The article discusses the increasing attacks on journalists amid protests in Los Angeles, specifically noting how law enforcement's use of 'nonlethal' weapons, such as rubber bullets and tear gas, poses significant risks. While authorities claim these methods are to manage crowds without causing fatalities, the terminology can mislead. The Washington Post's use of the term 'less-lethal' exemplifies a more cautious approach, acknowledging the potential for serious injuries or death. Journalists covering protests, including Sergio Olmos from CalMatters, have recounted direct confrontations with law enforcement, highlighting ongoing dangers.
Authorities in Los Angeles have used less-lethal weapons to disperse protesters. The weapons, which include tear gas, rubber bullets and balls of pepper spray, are part of most police departments' options to respond to crowds without using lethal force. They can, however, lead to serious injury or death.
It feels like the phrase 'nonlethal' is used by authorities to soften the weaponry. ...while such weapons are meant to subdue individuals without causing death, they still can be dangerous and even deadly.
Collection
[
|
...
]