by Greg Hanscom.
Over the past couple of weeks, the fight between “the 99%” and the powerful Wall Street and Washington elite has devolved into a
street battle between protesters and the police. Black-suited cops have pepper sprayed
peaceful protesters, bloodied kids who blocked New York streets, and clubbed an
old lady. It’s too bad—for everyone involved.
It’s easy to scapegoat people like John Pike,
the UC Davis police officer who doused a group of students with pepper spray—and was promptly escorted, along with the rest of his squad, off of the green
by a group of outraged students. (If all you’ve seen is the pepper spraying, you’ve
gotta watch the scene that followed, captured in this YouTube video. These kids
showed incredible chutzpah and restraint.)
But the problem obviously goes beyond individual officers. “Let’s not pretend that Pike is an
independent bad actor,” Alexis
Madrigal wrote an incisive piece in The
Atlantic. “If we vilify Pike, we let the
institutions off way too easy.”
in the Guardian,
author Naomi Wolf went so far as to suggest that Congress itself advised—and
the Department of Homeland Security coordinated—a violent nationwide
crackdown in an effort to quell dissent that might threaten lawmakers’
course, those crazy kids on the Interwebs just had a great time making a mockery of the cops.
For a little insight into the issue, and some perspective
from the police side of the line, we called Norm Stamper. He was chief of
the Seattle Police Department when all hell broke loose during the 1999 meeting
of the World Trade Organization. He has spent a good deal of the decade since
then trying to make sense of what happened, and doing his best to prevent it
from happening again.
Q. Take us back to 1999 and the first couple of days of the
WTO protests in Seattle.
A. We thought we were ready. We had put in 10,000 hours of
training. We had sent officers around the country. We had studied what had
happened at previous international financial conferences.
Monday [the first day of the WTO meeting] comes and goes
with a few incidents, with many thousands of protesters on the streets. They’re
praising us for our friendliness, our restraint … On Tuesday morning, however,
starting at 2 or 2:30 in the morning, we get reports from our officers that
large contingents of protesters, some of them holding gas masks, were starting
to converge on the downtown area.
When the sun comes up, we get a real sense of how big this demonstration
is … We knew there would be a big crowd, but we had no idea it would number
into the tens of thousands … I remember standing outside the Sheraton and
seeing a thin tan line of sheriff’s deputies who had been assigned to keep
demonstrators out of the parking garage. The Sheraton was key. It was a venue
for the WTO conference. Large numbers of conferees were staying there.
We continued to ask people to leave traffic lanes open in
case we needed, in the event of an emergency, to get a fire truck or a police
car or an aid car in there. Those requests met with rejection. By 9:00, the
intersection was completely clogged. The demonstrators had sat down, locked
arms, and refused to budge.
The police were hopelessly outnumbered. It looked like we
had this huge force, but we had cops only in the hundreds when we needed them
in the thousands.
Q. Were you afraid at that moment?
A. I was not feeling physical fear … I was feeling fear that
this entire thing was going to blow up, get out of hand. The anti-global
message, which personally I supported, would be lost. The focus would be on the
Then I made one of the biggest mistakes of my career.
Q. What did you do?
A. It wasn’t what I did. It was what I did not do. What I did
not do is veto the decision to use tear gas.
The operations commander said, “We need this intersection
cleared.” The field commander said, “We need this intersection cleared.” Why?
Somebody could be in cardiac arrest on the 27th floor of the Sheraton, somebody
could be suffering from a gunshot wound … It was the traditional cop in me who
supported that decision.
Q. What should you have done? Carried them all out?
A. Couldn’t have done it.
We had way too few cops to do what you’re suggesting. So
there was no answer, we thought, other than gas. The [real] answer was,
somebody could get hurt, we may not be able to get a fire engine through this
crowd. But I needed to do a better job of playing the odds.
People got hurt, and a lot of people got gassed over the
next two, three, four days. Nobody got killed—we take that as a large
consolation prize; it would have been very easy to imagine someone getting
killed by an errant rubber bullet to the eye or the head, or people getting
trampled in a crowd … But the police department’s response was inadequate all
around—the strategy, the tactics, the use of chemical agents on nonviolent,
Q. I assume that you’ve been watching videos of Occupy
protests and clashes with police. What goes through your mind when you watch
A. There are three scenes that compete for the most onerous.
The UC Davis pepper spraying incident stands out in large
part because of the casualness with which Lt. Pike sprayed those nonviolent
protesters—who were seated, and their heads were bowed. It was very clear
that this was somebody who didn’t feel threatened. There was ample room for the
cops to get around them if they had to get to the other side of the protest.
Here’s a cop who says, “We told you to leave, you didn’t leave, now you’re going
to be punished.” It struck me as punitive and utterly foolish and stupid.
Pepper spray and tazers are alternatives to lethal force. So
we need to ask ourselves: Is this a situation when Pike or any other cops would
pull their guns and start shooting?
We had the batons out and misused in Berkeley. This is traditional
mob and riot control training in action. When I became a cop in 1966, we had
campus unrest, antiwar demonstrations, civil rights uprisings all over the
country. During the long, hot summers, we would march out to the employee parking
lot [in San Diego] to do baton training, then march back … It was very military
… That’s one of the huge issues that needs to be addressed with the culture of
Then there’s Oakland—in many respects the worst. The
police were uniformed in all black outfits, wearing catcher’s shin guards and ballistic
helmets. I did not see badges or nametags or anything other than this
incredible, formidable image that looked anything but human. They were standing
there firing tear gas into the crowd. That evoked WTO for me more than any
other of these incidents.
It’s very clear that most law enforcement agencies have
learned little or nothing from 1999.
Q. 1999, sure—what about those long, hot summers in the
A. After the ‘60s, we had blue ribbon panels look at the cause
of rioting and the role of police in either instigating or enflaming this type
of emotion. We began the slow, painstaking process of reaching out to communities
and rebuilding the trust that had been lost.
In 1973, I headed a partnership designed to demonstrate that
you could forge an effective partnership with your community, that you could make
decisions in the interest of crime fighting and building a better relationship
with the community. Do the math: You’ve got one cop on a beat of tens of
thousands of people. By building a true sense of responsibility within the
community and in the mutual objectives of law enforcement and citizens, you’re
going to get a much safer community and a much healthier community.
Enter the drug war … The drug war began to chip away at
community policing. Even in very small rural police departments, you have SWAT
teams. You have very small police departments with armored personnel carriers
and military grade weapons and ammunition and military tactics. You hear that somebody’s got half a lid
[about a half an ounce] of weed in their home and you’re going to mount an
assault … It creates a certain attitude that makes the whole thing reducible to
us vs. them.
Then you have the war on terror. The federal government, mostly
under the Bush administration, is handing out military tools, equipment, and weaponry
to local police departments. Nobody who’s seen the images of those towers
coming down or the aftermath of the crash of the plane into the Pentagon or
that field in Pennsylvania is ever going to forget that. Every one of us has a
stake in homeland security. The question is, have we overreacted?
Q. Is the recent response to the Occupy movement creating a new
generation of radicals—and is that such a bad thing?
A. I really do support, 100 percent, the purpose of Occupy.
I am in the 99 percent. I don’t know a single police officer who’s in the 1
percent. We’re all affected by corporate greed and Wall Street malfeasance.
There’s something drastically and seriously wrong with this country. It is affecting
the environment. It is affecting the infrastructure. It is affecting the
dwindling middle class.
It’s wonderful that we now have attention focused on what
the real problem is. That’s just cool. What is not cool is those purporting to
represent the 99 percent who offend large portions of the 99 percent with their
tactics … There’s got to be a way to take this movement and help it evolve so
that it really wins hearts and minds. Then we will see real political and
economic change. We will begin to see social justice.
It’s going to take time to rebuild that trust [between the
police and the Occupy movement]. But it has to happen. Otherwise the focus is
not on corporate greed and people losing their mortgages and their jobs. It
really comes down to this for me: How do we mobilize, organize politically in
such a way that we don’t turn off the critical mass that we need to make change
in this country?
* The last photo was taken more than a decade ago, at the WTO protests in Seattle.
View full post on Grist.org – the latest from Grist