Cell phone video of the police assault shows a wall of officers in riot gear directing “non-lethal” fire at a group of unarmed and terrified civilians — including several small children, who were shielded by a man who appeared to be their father. Another officer unleashed a police dog, which immediately attacked a stroller containing an infant. A bystander who interposed himself — and was mauled by the dog for doing so — probably saved the child’s life.
Local news accounts, which retailed the department’s version of events, described the crowd as “unruly” and the protest as a “near-riot” in which angry citizens “encircled” the officers and “began throwing things, including bottles and possibly rocks, at them,” in the words of a Los Angeles Times report.The police also claimed that “several fires” had been started in trashcans. None of those claims have been been corroborated by video evidence or eyewitnesses. Nor have the police explained why the police gunned down the young man, referred to only as “Stomper,” after he and two others fled when approached by the cops.
Immediately after the shooting, several residents confronted the police to demand answers. The Anaheim PD — sensing an ominous tremor of righteous outrage on the part of a neighborhood that has endured seven “officer-involved shootings” this year — reverted to type as an army of occupation: Within a matter of minutes, the unarmed protesters were outnumbered by heavily armed cops in body armor.
In the wake of the Aurora massacre, the public has been encouraged to believe that because of private gun ownership, every public gathering place can be transformed into the scene of a massacre. The Anaheim police rampage illustrates how quickly the State’s armed enforcement caste — which, according to “gun control” activists, should have a monopoly on firearms — can turn any neighborhood into an urban war zone.
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.