smh.com.au
Journalist Injured by Police Rubber Bullet at Los Angeles Protest
During Los Angeles protests, Australian journalist Lauren Tomasi and an ABC cameraman were injured by police rubber bullets; the incident underscores the dangers of 'less-lethal' weapons, causing death and injury globally.
- How can the inherent risks associated with kinetic impact projectiles, such as rubber bullets, be mitigated to ensure their responsible and safe use in crowd control?
- The LAPD's use of 40mm sponge rounds, fired at high speeds, raises concerns about accuracy and potential for serious harm, despite targeting guidelines. The inherent inaccuracy and potential for misuse of kinetic impact projectiles, as highlighted by Amnesty International, necessitate a reassessment of their use in crowd control.
- What are the broader implications of the increasing availability and use of 'less-lethal' weapons globally, considering the documented cases of serious injury and death?
- The incident highlights the risks associated with 'less-lethal' weapons like rubber bullets. While intended to incapacitate without causing major injury, a 2017 study in BMJ Open revealed that these weapons caused at least 53 deaths and 300 permanent disabilities globally.
- What are the immediate consequences of the use of rubber bullets by law enforcement in crowd control situations, as exemplified by the injuries sustained by the journalists in Los Angeles?
- Australian journalist Lauren Tomasi was injured by a rubber bullet fired by a Los Angeles police officer during Monday's protests, sustaining a bruise. A nearby ABC cameraman was also struck, experiencing chest pain despite wearing a Kevlar vest.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing of the article emphasizes the dangers and negative consequences of using rubber bullets and less-lethal weapons. While it presents some information on their intended use, the focus remains on the potential for harm and the criticisms surrounding their use. The headline and opening sentences immediately highlight the injury to the journalist, setting a tone of concern and criticism.
Language Bias
The article uses fairly neutral language, although words like "bloody big old bruise" (in a quote) and descriptions of serious injuries could be perceived as emotionally charged. However, this seems to be reflecting the reality of the situation rather than injecting bias. The use of terms such as "less-lethal weapons" is noted as a misnomer, given the documented fatalities.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the injuries caused by rubber bullets and less-lethal weapons, and includes statistics on deaths and injuries. However, it could benefit from including perspectives from law enforcement on the use of these weapons in crowd control situations and the training provided to officers. It also doesn't discuss the context of the protests themselves, which could provide further understanding of the situation.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the misuse of less-lethal weapons by law enforcement, leading to injuries and even deaths. This undermines the rule of law, and police accountability, and fails to uphold justice and human rights. The use of rubber bullets in crowd control situations, as described, raises serious concerns about excessive force and disproportionate responses by law enforcement, contradicting the principles of justice and peaceful conflict resolution.