See the British protests a while back.

People rioting and people by people rioting sometimes get hit in the head... that's just how it goes.  Rubber Bullets bounce, excetera.

You obviously use tear gas on people running towards the person because you have no idea if they're trying to rush you or help the person.

Why it all happened is basic common sense unless you have an agenda.

Again, note how the footage all begins after he was hit.  I'd notice how he's a hell of a lot closer to the baracade then the most of the protesters,  IE he obviously either refused to move back or activly advanced towards the police.

And watch this video again.  Explain your rationalization for the throwing of a flashbang into a group of protesters who were around someone on the ground, crying out for someone to help.  Do you have ANY rationalization here?  Aren't you going to get tired yet of rationalizations being made for this?  Or are you SO polarized in one camp, the idea of acceptable behavior is only relevant when is supports your opinion of things?  This video below is before anyone was hit and shows the context.  It shows the entire incident with one person on the ground and a crowd around him.

They're people, not zombies. Unless he was going OVER the barricade, it was an excessive use of force. If the police were as passionate about controlling drug distribution in this country, there wouldn't be such a rampant drug problem. But of course, the police are paid to ignore that.

They weren't on the ground.  It was thrown as people were rushing towards the guy... aka rushing towards the barricades as well it's, common sense.

Though it doesn't look like a flashbomb to me.  Looks like a teargas bomb that explodes for some reason, you can see smoke coming out of it and a flash bang really should of been a lot brighter/blinded the camera.

Either way, smoke bomb/flashbomb, don't really see that big of a difference.

And I'd support using those kind of means against any unruly protestors who weren't following the rules of a protest and were crowding police barriers.

Whether i support their positions or not. 

Also, no it doesn't show the entire incident, cause you know.... it already started with the guy on the ground.

Though even that video seems totally justified, people were rushing towards the barricades, when your in the field you don't have the luxuray of assuming that none of them are planning to jump the barrier and start a melee.

Actually if you want to hear both sides of the story....

Question: Did the Police deploy rubber bullets, flash-bang grenades?  

Answer: No, the loud noised that were heard originated from M-80 explosives thrown at Police by protesters. In addition, Police fired approximately four bean bag rounds at protesters to stop them from throwing dangerous objects at the officers.

What are you crazy?  If you let a group of people get close enough that someone is trying to jump the barriacde your fucked at that point.  You end up in a melee, piss off people instead of scare off people and end up with london style riots.

I mean, how soon are people forgetting the student tuition. riots in the UK.

It wasn't excessive force at all, guy just got unlucky that a rubber bullet bounced up and hit him in the head.  It's just another example of why you should protest responsibily.

Darn shame the police don't bother to video record anything they do or the incident or whatever.

Anyhow, if anyone is reading this here, who isn't really taking sides, let me know if you can seen ANY place there would be a chance to reach any common ground here? I am not seeing any of it. I swear, if something like Kent state happened with regards to Occupy, people would say the shooting was justified by the police.

I also suggest people look at that video, and count how far away they are from the barricade. Go look at it. Seriously, look at it. I look at it several times and the crowd was feet away from it. Be interesting if anyone there could actually jump the fence.

Hate to say this, but I don't see any way any conversation can take place here. If people can't even look at a video, showing an entire incident and even agree to what the basics of reality are, and can try to justify a grenade being thrown in a crowd of people who were surrounded someone downed, then how can any discussion even take place? If anyone has any idea, let me know. I just don't see it. And the grenade was thrown after the people surrounded, not while they were rushing. Seriously?

I will say, if there isn't a chance to reach any common ground, things ARE lost here. This trend continues, the use of lethal force and corpses in the street will be seen as justified. Just keep on thinking the other side is more and more evil. It will happen. And in that, people will grow content with a police state that fatally enforces rules. And people protesting will be seen as wrong, because you know, the violence against them by the state only shows that they are in the wrong.

And that is the game. Apparently zero interest in reaching any sort of common ground. Oh well, carry on.

I've posted a few times in here, but I haven't posted anything significant because I really don't know much about this stuff.  However if pressed I would have to say that I am on the side of Kasz/Happysquirrel/badgenome. 

Any, to what you have in bold, I can't possibly see how you can consider that an entire incident.  The video starts with the dude on the ground.  We have no idea what happened before that.  It could have been a) The protestors were being calm and following rules and the police attacked them brutally and without warrant, or b) the protestors were getting out of hand and the police did what they thought was appropriate.  I have no idea what happened, no one does except for those who are there, but for some reason you are automatically assuming its a, when it just as likely could have been b.

If I went up to a stranger and started beating them in the face, and then turned on a camera right before they retaliated against me, it would just look like some enraged dude is attacking an innocent man with a camera. 

To sum it up, I try to get both sides of the story before I can really put together a well informed opinion, but with all of these videos we are only getting the OWS side of the story.  If it turns out that the police are being complete out of line assholes, then so be it and they should get fired/arrested, but until the full story comes out, everyone is just making assumptions.

EDIT: And what do you know, as Kasz pointed out below, the protestors were throwing rocks and firecrackers at the police before the video starts, so it looks like it was option b.

Im sure the ensuing lawsuit and the cost to Oakland will be much wanted by the city, and will praise the police officer for hitting someone at least 10 feet from the barricade. If people are going towards the barricades but are not at the barricades, then there is no harm, no foul.

By your logic, I should stab or shoot anyone who walks within 5 feet of me, you never know which one might be a mugger. Seems kind of insane in that context, no? That's what your justification for "scaring off" people sounds like.

An argument for that is that authorities and the government has a right to act the way no one else in society does, in the name of public safety and security.

Stab or shoot?  No,   Shoot with a beanbag gun if your the police and they are part of a riotous crowd who is thorwing M80's and rocks at the police and lighting things on fire? (note the lit trash everywhere)  Yeah... i'd say that'd be the safe thing to do.