3 ms·
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CS_gas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CS_gas CS gas and pepper spray - capsicin extract - were the two suspected substances. CS g
by observationist 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CS_gas https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CS_gas
CS gas and pepper spray - capsicin extract - were the two suspected substances.
CS gas and the solvent it's in are incredibly toxic, and are known to be toxic. It can cause heart, lung, and liver damage in acute exposure. Degrading kids health and possibly taking years of their life expectancy deserves more accountability than an "oops, we'll do better next time!"
Beyond the original chemicals in the CS gas canisters, the chemicals likely change over time, oxidizing and possibly mixing with chemicals in the container, so who knows what additional toxic hazard the expired canisters might have in store?
Just brief exposure can result in sensitization, such that any future exposure could trigger something like an asthma attack or a huge inflammatory response.
Absolutely nothing about this is ok.
>>The source said it was not routine to deploy such a large amount of munitions in an area so close to civilian populations.
Heads need to roll, or it'll just happen again. A whole lot of people made some very bad choices. Cops should be the most accountable of all members of society, given their authority.
None of the cops involved should be trusted with anything more dangerous or complex than tying their shoes unless and until they can prove they've got any respect for the rest of society.
- derwiki 2y agoHeads never seem to roll
- aramova 2y agoI know it's been going on for years, but it's all gotten worse since 2000 imo... https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836 https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/st...
- AzzyHN 2y agoI call bullshit on it being "not routine"
- observationist 2y agoThat means that somewhere there's a written policy defining where they should and shouldn't be doing these things, and that the policy wasn't strictly observed this time. They weren't just doing this randomly; they had procedures designed, ostensibly, to protect public safety, and the procedures weren't followed. A failure of leadership occurred at multiple levels, but, as is so common these days, nobody will be held accountable. It'll be given lip service and hand wringing, but ultimately nothing will be done.
- sobkas 2y ago> That means that somewhere there's a written policy defining where they should and shouldn't be doing these things, and that the policy wasn't strictly observed this time. They weren't just doing this randomly; they had procedures designed, ostensibly, to protect public safety, and the procedures weren't followed. A failure of leadership occurred at multiple levels, but, as is so common these days, nobody will be held accountable. It'll be given lip service and hand wringing, but ultimately nothing will be done. Procedures are there to look nice in the book, what matters is culture of use. Because culture always wins with procedures.
- observationist 2y agoYup - the "should we be doing this here" and "how and where should we do this" came after the fact, meaning they've probably been flagrantly violating written procedure for a long time; it's only now that they've been caught that the rules matter.