The Orbis

Issue date: 10/15/09 Section: News/Features

Media Credit: Hugh Schlesinger Police officers arrested several demonstrators during the Pittsburgh summit.

Media Credit: Hugh Schlesinger Many people took to the streets in favor of economic and social justice.

Media Credit: Hugh Schlesinger A line of officers monitored the parade of demonstrators during the second day of protests.

One moment from my time at late September's G-20 Summit in Pittsburgh has stuck in my mind: the image of about 300 police officers in full riot gear and backed up by armored vehicles sporting various non-lethal weapons, including the sonic cannon, blocking off three of the four streets of an intersection.
These officers were deployed at this location to break up an unpermitted protest march, dubbed the "People's Uprising," on the first day of the summit. The officers' presence was much larger than that of the protesters, and they seemed more confident of and prepared for imminent violence than any of the marchers.

Not surprisingly, violence did occur, as attempts by the police to disperse the protesters, including arrests and the use of tear gas, led to a retreat en masse by the protesters, some confrontations between protesters and police, and sporadic instances of property destruction.

The police's behavior typified the disproportionate force they used throughout the summit. Hours after the People's Uprising, police continued to occupy the area surrounding the march, blocking off entire streets and displacing some from their homes or businesses for hours. During this time they arrested multiple individuals and fired on protesters with rubber bullets and tear gas.

The two arrests I witnessed during this period where particularly shocking. First, I was standing with a group of people on a street corner close to a police line. When the police decided to move forward about fifteen feet, they ordered us off the corner and across two lanes of traffic. The officers immediately apprehended one of the members who didn't move fast enough.
The second arrest involved a protester who had filmed this first arrest. About ten minutes after ordering us to move, two officers charged down the street filled with 50 people and tackled a man to the ground. A person who knew the arrested man reported that he had been bruised and bloodied during the arrest and that his video camera had been smashed. He also said he witnessed a policeman pointing out protesters to his fellow officers and suggested that his apprehended friend had been targeted for video recording the other arrest.

Members of the ACLU were on hand to gather information about detained protesters and to monitor police action during the demonstrations.

That night another rally at Schenley Plaza near the University of Pittsburgh, ironically organized in protest of police brutality and in solidarity with those arrested, was violently dispersed by police and many more people were arrested. While a permitted protest march the next day of nearly 5,000 participants was peaceful, it was accompanied by a police presence of more than 1,000 officers. (Other reporting indicated that about 5,000 officers had been called up for security that weekend.) Then, that evening, the incident repeated itself at Schenley Plaza, with more arrests and another jail solidarity protest violently dispersed by the police.

It must be said that during all of these events, there were participants who planned to commit acts of vandalism and destruction, and they did succeed in causing about $50,000 worth of damage, $20,000 of which was reportedly caused by a single demonstrator. But these violent protesters made up only a fraction of the demonstrators, and they necessitated a proportional police response, not overwhelming force, to stymie their efforts.

Unfortunately, the Pittsburgh Police Department instead treated all protesters as if they were violent. When applied, force and arrests were used indiscriminately, with protesters and non-protesters (including a number of University of Pittsburgh students) being targeted.

These experiences left me with a central question: What was the point of law enforcement's harsh treatment of protesters? It was clear that the amount of security dedicated to the demonstrations was excessive. I also have little doubt that the tactics used against these demonstrators instigated the violence that occurred, making them highly ineffective crowd-control methods. Even if some of the protesters were motivated to disturb the peace, these individuals appeared not to have the means or the organization to cause much damage to the city or to present any threat to the G-20 delegates.

The disproportionate police response had no goal other than to intimidate, and this was the most disturbing aspect of the police's actions. They seemed purposeless, acting only to demonstrate the force and authority they had been granted and to try out the new toys they had obtained. For example, they proudly claimed during the protests that they were the first police force in the United States to publicly use the sonic cannon.

As a nation, we allowed this to happen. As they have done many times before, the public and media stood by with seemingly little notice or concern. Because of the marginal nature of the political ideas represented by these protesters, few cared to stand up in their defense.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools