Police settle suit over use of tear gas during Missouri protests

[Eugene]

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - Three Missouri police agencies have agreed to restrict the use of tear gas as part of a settlement of a lawsuit alleging that officers used heavy-handed tactics to quell protests in Ferguson after a white officer fatally shot an unarmed black teen.

The settlement requires police to warn demonstrators and give them reasonable time to disperse before using tear gas or other chemical agents in response to non-criminal activity.

U.S. District Judge Carol Jackson dismissed the case formally on Thursday, but retained jurisdiction through 2017 to enforce the settlement terms. The settlement follows along the lines of an order Jackson entered in December.

Police are not required to warn or give time to disperse when there is an imminent threat of bodily harm to people, damage to property or if law enforcers must defend themselves.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/27/us-usa-police-missouri-idUSKBN0MN01P20150327

---

US | Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:27pm EDT

[WDIM]

1. The use of chemical weapons against citizens should be illegal

Period

[cstanleytech]

2. Umm how about no. While it certainly was not wise usage here tear gas itself

is a better option than some like.............bullets.

[WDIM]

3. how about just letting the people protest.

No need for bullets or tear gas the police instigate the chaos then the protestors get blamed. If they would just let the people march and let the people protest give them their freedom to assemble and freedom of speech.

[cstanleytech]

4. I have absolutely no problem with people peacefully protesting

as thats a first amendment right but the problem is though not all protests remain peaceful and for those cases (as rare as they are) the police need ways disperse them and I prefer ways that dont involve them using bullets which is why I am pointing out that your idea of making it illegal to use tear gas is just a bad idea.