And what is known about the maneuvers of the PPB? ED Kain, a Forbes contributor, has been observing Occupy events around the country -- especially police response incorporating pepper spray -- and has offered some opinions, including:

"What strikes me most about these events is how short-sighted the police have been. Excessive use of force should be followed by condemnation from police officials and governments. Public relations is critical to doing good, safe police work and any time police departments are perceived as unfair, violent, or outside the law they lose public trust. A loss for police in the realm of public relations can lead to less cooperative communities and serious safety issues for officers."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/11/19/police-should-criticize-not-defend-excessive-use-of-force-at-uc-davis/

"Stopping criminal behavior is one thing. Spraying peaceful protesters, even if they won’t move, is quite another."

A "peaceful protester" was caught on tape striking a police officer's horse in the middle of a crowd. Had the animal spooked, who knows how many people could have been injured or worse. From the video I have seen, the police are clearly being taunted, & antagonized. It's part of their strategy for keeping the media attention. If their protests were orderly, there would soon be no coverage.
It's time to make it too unpleasant for these attention seekers to operate. Firehoses come to mind. Simply giving you some relief from the pepper spray.

Very good Link Gardiner Menefree! To bad most LE in these parts don't get it.

A "peaceful protester" was caught on tape striking a police officer's horse in the middle of a crowd. Had the animal spooked, who knows how many people could have been injured or worse. From the video I have seen, the police are clearly being taunted, & antagonized. It's part of THE PROTESTERS strategy for keeping the media attention. If their protests were orderly, there would soon be no coverage.
It's time to make it too unpleasant for these attention seekers to operate. Firehoses come to mind. Simply giving you some relief from the pepper spray.

In a slightly earlier piece, Forbes contributor Kain provided context for his opinion regarding pepper spray in several of the coordinated police responses around the country:

"And make no mistake, the powers of the police in this country have grown out of hand. I’ve written at length on the militarization of the police, of SWAT team abuses, and the way that the war on terror and the war on drugs have both contributed to what is really just a war on individual liberty. Occupy Wall Street may need to grow up and evolve, but a far greater and more pressing issue facing this country is what to do about the security state we’ve erected about us at the local, state, and federal level.

Between the Patriot Act and the War on Drugs, it’s hard to see a light at the end of the tunnel."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/11/19/police-response-to-occupy-wall-street-is-absurd/

Will, that's quite an authoritarian sympathy card you offer to the police. So, protestors verbally antagonizing/taunting armor clad professionally trained police ON DUTY gives the police a pass for their violent reprisal with clubs pepper spray and pulling hair. The CIRCUMSTANCE justifies the violent over-reaction . Boy, cols psychological tolerance must be pretty fragile (sticks and stones can break my bones don't call me names or I'll hurt you?)

But when the CIiRCUMSTANCE is when protestors are run down by a horse or cross checked in the throat by an out of control mob of robo cops and the complimentary anger and outrage from the people who have been actually physically hurt (and their friends who witness it) isn't predictable? Isn't right?

Are police really such tender delicate flowers that you allow them to physically retailiate for name calling? I for one think they should have the mental strength to be on the job and take anything anyone wants to call them.

caught on tape, will?
link or it's hearsay.

To Gardiner and Bingo -

So, if the protesters DON'T do as they are asked by the police, then what??? Gee, they are using pepper spray, hmmm, maybe it should be rubber bullets?? To folks like you, it doesn't make any difference WHAT kind of force is used, any kind of force is too much in your world. Thankfully, we do not live in your world, we live in one where we are a nation of laws and give certain people the authority and means to carry out those laws. If you are asked by a police officer to do something (or not do something) as a citizen you'd best comply with the request. If you feel the request was out of line, then we have a system with courts and lawyers that you many take recourse in. If you are stupid enough to NOT comply with a police officer's request, we have authorized him to escalate measures till you DO comply; or did you forget civil ethics 101 lessons?

Using your interpretation of what police can and can not do, then feel free to steal from a store, and ignore the store owner and the police when they tell you to stop. Feel free to walk into someone's home and help yourself, and ignore the homeowner and the police when they tell you to stop. Where does you 'line' lie? At what point (in your world) is it okay for the police to escalate the amount of force and when is it too much?

Bottom line, they had their time to express their 1st amendment rights and in doing so they trampled the rights of many, many other citizens. Time to get them out of there and send they way. If they want change, then take their business elsewhere, spend their money elsewhere, vote in someone you like. I'm with Will, they can bring in the fire hoses any time!!!!-

The courts in Boston have said there is no time limit on being able to express First Amendment rights which seems to match the intention of the words.

"What kind of man would hit a poor defenseless animal?"

This Occupy Portland-affiliated endeavor yesterday appears to have been overlooked by this blog:

"The march started with a rally at Tom McCall Waterfront Park, featuring speakers from single-payer advocacy groups, many of whom are health professionals or students.

Standing over her family as they helped stick 558 crosses in the ground at Waterfront Park to symbolize the Oregonians who died last year from lack of health insurance, Swallow's wife, Marsha, said she was repeatedly denied individual insurance because she has rheumatoid arthritis. Her husband must keep a job that covers their four children now.

'If we had single-payer for everybody, it would encourage entrepreneurship,' Keith Swallow said, because he knows many small-business owners worry about covering employees.

At Pioneer Square, organizer Dr. Paul Gorman, part of Mad As Hell Doctors, asked the marchers to talk about why they were mad as hell. A father lamented that he chooses between $400 monthly multiple sclerosis medication for himself or food for his four children. A 4-year temporary worker at the Oregon Zoo still doesn't have benefits. A former medical transcriptionist never had health care through years of working in the health care industry."
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2011/11/occupy_portland_teams_up_with.html

If you are stupid enough to NOT comply with a police officer's request, we have authorized him to escalate measures till you DO comply; or did you forget civil ethics 101 lessons?

Sounds like you need a civics lesson. We have never authorized police to make - let alone "escalate measures" to enforce compliance with - illegal requests. That would be why the city paid out millions in settlements for the anti-war protests several years back.

Seriously, you want to give police ultimate power to do what they like and then sort it all out in court later? Ever read the Bill of Rights?

Ex-bartender -
"...to enforce compliance with - illegal requests"

And WHO decided it was/is an illegal request? You want illegal, gee camping in a downtown public park is illegal. Marching without a permit is illegal. Refusing to disperse/disband when requested by the police is ILLEGAL. Police are authorized to use "reasonable force" - here is a lawyers definition of "reasonable force".

"Simply put, reasonable force is the amount of force that a reasonable person would use under similar circumstances. For example, if an officer is attempting to arrest an unarmed suspect who refuses to physically comply, it may be considered reasonable for the officer to use a taser or pepper spray to force the suspect into compliance. However, it would not be considered reasonable for an officer to use deadly force on an unarmed suspect in a similar situation."

Right now, to me, fire hoses would qualify as reasonable force.