9 ms·

Pipeline company paid Minnesota police for arresting and surveilling protesters

298 points by esarbe 5y ago

derbOac 5y ago
For more, similar, coverage of the same issues from July: https://theintercept.com/2021/07/07/intercepted-line-3-pipeline-minnesota/ https://theintercept.com/2021/07/07/intercepted-line-3-pipel... Surprised it didn't get more attention then. It's fairly convincing in my opinion.
standardUser 5y ago
It should be illegal for a police department to accept any source of funding outside of government. The potential for abuse is so obvious that I struggle to imagine how this is not already the case.
threatofrain 5y ago
There's perverse incentives going for both obvious plans (company pays vs town pays), but I suspect one is worse than the other. If we say that towns should pay the burden, then companies cannot "incentivize" police, but they can also exhibit disproportionate burden vs. other police priorities. If we say that companies pay, then at some point the company is responsible for so much of police wellbeing that the police begin to lose moral credibility.
- fnimick 5y ago
  "begin to lose"?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
lowkey_ 5y ago
> The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, which regulates pipelines, decided rural police should not have to pay for increased strain from Line 3 protests. As a condition of granting Line 3 permits, the commission required Enbridge to set up an escrow account to reimburse police for responding to demonstrations. The crux of the issue here is whether the police are being incentivized and are biased by this arrangement. It's possible they feel that they are being paid by Enbridge and thus behave differently, but I think it's much more likely that this arrangement is above their heads — they're doing their job as police, and the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission is ensuring that local townspeople don't pay for an increase in police budget caused by a large company's behavior. I could only really imagine they're being biased if they're being weaponized as a personal security force, and could, for instance, be removed from assignment if they don't follow Enbridge's orders on who to arrest. I highly, highly doubt that to be the case. > Enbridge told the Guardian an independent account manager allocates the funds, and police decide when protesters are breaking the law. But records obtained by the Guardian show the company meets daily with police to discuss intelligence gathering and patrols. And when Enbridge wants protesters removed, it calls police or sends letters. This reminds me of a local police presence at a rally or controversial talk speaking to the organizers of the event about their concerns. This is rather ordinary, really. Without evidence of what their letters or calls contain, I imagine it's like "hey, this person broke the law and here's the evidence," which frankly is fine reason to arrest someone. The ability to call the police and tell them that you want someone arrested for an illegal action is one of their main purposes! Altogether, this article has a huge bite as clickbait, as the idea of our police being weaponized like a private security force by a foreign national company, but I think the reality is much more dull.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > this article has a huge bite as clickbait...the reality is much more dull Agreed. I imagine future deals will be structured as a special tax. Same situation, fundamentally. But less potential to be spun by the Guardian.
  - tclancy 5y ago
    Would you rather these things be reported on or not? The US doesn't exactly have a great history with company towns and these deals smell a lot like that.
  - wavefunction 5y ago
    Might as well make the payments from master to servant explicit, I agree.
- Loughla 5y ago
  I think the issue is that without a) all documents being public from day 1, and b) all processes controlled, audited, and strictly overseen by an independent third part who is just as open and public from day 1, this process is ripe for corruption. Even having the conversation, click bait or no, tells me that there wasn't enough information about this from the get-go.
- clarkevans 5y ago
  So, I'm curious -- why are there protests here to begin with? What is the proper bar for adding a pipeline across the landscape? When your land is traversed against your will, what exact rights to you have to protect it?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - whatshisface 5y ago
    Pipelines leak after being in place for a while and what they leak is usually toxic to the ground near where they are built. Hypothetically leaks can be kept to low levels by proactive maintenance, but in practice managers want to cut costs to a minimum, and have no incentives to spend their company's money to keep up the value of someone else's land.
jms55 5y ago
I'm not convinced this is necessarily the worst option? On one hand, the police being paid for by the company for their enforcement, especially so much money, definitely creates perverse incentives for the police officers to disrupt the protests more than they should. On the other, the police were going to do it anyways because several of the protesters were breaking the law. I'd rather the police be doing this than a private enforcement company who is entirely dependent on the pipeline company, without the additional duties of being a police officer. So I'm not sure where to stand on this.
nostromo 5y ago
Because the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission required they do so. Getting enraged at the pipeline company is misplaced. You can't blame the company for following the law. Complain to the governor, Tim Walz, that oversees the commission.
- didntknowya 5y ago
  the money trail isn't the main issue here. It's the perception that the pipeline company is getting discretion at who gets arrested, rather than the police making the decision.
ruined 5y ago
commenters so far have been discussing two options like "town pays for police operations" and "company pays for police operations" but there are third and fourth options 3) police simply don't conduct expensive operations 4) permits denied, moot point of course it's all in the past at this point, but if the people responsible receive the right incentives, maybe those choices will be on the table next time this comes up
- speedybird 5y ago
  5) Towns tax the pipeline company like they would any other business that attracts crime? Am I missing something here? These pipelines pay taxes, right? If so, why is a special funding arrangement parallel to taxation needed? And if not, why not?
- jrd79 5y ago
  Re (4): heckler’s veto anyone? In the US, individuals and companies pay property tax and are entitled to police protection, consistent with the law. Opponents of the permit should use the courts and the political process to argue their position. Failing that, protests should follow the law, and failing that, police should enforce the law at their own expense.
gorgoiler 5y ago
It’s really important to stem this stuff, in law, before it has even the slightest foothold to get out of hand. I’m sure there are plenty of rational folks who could sensibly sell their left kidney to a transplant facility but we forbid it because, unchecked in any form, it will lead to corruption and exploitation of humans. We don’t forbid private entities from paying for policing because we’re ultra flush and don’t need the money — we forbid it because once allowed it is inevitable that corruption will occur.
- InitialLastName 5y ago
  > We don’t forbid private entities from paying for policing because we’re ultra flush and don’t need the money — we forbid it because once allowed it is inevitable that corruption will occur. We don't forbid private entities from paying for policing at all. In my town, and many other places I've lived [0 for example}, you can contact the police department and hire a "paid detail" consisting of off-duty uniformed officers for any e.g. event where a police presence is beneficial. [0] http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/public_information/nypd-258_paid_details_2016-06-16.pdf http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/public_informatio...
  - tdeck 5y ago
    Which in my opinion is a real problem. I went to a private high school that hired off-duty cops from the local PD as security. Guess which high school students got off easier when they were caught underage drinking and the like by the police?
    - InitialLastName 5y ago
      I don't think it's a problem with an easy solution though. Activities by private organizations that require a police presence aren't something we want to discourage, but we do want to pass the costs on to the people incurring them. If I'm putting together a festival in a city park to raise money for cause X (while providing some value to the local denizens), that's a good thing, but the municipality shouldn't have to pay my security costs. It's similar if I need to do construction that will impede a roadway and need a police officer to direct traffic; the cost for those hours should be passed to me, not to the town.
marricks 5y ago
All these comments seem to live in a fantastical world where money doesn't corrupt or influence behavior. Police were paid to do a job and did it to the benefit of an oil company. You can't pay a detective to investigate a family murder or sexual assault and shouldn't have to. Ostensibly that's what taxes for and what most people actually want them to do anyways. The day we normalize companies paying for services like these is the day we normalize the things people actually like police doing getting even more de-prioritized because everyday people can't (and shouldn't) pay for it. It's like a college building a new sports stadium, suuuure they say the ticket sales will offset the cost and help the school but somehow it all gets funneled back into sports.
- gruez 5y ago
  > All these comments seem to live in a fantastical world where money doesn't corrupt or influence behavior. Police were paid to do a job and did it to the benefit of an oil company. You can't pay a detective to investigate a family murder or sexual assault and shouldn't have to. Ostensibly that's what taxes for and what most people actually want them to do anyways. But as another commenter mentioned[1], the pipeline company isn't doing this voluntarily, they're doing it because the utility commission forced them to. If that's the case, what's the difference between the pipeline company paying the police, and the pipeline company paying taxes, which goes to the town, which pays the police? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28776698 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28776698
  - Barrin92 5y ago
    For starters according to the article: "Enbridge told the Guardian an independent account manager allocates the funds, and police decide when protesters are breaking the law. But records obtained by the Guardian show the company meets daily with police to discuss intelligence gathering and patrols. And when Enbridge wants protesters removed, it calls police or sends letters. “Our police are beholden to a foreign company,” Tara Houska, founder of the Indigenous frontline group Giniw Collective, told the Guardian. “They are working hand in hand with big oil. They are actively working for a company. Their duty is owed to the state of Minnesota and to the tribal citizens of Minnesota.”" The company does much more than just funding the police comparable to tax revenue, they're literally organisizing and coordinating with police in their own interests, put simply, they use the police like a bunch of private goons.
willcipriano 5y ago
>At about 5pm a group of protesters ran from a nearby camp to the drill site, leaned ladders against the fence and began to climb over, according to a Wright county police report obtained by the Guardian. Police told them they were under arrest but they kept climbing. Then police fired at protesters with “less-lethal munitions” – weapons that are more likely to injure than kill someone. Wright county officers fired pepper spray at protesters and arrested four people. Is it safe to say that the fenced in drill site is private property? If so couldn't the headline alternatively read: "Police demand payment for enforcement of trespassing law"?
- codezero 5y ago
  If it's protocol to shoot non-violent trespassers with "less-lethal" ammunition, that seems like a big problem. They weren't involved in theft or destruction, at least not at the point they were climbing a fence. It's kind of a distraction to turn this into "but it's private property" - that doesn't inherently excuse police action.
  - willcipriano 5y ago
    If there isn't a legal basis for those arrests the headline should read: "Police violently commit extra judicial action against peaceful protestors". If I got a mob of angry people and stood them in front of your place of work and I incited them to rush towards it, when would you like the police to take action?
    - codezero 5y ago
      A corporation and a personal home are different, and again, I'm not challenging the police's ability to act, I am challenging the magnitude of response given the context of the situation. If I have a mob outside of my home, I'm going to assume I will be dead and fight to the best of my abilities or run. These people were trespassing on property, not entering into a private home, so still not really addressing the concern I have. For my own opinion: I absolutely value individual private human life over replaceable corporate property. I find it unacceptable that our police force isn't trained to respond peacefully to a nonviolent threat of minimal immediate danger.
imglorp 5y ago
The same thing is happening in Pennsylvania: environmental crimes; hiring armed muscle to keep civilians from observing drilling sites from afar (I've been harassed myself) even though these sites pass through little league fields, apartment complexes etc; some shenanigans getting classed as a public utility with eminent domain rights; and some FOIA shenanigans (there should be no secrets here). Highlights: * thugs: https://www.audacy.com/kywnewsradio/articles/news/more-scrutiny-sunoco-security-mariner-east-investigation-continues https://www.audacy.com/kywnewsradio/articles/news/more-scrut... * charges: https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2021/10/05/pennsylvania-pipeline-developer-charged-in-mariner-east-2-pipeline-spill https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2021/10/05/pennsylvania-pi... * FOIA: https://www.chescoplanning.org/pic/PDF/ME2-092421.pdf https://www.chescoplanning.org/pic/PDF/ME2-092421.pdf etc. If you think there has been miscarriage of justice, consider letting Sunoco know how you feel.
- dls2016 5y ago
  I mean, the PSP was formed to replace the more violent coal police and break strikes... police protect capital... same crap, different decade.
- abawany 5y ago
  Similarly in Texas: https://www.kxan.com/pipeline-exposure/ https://www.kxan.com/pipeline-exposure/ . The KXAN reporter (Jody Barr) who worked on this expose was followed by sheriffs in multiple counties and stopped for no reason on public roads.
just_steve_h 5y ago
Are commenters here familiar with the history of police and "private security" being deployed against striking workers? This has been happening without interruption in the U.S. since the nineteenth century. There are some excellent resources out there - some useful keywords to search would be "Pinkertons" and "Ludlow"… It's useful to recognize that police primarily exist to defend private property and the persons to whom said property belongs.
tediousdemise 5y ago
Seems like the police's problem. If the police need more money to enforce the law, then they should request it through the proper government channels. If the pipeline company needs more support on their frontlines, then they should pay a private security company such as Pinkerton[0] or Blackwater[1] - not the police. A weak or non-existent financial barrier between corporations and government is synonymous with corruption. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_(detective_agency) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_(detective_agency) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_(company)
gremloni 5y ago
The police in the US are atrocious. It’s an easy problem to solve. Dissolve the only union that rightfully needs to be dissolved— the police union. Put cops on practitioners insurance like nurses and back that up with always on cameras that the police department has no access to. It’s a low skilled, low bar for entry job. Finding candidates should be a breeze.
- sofixa 5y ago
  > It’s a low skilled, low bar for entry job. Finding candidates should be a breeze. Proper police should be well trained ( de-escalation, judging situations, hostage negotiation, domestic abuse, etc etc). Furthermore, it's a (potentially) very tough ( in terms of hours worked and shit that happens during those hours) and thankless job. I don't think there would be that many candidates.
  - gremloni 5y ago
    You need to know none of those things to be a cop in the US. Furthermore it’s one of the safer jobs with pizza delivery men getting killed or injured more often than cops.
mfer 5y ago
> But in Minnesota, a financial agreement with a foreign company has given public police forces an incentive to arrest demonstrators. I must have missed it. What’s the incentive. Are the police paid by the number of arrests or something else? > Police have arrested more than 900 demonstrators opposing Line 3 and its impact on climate and Indigenous rights Identifying where problems are is, it think, important. So, where these people doing illegal things or arrested for doing legal things? Police enforce laws but legislatures create them. Is there an issue of bad laws a legislature needs to look at around protesting?
- sofixa 5y ago
  > I must have missed it. What’s the incentive. Are the police paid by the number of arrests or something else? They are paid for overtime by the company directly, so yeah. Each extra arrest is more time spent on documentation, interrogation, etc., which means more money past a certain threshold.
bequanna 5y ago
Clickbait title and manufactured outrage. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission required Enbridge to pay for additional police presence as a condition of granting permits. These payments are managed by an independent third party. Enbridge informs the police when people are suspected or observed breaking the law. Some of those people are indeed breaking the law and arrested.
- draygonia 5y ago
  I can confirm this as I worked with a cleaning contractor for their offices and met the cops that were paid to work the night shift watching for trespassers.
rhacker 5y ago
There are a lot of Canadian pipeline companies that pull this shit all over the US.
int_19h 5y ago
1984 is often cited as "it's not supposed to be a manual!" book when referring to current events, but I think that title should more properly go to Snow Crash these days. "MetaCops Unlimited is the official peacekeeping force of White Columns, and also of The Mews at Windsor Heights, The Heights at Bear Run, Cinnamon Grove, and The Farms of Cloverdelle. They also enforce traffic regulations on all highways and byways operated by Fairlanes, Inc. A few different FOQNEs also use them: Caymans Plus and The Alps, for example. ... MetaCops’ main competitor, WorldBeat Security, handles all roads belonging to Cruiseways, plus has worldwide contracts with Dixie Traditionals, Pickett’s Plantation, Rainbow Heights (check it out — two apartheid Burbclaves and one for black suits), Meadowvale on the [insert name of river] and Brickyard Station. WorldBeat is smaller than MetaCops, handles more upscale contracts, supposedly has a bigger espionage arm — though if that’s what people want, they just talk to an account rep at the Central Intelligence Corporation. And then there’s The Enforcers — but they cost a lot and don’t take well to supervision. It is rumored that, under their uniforms, they wear T-shirts bearing the unofficial Enforcer coat of arms: a fist holding a nightstick, emblazoned with the words SUE ME."

298 points by esarbe 5y ago

For more, similar, coverage of the same issues from July: https://theintercept.com/2021/07/07/intercepted-line-3-pipeline-minnesota/ https://theintercept.com/2021/07/07/intercepted-line-3-pipel... Surprised it didn't get more attention then. It's fairly convincing in my opinion.

standardUser 5y ago

It should be illegal for a police department to accept any source of funding outside of government. The potential for abuse is so obvious that I struggle to imagine how this is not already the case.

threatofrain 5y ago

There's perverse incentives going for both obvious plans (company pays vs town pays), but I suspect one is worse than the other. If we say that towns should pay the burden, then companies cannot "incentivize" police, but they can also exhibit disproportionate burden vs. other police priorities. If we say that companies pay, then at some point the company is responsible for so much of police wellbeing that the police begin to lose moral credibility.

fnimick 5y ago
"begin to lose"?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

lowkey_ 5y ago

> The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, which regulates pipelines, decided rural police should not have to pay for increased strain from Line 3 protests. As a condition of granting Line 3 permits, the commission required Enbridge to set up an escrow account to reimburse police for responding to demonstrations. The crux of the issue here is whether the police are being incentivized and are biased by this arrangement. It's possible they feel that they are being paid by Enbridge and thus behave differently, but I think it's much more likely that this arrangement is above their heads — they're doing their job as police, and the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission is ensuring that local townspeople don't pay for an increase in police budget caused by a large company's behavior. I could only really imagine they're being biased if they're being weaponized as a personal security force, and could, for instance, be removed from assignment if they don't follow Enbridge's orders on who to arrest. I highly, highly doubt that to be the case. > Enbridge told the Guardian an independent account manager allocates the funds, and police decide when protesters are breaking the law. But records obtained by the Guardian show the company meets daily with police to discuss intelligence gathering and patrols. And when Enbridge wants protesters removed, it calls police or sends letters. This reminds me of a local police presence at a rally or controversial talk speaking to the organizers of the event about their concerns. This is rather ordinary, really. Without evidence of what their letters or calls contain, I imagine it's like "hey, this person broke the law and here's the evidence," which frankly is fine reason to arrest someone. The ability to call the police and tell them that you want someone arrested for an illegal action is one of their main purposes! Altogether, this article has a huge bite as clickbait, as the idea of our police being weaponized like a private security force by a foreign national company, but I think the reality is much more dull.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> this article has a huge bite as clickbait...the reality is much more dull Agreed. I imagine future deals will be structured as a special tax. Same situation, fundamentally. But less potential to be spun by the Guardian.
- tclancy 5y ago
  Would you rather these things be reported on or not? The US doesn't exactly have a great history with company towns and these deals smell a lot like that.
- wavefunction 5y ago
  Might as well make the payments from master to servant explicit, I agree.
Loughla 5y ago
I think the issue is that without a) all documents being public from day 1, and b) all processes controlled, audited, and strictly overseen by an independent third part who is just as open and public from day 1, this process is ripe for corruption. Even having the conversation, click bait or no, tells me that there wasn't enough information about this from the get-go.
clarkevans 5y ago
So, I'm curious -- why are there protests here to begin with? What is the proper bar for adding a pipeline across the landscape? When your land is traversed against your will, what exact rights to you have to protect it?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- whatshisface 5y ago
  Pipelines leak after being in place for a while and what they leak is usually toxic to the ground near where they are built. Hypothetically leaks can be kept to low levels by proactive maintenance, but in practice managers want to cut costs to a minimum, and have no incentives to spend their company's money to keep up the value of someone else's land.

jms55 5y ago

I'm not convinced this is necessarily the worst option? On one hand, the police being paid for by the company for their enforcement, especially so much money, definitely creates perverse incentives for the police officers to disrupt the protests more than they should. On the other, the police were going to do it anyways because several of the protesters were breaking the law. I'd rather the police be doing this than a private enforcement company who is entirely dependent on the pipeline company, without the additional duties of being a police officer. So I'm not sure where to stand on this.

nostromo 5y ago

Because the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission required they do so. Getting enraged at the pipeline company is misplaced. You can't blame the company for following the law. Complain to the governor, Tim Walz, that oversees the commission.

didntknowya 5y ago
the money trail isn't the main issue here. It's the perception that the pipeline company is getting discretion at who gets arrested, rather than the police making the decision.

ruined 5y ago

commenters so far have been discussing two options like "town pays for police operations" and "company pays for police operations" but there are third and fourth options 3) police simply don't conduct expensive operations 4) permits denied, moot point of course it's all in the past at this point, but if the people responsible receive the right incentives, maybe those choices will be on the table next time this comes up

speedybird 5y ago
5) Towns tax the pipeline company like they would any other business that attracts crime? Am I missing something here? These pipelines pay taxes, right? If so, why is a special funding arrangement parallel to taxation needed? And if not, why not?
jrd79 5y ago
Re (4): heckler’s veto anyone? In the US, individuals and companies pay property tax and are entitled to police protection, consistent with the law. Opponents of the permit should use the courts and the political process to argue their position. Failing that, protests should follow the law, and failing that, police should enforce the law at their own expense.

gorgoiler 5y ago

It’s really important to stem this stuff, in law, before it has even the slightest foothold to get out of hand. I’m sure there are plenty of rational folks who could sensibly sell their left kidney to a transplant facility but we forbid it because, unchecked in any form, it will lead to corruption and exploitation of humans. We don’t forbid private entities from paying for policing because we’re ultra flush and don’t need the money — we forbid it because once allowed it is inevitable that corruption will occur.

InitialLastName 5y ago
> We don’t forbid private entities from paying for policing because we’re ultra flush and don’t need the money — we forbid it because once allowed it is inevitable that corruption will occur. We don't forbid private entities from paying for policing at all. In my town, and many other places I've lived [0 for example}, you can contact the police department and hire a "paid detail" consisting of off-duty uniformed officers for any e.g. event where a police presence is beneficial. [0] http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/public_information/nypd-258_paid_details_2016-06-16.pdf http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/public_informatio...
- tdeck 5y ago
  Which in my opinion is a real problem. I went to a private high school that hired off-duty cops from the local PD as security. Guess which high school students got off easier when they were caught underage drinking and the like by the police?
  - InitialLastName 5y ago
    I don't think it's a problem with an easy solution though. Activities by private organizations that require a police presence aren't something we want to discourage, but we do want to pass the costs on to the people incurring them. If I'm putting together a festival in a city park to raise money for cause X (while providing some value to the local denizens), that's a good thing, but the municipality shouldn't have to pay my security costs. It's similar if I need to do construction that will impede a roadway and need a police officer to direct traffic; the cost for those hours should be passed to me, not to the town.

marricks 5y ago

All these comments seem to live in a fantastical world where money doesn't corrupt or influence behavior. Police were paid to do a job and did it to the benefit of an oil company. You can't pay a detective to investigate a family murder or sexual assault and shouldn't have to. Ostensibly that's what taxes for and what most people actually want them to do anyways. The day we normalize companies paying for services like these is the day we normalize the things people actually like police doing getting even more de-prioritized because everyday people can't (and shouldn't) pay for it. It's like a college building a new sports stadium, suuuure they say the ticket sales will offset the cost and help the school but somehow it all gets funneled back into sports.

gruez 5y ago
> All these comments seem to live in a fantastical world where money doesn't corrupt or influence behavior. Police were paid to do a job and did it to the benefit of an oil company. You can't pay a detective to investigate a family murder or sexual assault and shouldn't have to. Ostensibly that's what taxes for and what most people actually want them to do anyways. But as another commenter mentioned[1], the pipeline company isn't doing this voluntarily, they're doing it because the utility commission forced them to. If that's the case, what's the difference between the pipeline company paying the police, and the pipeline company paying taxes, which goes to the town, which pays the police? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28776698 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28776698
- Barrin92 5y ago
  For starters according to the article: "Enbridge told the Guardian an independent account manager allocates the funds, and police decide when protesters are breaking the law. But records obtained by the Guardian show the company meets daily with police to discuss intelligence gathering and patrols. And when Enbridge wants protesters removed, it calls police or sends letters. “Our police are beholden to a foreign company,” Tara Houska, founder of the Indigenous frontline group Giniw Collective, told the Guardian. “They are working hand in hand with big oil. They are actively working for a company. Their duty is owed to the state of Minnesota and to the tribal citizens of Minnesota.”" The company does much more than just funding the police comparable to tax revenue, they're literally organisizing and coordinating with police in their own interests, put simply, they use the police like a bunch of private goons.

willcipriano 5y ago

>At about 5pm a group of protesters ran from a nearby camp to the drill site, leaned ladders against the fence and began to climb over, according to a Wright county police report obtained by the Guardian. Police told them they were under arrest but they kept climbing. Then police fired at protesters with “less-lethal munitions” – weapons that are more likely to injure than kill someone. Wright county officers fired pepper spray at protesters and arrested four people. Is it safe to say that the fenced in drill site is private property? If so couldn't the headline alternatively read: "Police demand payment for enforcement of trespassing law"?

codezero 5y ago
If it's protocol to shoot non-violent trespassers with "less-lethal" ammunition, that seems like a big problem. They weren't involved in theft or destruction, at least not at the point they were climbing a fence. It's kind of a distraction to turn this into "but it's private property" - that doesn't inherently excuse police action.
- willcipriano 5y ago
  If there isn't a legal basis for those arrests the headline should read: "Police violently commit extra judicial action against peaceful protestors". If I got a mob of angry people and stood them in front of your place of work and I incited them to rush towards it, when would you like the police to take action?
  - codezero 5y ago
    A corporation and a personal home are different, and again, I'm not challenging the police's ability to act, I am challenging the magnitude of response given the context of the situation. If I have a mob outside of my home, I'm going to assume I will be dead and fight to the best of my abilities or run. These people were trespassing on property, not entering into a private home, so still not really addressing the concern I have. For my own opinion: I absolutely value individual private human life over replaceable corporate property. I find it unacceptable that our police force isn't trained to respond peacefully to a nonviolent threat of minimal immediate danger.

imglorp 5y ago

The same thing is happening in Pennsylvania: environmental crimes; hiring armed muscle to keep civilians from observing drilling sites from afar (I've been harassed myself) even though these sites pass through little league fields, apartment complexes etc; some shenanigans getting classed as a public utility with eminent domain rights; and some FOIA shenanigans (there should be no secrets here). Highlights: * thugs: https://www.audacy.com/kywnewsradio/articles/news/more-scrutiny-sunoco-security-mariner-east-investigation-continues https://www.audacy.com/kywnewsradio/articles/news/more-scrut... * charges: https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2021/10/05/pennsylvania-pipeline-developer-charged-in-mariner-east-2-pipeline-spill https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2021/10/05/pennsylvania-pi... * FOIA: https://www.chescoplanning.org/pic/PDF/ME2-092421.pdf https://www.chescoplanning.org/pic/PDF/ME2-092421.pdf etc. If you think there has been miscarriage of justice, consider letting Sunoco know how you feel.

dls2016 5y ago
I mean, the PSP was formed to replace the more violent coal police and break strikes... police protect capital... same crap, different decade.
abawany 5y ago
Similarly in Texas: https://www.kxan.com/pipeline-exposure/ https://www.kxan.com/pipeline-exposure/ . The KXAN reporter (Jody Barr) who worked on this expose was followed by sheriffs in multiple counties and stopped for no reason on public roads.

just_steve_h 5y ago

Are commenters here familiar with the history of police and "private security" being deployed against striking workers? This has been happening without interruption in the U.S. since the nineteenth century. There are some excellent resources out there - some useful keywords to search would be "Pinkertons" and "Ludlow"… It's useful to recognize that police primarily exist to defend private property and the persons to whom said property belongs.

tediousdemise 5y ago

Seems like the police's problem. If the police need more money to enforce the law, then they should request it through the proper government channels. If the pipeline company needs more support on their frontlines, then they should pay a private security company such as Pinkerton[0] or Blackwater[1] - not the police. A weak or non-existent financial barrier between corporations and government is synonymous with corruption. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_(detective_agency) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_(detective_agency) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_(company) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_(company)

gremloni 5y ago

The police in the US are atrocious. It’s an easy problem to solve. Dissolve the only union that rightfully needs to be dissolved— the police union. Put cops on practitioners insurance like nurses and back that up with always on cameras that the police department has no access to. It’s a low skilled, low bar for entry job. Finding candidates should be a breeze.

sofixa 5y ago
> It’s a low skilled, low bar for entry job. Finding candidates should be a breeze. Proper police should be well trained ( de-escalation, judging situations, hostage negotiation, domestic abuse, etc etc). Furthermore, it's a (potentially) very tough ( in terms of hours worked and shit that happens during those hours) and thankless job. I don't think there would be that many candidates.
- gremloni 5y ago
  You need to know none of those things to be a cop in the US. Furthermore it’s one of the safer jobs with pizza delivery men getting killed or injured more often than cops.

mfer 5y ago

> But in Minnesota, a financial agreement with a foreign company has given public police forces an incentive to arrest demonstrators. I must have missed it. What’s the incentive. Are the police paid by the number of arrests or something else? > Police have arrested more than 900 demonstrators opposing Line 3 and its impact on climate and Indigenous rights Identifying where problems are is, it think, important. So, where these people doing illegal things or arrested for doing legal things? Police enforce laws but legislatures create them. Is there an issue of bad laws a legislature needs to look at around protesting?

sofixa 5y ago
> I must have missed it. What’s the incentive. Are the police paid by the number of arrests or something else? They are paid for overtime by the company directly, so yeah. Each extra arrest is more time spent on documentation, interrogation, etc., which means more money past a certain threshold.

bequanna 5y ago

Clickbait title and manufactured outrage. The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission required Enbridge to pay for additional police presence as a condition of granting permits. These payments are managed by an independent third party. Enbridge informs the police when people are suspected or observed breaking the law. Some of those people are indeed breaking the law and arrested.

draygonia 5y ago
I can confirm this as I worked with a cleaning contractor for their offices and met the cops that were paid to work the night shift watching for trespassers.

rhacker 5y ago

There are a lot of Canadian pipeline companies that pull this shit all over the US.

int_19h 5y ago

1984 is often cited as "it's not supposed to be a manual!" book when referring to current events, but I think that title should more properly go to Snow Crash these days. "MetaCops Unlimited is the official peacekeeping force of White Columns, and also of The Mews at Windsor Heights, The Heights at Bear Run, Cinnamon Grove, and The Farms of Cloverdelle. They also enforce traffic regulations on all highways and byways operated by Fairlanes, Inc. A few different FOQNEs also use them: Caymans Plus and The Alps, for example. ... MetaCops’ main competitor, WorldBeat Security, handles all roads belonging to Cruiseways, plus has worldwide contracts with Dixie Traditionals, Pickett’s Plantation, Rainbow Heights (check it out — two apartheid Burbclaves and one for black suits), Meadowvale on the [insert name of river] and Brickyard Station. WorldBeat is smaller than MetaCops, handles more upscale contracts, supposedly has a bigger espionage arm — though if that’s what people want, they just talk to an account rep at the Central Intelligence Corporation. And then there’s The Enforcers — but they cost a lot and don’t take well to supervision. It is rumored that, under their uniforms, they wear T-shirts bearing the unofficial Enforcer coat of arms: a fist holding a nightstick, emblazoned with the words SUE ME."