David Blaska wrote:But since Kurt's Law has banned pepper spray, pray tell what recourse is left to the police for those who refuse a legitimate police order?
I'm not in a position to "ban" anything, merely repeating what ought to be common sense (and, oddly enough, in the Humboldt case the courts have confirmed common sense).
As for your question -- somehow
, hundreds of police departments around the country manage to deal with nonviolent protesters without
swabbing pepper spray-soaked Q-tips on their eyeballs or spraying it in their faces at point-blank range.
And in those cases where pepper spray is
used, it turns out not
to be some kind of magical police pixie dust, capable of instantaneously teleporting protesters straight to the county jail. All it does is inflict pain. Sometimes that pain causes the protesters to give up. Other times, it doesn't.
In Humboldt County, the sheriff's deputies had all kinds of excuses for why they couldn't use any other means to remove protesters. Then, when some of them refused to budge even after having the spray applied directly to their eyes ... the deputies went ahead and used the old-fashioned approach of cutting off their shackles and carrying them away.
Did you really need me to explain that to you?