 3 feet away", YOU said that.
Oh, and 'august 22 brutality" is an address that I might use in describing this if I were still a user of attbi with it's several email addresses available - in order not to use my main one for obvious reasons. Supposed to be something telling in that?
[ edited by krs on Aug 28, 2002 10:32 PM ]
|
DeSquirrel
|
posted on August 28, 2002 11:21:52 PM new
"he turned the can on my wife who was holding our 10 month old baby and doused both of their heads entirely from a distance of less than 3 feet."
I can read English very well, thanks.
|
aposter
|
posted on August 29, 2002 05:20:07 AM new
Squirrel: Let's see the "Portland Independent Media Center" where
"coverage of major issues and events through open publishing. anyone may post their stories"
Squirrel, it looks like you rejected the story because it came from an independent news site. Am I right?
Do you have any reason to believe that fraudulent stories are being reported there?
Would you please give links to those?
Thank you.
I looked through the site and saw quite a few stories that were in foreign papers, just not in the U.S. dependent media.
Unfortunately, I can't link to the story that krs gave.
[ edited by aposter on Aug 29, 2002 05:21 AM ]
|
krs
|
posted on August 29, 2002 06:09:44 AM new
[i]"I can read English very well, thanks"[/]
Now that's odd, because nowhere in the letter does the father mention that his 10 month old had been sprayed in the eyes, yet you say that it was with "I wonder if he had to hold the tyke's little head to get it in his eyes"[/i].
But this is a boring effort of yours to sidetrack the point anyway, now isn't it, little chipmunk? Just another of your smarmy sickening demonstrations of rebugnacan cheerleading? Everybody knows that. Do you consider yourself a "freeper"?
Yes,aposter, the source is an globally organized effort to enable people to see what is going on in their back yards. A pretty exciting venue really, in which the structure allows for anyone to post information that they have concerning events in their areas. Though there are restrictions it is quite open about them and a link is provided to review any postings which were deemed innapropriate for general publication. All of the contributors are journalists. A very well organized effort to provide an alternative to the mainstream media which is heavily influenced in it's editorial content choices by the corporate entities which pay it's bills through advertizing revenue. Try the "about" link for more information. You'll find that there's no attempt to hide anything or to persuade anyone to a particular point of view.
|
nycyn
|
posted on August 29, 2002 08:42:55 AM new
"and when they came for me there was no one left."
Anybody know the precise text of that?
If no one does, it went somethig like this:
When they came for the Jews, I wsan't a Jew.
When they came for the Communists, I wasn't a Communist. And when they came for me...
Cyn
|
nycyn
|
posted on August 29, 2002 08:50:23 AM new
DeRodent:
>>"he turned the can on my wife who was holding our 10 month old baby and doused both of their heads entirely from a distance of less than 3 feet."
I can read English very well, thanks.<<
You are extraordinarily concrete. Maybe somebody else can explain it to you?
Cyn
|
Helenjw
|
posted on August 29, 2002 09:15:27 AM new
Nycyn...the text
First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
|
