By Matt Underwood LASD shot LAPD with rubber bullets and tear gas during the No Kings protest, an incident highlighted by frantic radio calls revealing a chaotic scene of friendly fire. The initial radio transmission from an LAPD officer urged LASD deputies to cease crossfire, warning of “blue on blue” incidents.
Despite this warning, or perhaps due to a failure in communication, approximately 20 minutes later, another LAPD officer radioed for assistance in dispersing a crowd, simultaneously reporting that they were receiving less-lethal munitions from LASD.
Further radio calls underscored the continuing issue, with officers reporting they were being shot at by LASD deputies while simultaneously facing attacks from protesters throwing rocks and bottles. This points to a significant breakdown in coordination and communication between the two law enforcement agencies.
The incident is viewed by some as a stark illustration of the internal problems within LASD. Comments suggest a deep-seated culture of violence and gang activity within the department, contrasting sharply with the LAPD, which, while not without its issues, is perceived by some as a comparatively more restrained force. The notion that the LASD’s actions were somehow justified in targeting violent protesters doesn’t negate the fact that their actions constituted friendly fire, creating an extremely dangerous situation.
The event has prompted concerns about the lack of clear command structure, leading to a potentially deadly situation for the officers involved. The incident raises questions about training, leadership, and the overall effectiveness of inter-agency collaboration during protests or high-stress situations. The lack of clear identification between officers from different agencies likely exacerbated the confusion and resulted in friendly fire incidents. Uniforms and identification systems could certainly be reviewed to improve inter-agency communication and reduce the possibility of these events occurring in the future.
Several comments raise questions about the hiring and training standards within law enforcement agencies. The incident is seen as an example of larger systemic issues within law enforcement, where accountability is lacking, and a culture of violence may be tolerated, if not actively encouraged. The low standards are partially blamed for the high frequency of friendly fire incidents.
The use of less-lethal munitions, in this case, rubber bullets and tear gas, caused injuries amongst the officers, highlighting the potential dangers even with non-lethal weapons, especially when used in a chaotic and poorly coordinated environment. The cost of these injuries, and the resulting worker’s compensation claims, were also subjects of discussion amongst commenters. This event underscores a significant financial burden, and the indirect societal cost in terms of the public’s trust in law enforcement.
The incident underscores broader concerns about the effectiveness of large-scale law enforcement responses to protests. The sheer number of agencies involved and the potential for miscommunication, coupled with conflicting objectives, are identified as factors contributing to the chaos and the potential for serious injury or death. Concerns about potential escalation to lethal force, due to the chaotic nature of the friendly fire, were expressed, as were concerns about the lack of adequate training and communication between agencies.
In conclusion, the incident where LASD shot LAPD with rubber bullets and tear gas during the No Kings protest is a multifaceted event pointing to several underlying problems. It shines a spotlight on the need for improved communication, better inter-agency coordination, stricter accountability for misconduct, and thorough review of hiring and training standards within law enforcement. The lack of uniformity in attire and identification of officers is viewed as a significant contributor to the friendly fire incidents and the generally chaotic atmosphere. The whole event serves as a cautionary tale of what can happen when law enforcement agencies don’t work together effectively and are plagued by internal issues.