A videotape of the beating, along with pictures of the bruised body, of protester Ken Tsang adds to tension between protesters and the chinese government. Ken Tsang says he was "brutally" assaulted by police. A spokesman for the Hong Kong Police has said protesters have been violent as well, tossing objects, kicking, and pushing officers. One officer has had his shoulder dislocated after being pushed by a protester. Mr. Tsang was "accused of unlawful assembly and of obstructing a police officer". Throughout history there have been cases of police brutality. Was Tsang asking for this treatment? Is it ever okay for police to resort to violence? How far is too far?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/world/asia/video-of-apparent-beating-of-protester-in-hong-kong-stirs-anger.html?ref=world&_r=0
Throughout the world, there have been countless stories of police brutality. Sometimes these stories are true and sometimes the citizens are the ones tempting the police and testing limits. Until both sides are thoroughly explored for details, assumptions can not be made. Most of the time, the citizen is acting and purposely temps the police because the citizen may think they will have the media backing them up. However, if this were to happen, the police does not need to constantly beat the citizen. Instead, they could knock them down without the constant beating.
ReplyDeleteAlthough one officer claims that he has had his shoulder dislocated after being pushed by a protester, it was not the protester's intention to brutally harm the police man. The protester may have been unaware of the harm that he/she had inflicted on the police officer. However, Mr. Tsang's beating is a situation all together. Police "brutally" assaulted him knowingly. Mr. Tsang was accused of "unlawful assembly and of obstructing a police officer," but he did not beat or harm the police in the same way that they reciprocated to his protests. Rather than resorting to violence, police should know to restrain protesters from creating more violence and disturbance. There is no use in fighting fire with fire.
ReplyDeleteNo one is right in situations like these. The protester was wrong for harassing multiple officers and the officer was totally wrong for beating the protester. Even if Tsang was "asking for it," it is unprofessional and unacceptable for the police officer to intentionally attack and injure the civilian. It's definitely true that we do not know the full details of this particular attack; we would need more information to determine what really happened and what should be done.
ReplyDeleteI think that some situations require police officers to result to violence but only when its the last resort. I don't think that Tsang was wanting or looking for this type of treatment. I don't think that he deserved to be treated like that if the only thing he was doing was protesting. I also think that police officers shouldn't be able to beat someone to the point of unconsciousness just because they were standing up for something they believe in. Even if someone is violent I don't think that it is justified to put them into a hospital which I think is too far. I think that protesting should be equal but I understand that sometimes violent outburst can happen. I think the police should get involved but not to the point were they start to encourage violent outburst.
ReplyDeleteBy definition, police are meant to protect people. In order to do that, they are given some sort of power by the government. Police brutality in any case is an example of abuse of that power. In this case, yes, the protesters for violent, but not tot he point of beating police officers. This is what happens when power gets into people's heads.
ReplyDelete