http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/28/local/la-me-officer-sentenced-20110528

“their mission is to violently enforce the will of the rich, which includes silencing any challenge to the status quo.” WRONG.

“The fact that this includes making society safe – for commerce and to ensure that the upper middle class can comfortably sleep at night – is only a collateral benefit to the rest of us.” WRONG.

You are entitled to your opinion, however misguided it may be, but please understand if you attempt to present said statements as fact you should provide citations so I may see where you get your “facts” from for myself.

Some choice quotes from that decisions:
“[13] The protestors were nonviolent and unarmed. None were physically menacing. [14] They posed no danger to themselves. A reasonable factfinder could have concluded that using pepper spray bore no reasonable relation to the need for force.

[15] That the defendants were frustrated by the protestors was irrelevant. [16] The reasonableness of a use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene. ”

“The use of pepper spray is not reasonable simply because police have the legitimate objective of making an arrest. A rational juror could have concluded that the nonviolent trespass did not render pepper spray necessary to effect the arrests.”

(Yep, the job of the police is to violently enforce the will of the rich, so you are correct. That’s why cops are the enemy. Sure there are a few good ones, but most of them are “just following orders” when it comes to crushing peaceful protests.)