French police fire tear gas during fresh protests, say 110,000 marched in Paris

France held fresh nationwide demonstrations on October 24, one week after protests had turned violent. Marchers opposed the cost of living, but authorities feared a repeat of vandalism, looting, and clashes. Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez warned that violence or public-order disruption would not be tolerated.

Police used tear gas in Lyon, Lille, Toulouse, Montpellier, and Nantes. In Nantes, thousands broke through police lines, while some demonstrators threw projectiles and fireworks. Officers also used a water cannon. In Lyon, tear gas dispersed about 1,000 people gathered in the south of the city.

The response showed how last week's unrest shaped the new demonstrations. Police had armored vehicles, helicopters, and water cannon ready, while authorities restricted some marches and kept protesters from central areas. The main Paris protest was largely calm, but anger remained over limits placed on demonstrations and the government's security measures.

Tear gas is a crowd-control chemical that irritates the eyes, skin, and airways. Exposure can cause intense tearing, coughing, burning, and short-term breathing difficulty. The article does not identify the specific chemical used in France, but it records police deploying tear gas during several demonstrations.

Police usually release it as a cloud from canisters or launchers. Wind carries the irritant through a nearby area, prompting people to move away or cover their faces. This creates distance between officers and protesters without requiring direct physical contact. Its effectiveness depends on conditions such as wind and crowd movement.

In Nantes, police used tear gas and a water cannon after protesters broke through police lines and some threw projectiles or fireworks. In Lyon, officers used it against around 1,000 people. These incidents show the tension between restoring order and allowing protest, especially when authorities had already imposed restrictions after earlier riots.

The demonstrations were large and nationally coordinated. Police reported 110,000 people taking part in the Paris march, while authorities deployed 70,000 security forces across France. The scale mattered because the previous week's protests had produced widespread disorder, including vandalized public buildings, looted shops, and 2,700 arrests.

Paris became the clearest example of the operation's size. Shops were boarded up, the Louvre and Musée d'Orsay closed, and many central metro stations shut. Scores of riot police guarded the ring road to stop protesters from entering it. Police also prepared armored vehicles, helicopters, and water cannon.

The reported figures describe both participation and state response, though they come from authorities and police. The Paris march remained largely calm, with families watching from the sidelines, but clashes occurred elsewhere. The continuing demonstrations, including planned Yellow Vest action on October 31, suggested that security restrictions would remain central to future protests.

The immediate focus of the French demonstrations was the cost of living. Rising prices reduce what households can buy with their income, making essentials and transport harder to afford. The article specifically highlights inflation and the rising cost of fuel. It also notes overlapping concerns about education in protests across several European countries.

Fuel matters in daily life because it affects travel and transport costs. When fuel becomes more expensive, driving to work, school, shops, or appointments can cost more. It can also raise the cost of moving goods. The article says inflation in France, particularly fuel costs, has surged since the Middle East war began in February.

These pressures help explain why demonstrations continued despite heavy policing and restrictions. The Paris march was largely calm, but anger toward President Emmanuel Macron remained strong. The article gives no precise household price figures, so it cannot measure the burden for particular families. It does show that economic concerns were driving protests beyond one city.

The earlier riots changed the conditions for this week's demonstrations. Public buildings had been vandalized, hundreds of shops looted, and 2,700 people arrested. Authorities responded by restricting protest locations and banning non-union demonstrations they considered illegitimate. Protesters were kept away from city centers, while some Paris areas faced a curfew until Monday.

The consequences were visible in Paris. Many retailers boarded up windows or closed, fearing that looters would return around the demonstrations. The Louvre and Musée d'Orsay shut, and many central metro stations closed by police order. The main Paris march was pushed to the capital's southeastern edge at the last minute.

Police also prepared armored vehicles, helicopters, and water cannon after being caught flat-footed by the previous unrest. This produced a stronger security presence and contributed to a largely calm capital march, although clashes continued in Nantes and Lyon. The Yellow Vests' call for October 31 suggested that restrictions and security measures would continue shaping future protests.

The article shows French authorities using several tools to control demonstrations. They moved the main Paris march away from the center, banned non-union demonstrations they deemed illegitimate, closed central metro stations, and imposed a curfew in some areas with many shops. Police also blocked routes with lines and riot units.

These powers work by controlling where, when, and how people can gather. A location order can keep a march away from sensitive areas. A curfew can temporarily prevent people from entering or remaining in specified districts. Police lines, tear gas, and water cannon can stop a crowd from advancing when officers judge that violence or disorder threatens public safety.

The article presents a conflict between security and protest rights, rather than resolving it legally. Macron defended restrictions after the riots and blamed ultra-left groups for the worst violence. Critics, including Jean-Luc Mélenchon and the Yellow Vests, objected to limits on demonstrations. The Yellow Vests called for October 31 protests for “the freedom to protest.”

The Yellow Vests were a protest movement that staged disruptive demonstrations against President Emmanuel Macron eight years before the events described here. The article does not provide their full history or original demands. It does show that they remained an important political reference during the new unrest, especially because current demonstrations also centered on economic pressure.

Their relevance became concrete when the Yellow Vests called for more demonstrations on October 31 for “the freedom to protest.” That appeal came after authorities moved marches away from city centers, restricted some demonstrations, and imposed a curfew in selected Paris areas. It connected the earlier movement's disruptive style with present anger over protest limits.

The comparison matters because it suggests that France's unrest has both an economic and political dimension. Fuel and other living costs drove the current marches, while restrictions and anger at Macron widened the conflict. The article does not predict what will happen next, but the October 31 call indicated that demonstrations could continue.