By Julia Lopez, CVPost community reporter
An online petition created by the Eau Claire Justice League (ECJL) is bringing a national issue closer to home and has already led to a meeting between the Eau Claire Police Department and concerned citizens.
On Change.org, the Justice League, a local activists’ organization founded in June by Jalyn Carlson, requested the police department and the Eau Claire City Council to “Ban Tear Gas and Rubber Bullets in Eau Claire.” The ECJL has described itself as a grassroots community group whose members are passionate about social justice.
It noted “police brutality” at multiple demonstrations in cities like Minneapolis and Portland this summer, including many cases where police used tear gas and/or projectiles to disperse otherwise peaceful marches.
Eau Claire Police Chief Matt Rokus said it’s important to listen to concerns citizens bring forth and that he doesn’t take their input lightly. However, he said completely banning these items from police use is not in anyone’s best interest.
“I think it’s important to point out for the conversation that these force options can be considered in a variety of circumstances,” Rokus said in a recent phone interview with the CVPost. “And they have a variety of practical applications beyond a violent crowd control situation.”
Concerns are with potential use here
Luke Seidel, Director of Political Affairs at the ECJL, said local citizens’ concerns are with the potential for similar tactics to be used in Eau Claire at any point in the future.
“We want to take a hard look at why we have these weapons in the police arsenal and at how they’re used,” Seidel said. “In the end, we want to protect assemblies, protests and demonstrations.”
David Shih, president of the Chippewa Valley Civil Liberties Union, declined a request to comment on the petition.
Members of the Justice League met with Rokus on Aug. 5, for what Seidel described as a round-table discussion about their requests and police policy.
Seidel said one goal of the Justice League’s petition was to open up a conversation among the community and the police and added that he was glad to see those discussions begin.
While Rokus said current policies are “about as tight as they could safely be right now,” Seidel said he and the Justice League may be willing to compromise and advocate for policy change that bans the use of less lethal force options from crowd control settings.
Rokus: Terminology and policies must be understood
Rokus said it’s important to understand the terminology and the policies behind these concerns.
“The petition that’s being brought forth uses the terms ‘tear gas and rubber bullets,’” Rokus said. “Those are very broad definitions of a variety of less lethal force options that are available to police agencies.”
Rokus said the term “less lethal force options” describes items such as “kinetic energy projectiles” (rubber or foam bullets) that police may use in situations that might otherwise call for more harmful action.
“We have the officers dealing with somebody with a firearm, okay?” Rokus said. “Or a knife and they’re threatening somebody else. You take these items away. What are we left with? We’re left with a regular firearm, and I think we all know the catastrophic consequences of that.”
Comments from people at demonstrations
Several people who attended local demonstrations said they felt safe during the marches but would feel safer if those force agents were banned.
“I’m against the use of less lethal options like rubber bullets for crowd control because people who are peaceful protestors obviously shouldn’t be getting shot,” said Molly Larson, a UW-Eau Claire junior. “But I think if it’s like an alternative to a shootout where there’s an armed suspect, obviously, that’s better than using an actual gun.”
“I think that tear gas is unjust,” Ximona Pederson, a senior at UW-EC, said. “And I think that you don’t have to use tear gas and rubber bullets to make a statement to the public who are trying to peacefully protest.”
Instead, Pederson said, she advocates for better police training, in crowd control situations as well as in implicit bias.
Concerns over having these options available
Other demonstrators said that while they didn’t fear escalation at demonstrations here, they believe these options are still dangerous to have in any police arsenal.
“I think we need a change of policy and we need to probably end up banning that exact substance (tear gas),” Jonathan Karow, another UW-EC student, said. “I believe tear gas is banned under the Geneva Convention . . . to use in warfare, so the fact that we would use it against our own citizens is a little bit disconcerting.”
Chemical weapons and “riot control agents” were banned from use in war under the 1925 Geneva Protocol, according to U.S. Department of State archives.
“Tear gas is brutal and should not have a place in crowd control or dispersal of crowds,” Seidel said.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) define riot control agents (or “tear gas”) as “chemical compounds that temporarily make people unable to function by causing irritation to the eye, mouth, throat, lungs and skin,” with potential long-term health effects including eye scarring, asthma, or blindness, in extreme cases.
As of last Thursday (Aug. 13), 749 people have signed the petition, including Karow and Pederson.
Larson, who is considering signing the petition, said “I definitely think changing the policy to be specifically, cannot be used for crowd control, would be a good thing.”
Policies here guard against inappropriate use
But Rokus noted that the ECPD has strong policies in place that ensure officers do not use such control agents inappropriately.
“The misconduct we’ve seen in the news of tear gas being thrown into passive, peaceful crowds- that’s a real issue,” Rokus said. “That’s a real concern. But that’s not allowed here.”
The department’s Policy Manual Section 303.2 states officers may be authorized to use control devices “(I)n order to control subjects who are violent or who demonstrate the intent to be violent…in accordance with the guidelines in this policy and the Use of Force Policy.”
Those guidelines include restrictions on who can carry such devices, as well as when it may be appropriate to use them.
“Gas may be used for crowd control, crowd dispersal or against barricaded suspects based on the circumstances,” Section 303.6 states. That’s following approval from a supervisor or commander, after “evaluating all conditions known at the time and determining that such force reasonably appears justified and necessary.”
However, Rokus said that crowd control agents may never be necessary in Eau Claire.
“Based on the quality of our community members,” Rokus said, “when they have gathered to demonstrate or exercise their First Amendment rights, it’s been done peacefully. And so we haven’t needed to even consider using those items.”
Demonstrators didn’t feel threatened here
Larson, Pederson and Karow all said they had never felt threatened by the ECPD, even at the large Black Lives Matter march that took place downtown following the George Floyd demonstrations in Minneapolis.
“They were just there to block off the roads and make sure cars didn’t try driving down the streets,” Larson said. “I didn’t see many police around.”
Rokus said that he makes a point of contacting organizers before a demonstration in order to collaborate for a “safe, successful event.”
Seidel said that while he commends Rokus and the ECPD for their community involvement, the petition still calls for necessary preventive measures. The ECJL is working on an open forum with the police department to continue the conversation.
“I think the chief has done a great job and leads the department in a great way,” Seidel said. “But the tough part is looking at these institutions and saying, ‘Hey, there’s a chance that harm can happen.’”
If you liked this story, please remember there were costs involved in producing it. The CVPost has no paywall, and we rely on our readers to help us meet the costs of reporting community news and information you often won’t find elsewhere.
Annual CVPost membership is $50, but contributions of any amount also matter. Please consider helping community supported journalism survive by clicking the Donate button below.
James Morgan says
Law and order is critical and the proper tools are required. Many protester are far from peaceful. Just try walking down the street with a MAGA hat on and you could be assaulted. However you can display a sign supporting blm and that is suppose to be some type of good thing. The media wont report that BLM is full of racist criminals that burn buildings and assault people. Strict law and order required, along with conceal and carry. Journalism in America is 95 % left wing propaganda, please don’t be a part of it. Truth is required for your marriage, work and mankind to be successful.