Don't Tase Me Bro
Here's the scenario:
Senator John Kerry was speaking to a group of students in an auditorium at the Univeristy of Florida. Student Andrew Meyer barged to the front of the line to ask Senator Kerry a question. His question turned out to be an excuse for a grandstand statement and harangue - though he did ask 3 questions of the Senator. When asked by the forum presenters, he refused to yield the microphone. When asked to leave, he resisted campus security, and when arrested, he resisted arrest. The securty (I'm assuming the UF Police/Public Safety) ended up tasering Meyer and forcibly removed him from the auditorium, apparently under arrest. Where's the line here? Do the forum presenters have a right to control the questions and questioners? Should they be able to cut people off? Should they be able to ask people to leave? If people refuse to leave, can they be forcefully removed? If they resist removal, can they be arrested for trespassing? If they resist arrest, can force be used? What, if anything, should John Kerry have done? On the one hand, he is the featured guest, a Senator, has a microphone, and presumably believes himself to have some leadership skills. On the other, it was not his forum. Personally, I don't have a solid answer, but I can't help but feel that he should have had SOME sort of comment or interaction other than standing on stage and awkwardly talking over the sound of a student being arrested and tasered. There are numerous Youtube videos of this event taken from several vantage points. This one seems to have the most run-up to Meyer's removal - the shorter ones fail to convey as much context. Don't Tase Me Bro Article on Wired Quote:
|
I saw this on Digg the other day. The tasing appears to be quite excessive, from the context given. The kid was being very rude (stop giving liberals such a bad image, people), but he didn't appear to need anywhere near the force used by the officers. Not only that, but Kerry was pretty cowardly to dodge that question so much. He won the damn election and laid down as Bush took it. At least Al Gore fought a bit. The whole thing is a bit frustrating.
|
This guy was trying to get this to happen. There are reports that he was calm afterwards asking if there will be camera's where they are going etc. Then as soon as there were cameras he starting yelling and screaming again. He wanted attention, intentionally goaded the police (even before barging into the front of the line). Police have a hard enough time, we shouldn't be intentionally making it harder. Also if you look at the kids websites he does this kind of stuff all the time. I think this is a non-story.
Oh yeah and they tazed him because he was fighting and wouldn't let them put handcuffs on him. |
Quote:
|
I heard about it the next day from my brother-in-law who was there. He heard the commotion but didn't see anything. I should also point out that I think, as a Tennessee fan, that all Florida fans should be tased on general prinicple, especially after debacle on Saturday.
All joking aside, one of the negative things that I think that the civil rights movement started and that the general protesting community picked up on is a lack of civility. Yes, that is sometimes the only way to get your message across, but most non-violent forms of protest involve a lack of common courtesy. The whole point of many protests is to inconvenience as many people as possible. Perhaps that is the only way to get through to the masses, but it's irritating at times. And yes people, I think that the civil rights movement produced things besides sunshine and rainbows. That doesn't mean that it's not the right thing to do at times, and I've certainly been involved in some protests that inconvenienced people. The kid was rude. Kerry's reaction (or lack thereof) is immaterial as far as I'm concerned. The moderators of the discussion did the right thing by shutting off the microphone. The police then overreacted, as I think many campus officers do. I expect that they will most likely be looking for other work when this sorts itself out since they are conceiveably guilty of a first amendment violation since they are state employees. That said, the kid was being an asshole and deserved to be escorted from the premises for being disruptive and rude. |
Well, from what I could tell in the videos I saw John Kerry was attempting to answer the question when they started pulling the guy away. I don't understand why they couldn't just let him answer the question.
But that said, the guy was obviously grandstanding and is probably an ass. And that said, I think the campus police handled the incident shoddily. There were six of them on the one guy for crying out loud. They should have attempted to shuffle him out of there and let the event continue at the very least. |
I think that dickhead got what he deserved. He was disrupted a private function, he was asked to leave. Just look at the video when they are attempting to escort him out. That screams of resisting arrest, he was putting swim moves and all types of jukes on the security. Even notice when he was on the ground, he was resisting the officers they were attempting to get his arms behind his back and he wouldn't let them. They were well within their rights to tase that little D bag.
Look at this video... The guy is bouncing around like a maniac, and this is where I was referring to his arms. |
Well there is some merit to a discussion about why they were escorting him out for asking questions.
|
The guy was/is a dick. That said, the taser was an excessive use of force. I had originally thought his removal might have been as well, but then I learned that 1) he is well-known around campus as an attention whore and 2) what isn't seen before the video is that he runs past the rest of a line of questioners to get to the mic, and that's when the security guards come by him. Kerry agrees that he'll hear the guy's question, but the people he cut in front of need to go first (or something to that effect). When he gets his chance, that's what you see in the video.
Still, there's absolutely no need to use the taser when there are no less than 5 officers holding the person down. That weapon is used FAR too frequently lately. |
Best I can imagine he was disrupting the function. University security or police were well within their rights to remove him. He was being combative from the beginning around 2:50, they cut his mic a minute later and attempted to remove him. Besides this thing was completely preplanned by this gabroni.\
The point of the taser is to secure the suspect. He was resisting them on the ground so they couldn't cuff him, notice after a brief 2-3 second tase which is non-lethal and will have no long or short term affects outside a few seconds they were able to secure him. |
the use of a taser in that situation is excessive.
and it was bad theater. |
Well, this is an extreme case, but there is marked increase, since the Bush administration's tenure, in the amount of control exerted over questioners at political events such as this one. By both republicans and democrats. I find it rather alarming.
|
Quote:
|
I agree but, and this could just be hearsay because I can't remember where I heard it, I heard that this guy's questions were pre-screened and he was told he would be removed if he asked them.
|
I haven't heard that. If true, that's concerning.
It's always a shame when jackasses are caught up in things like this...it makes it hard to know who to believe :p |
And, you know, outside of the Skull and Bones question, I don't think they were that far out of line.
Let me see if I can find it. I believe it was in a local paper. |
As a protester, I also find it alarming. I've been doing some looking at defenses against electroshock weapons and I've come across some information:
Thick clothing. Thickness that is the equivalent of a few pairs of jeans can substantially reduce the effectiveness of tasers. Enough clothing can render them almost useless. Note: this is not suggesting to resist arrest or police orders, just to protect yourself from an attack. Don't let them tase your chest area. While tasers are considered non-lethal, they can kill you. (Tasers have been associated with almost 250 deaths) Comply or avoid. If it's a cop, do what they say exactly, and don't do anything that could reasonably be considered any type of resisting behavior or speech. While most police officers have no interest in hurting people, some do. If it's not a cop, run for it. |
Not at all, but his cutting in front of line and unwillingness to stop talking and let Kerry answer was.
willravel: Don't waste your time. Pretty soon, they'll have a new method: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System |
Being rude is not a taserable offense. Being uncooperative is not a taserable offense.
Being a threat is. I fail to see how this rude, uncooperative asshole became a threat by being obnoxious. He threw no punches and was unarmed. If being rude and uncooperative were justification for a tasering then the majority of Americans would peel darts out of their chests at some point or another in their lifetimes. Including yours truly. |
The microwave gun, I've seen that. That, also, can be easily defended against. A mesh made from a conductive metal can be sown into the inside of a jacket. Of course, that would make tasing a bit of a problem.
|
Quote:
But, what I have read just now is that this guy didn't really butt ahead of anyone because Kerry was commenting at the time on what was to be the last question. What he did was bum-rush the microphone...and not in the PE way. :p |
Quote:
All silliness aside, though. If anyone needed a good tasing...it was this ridiculous fool. Oh yeah...he had it coming. If for absolutely no other good reason, then just out of general principle. |
Well hey, I'm all for punishing people who say "bro"...I just dunno about tasers ;)
(I had an old roommate who would call people "bro." In fact, that become his nickname among me and my 2 other roommates. He wasn't well-liked :p) |
Quote:
|
nice.
so bor: say i found your last post to be stupid, and you kinda obnoxious for both what you said and how you said it. following your logic, i should be able to use a taser on you. and to justify it, all i'd have to say is: in your last post, i think you were acting like an asshole. and your tone was disruptive. and you'd be fine with that. and nothing would change about it were i a kampus kop or just some guy on the street--because laws concerning the use of excessive force dont really apply if you find the guy at the receiving end of that force to be an asshole. so it would follow that the police have a kind of taste enforcement function and if that function requires the use of tasers, then so be it. but i am really not sure that i would want kampus kops--a problematic population--to be charged with taste enforcement.... i suspect it'd be hard to get anything done on campus for the sound of tasers going off more or less continually. but maybe that's why there are i-pods. "la la la i cant hear you..." i'd rather kampus kops played by the rules. they may be in the main kind of pissy....they may not be very good....they may act as though they hate you because you are a student or a faculty person....but they have guns and tasers and loud uniforms, and i just feel a whle lot better if i can understand these very macho "security professionals" as constrained by some rules. just saying... |
Yes, in general I don't throw my support politically behind guys who say 'bro' or 'bra.'
|
George Washington said bro. So did Gandhi.
RB, I *think* BOR was kidding. I hope. If not, then I hope no one ever gives him a taser. |
i was joking as well, will.
i figure that the logical reponse to my post would be to taser me. |
This guy is probably lucky he got tased and taken out otherwise some of the people there would have probably beat his head in after it was over.
|
Quote:
I second that vote. Where was the boiling pitch and bamboo slivers under the fingernails? Oh, yeah... IT WAS REPLACED BY THE TASER. Quote:
|
Does nobody recognize the fact that the guy was resisting the police? Its not about being a threat, he was not complying with police orders. In cases such as this compliance = tazing, this idiot was obviously refusing all verbal cues which I'm sure he had ample warning, he obviously was wrestling with the police since six police where unable to secure his hands.
If this instance was so egregious, has anybody heard about any action being taken against the cops? I mean I'm sure it wouldn't be hard being on video and in an auditorium full of people including a US senator. |
I don't see the problem. The guy was resisting arrest and was struggling. If you notice in the video, they warn him that if he doesn't do what they ask they are going to tase him. Then, he struggles and tries to get to his feet, and wrenches an arm free right before he gets tased, which only lasts for a second or two. Then he whines like a little bitch for the rest of the video.
The taser seems like a safe way to get him to comply without risking injury to him or the officers. He was struggling too much for them to subdue him, and they were going to have to escalate force and risk an injury. The taser was a good alternative...it put him back on his ass and they could deal with him. I mean seriously, the guy was resisting arrest and they didn't hit him with a baton, strike him, etc. Instead, they tried to wrestle him under control and failing that they tased him. I don't think I would have had that much patience. |
Quote:
|
(takes his shirt off)
YOU AIN'T GONNA GET ME, SUCKAS! |
i don't know...i find it hard to believe that those chaps felt under particular threat from this kid. there were 5 or 6 of them, and he was on the ground...i have to say that i suspect they were a tad pissed off at him for being a dick. which is understandable. however, the people i want holding the shiny gizmos that make the tingle-tingle feeling are precisely the people who wouldn't let being pissed off at a college kid know-it-all smartass goad them into something this stupid. regardless of what you think about it - if i was a rent-a-cop campus guy, and i knew john kerry was on stage and thus might suspect there could be some media coverage...i'd tie the kid up or sit on him or whatever, then drag him.
then tase the everloving shit out of him, if you're going to do it. but don't do it on camera, and give him exactly what you have to know he wants... or better yet, just don't tase him. i'd rather have cop-type guys a little quicker between the ears than that. makes the sec look bad damnit. /fuck tennessee and florida //GO COCKS!!! |
Quote:
Resisting police... I don't know what that means. |
Right. I forgot to add that all South Carolina fans should also be tased because of their association with Visor Boy/Spurrier. Matter of fact, we should add in Alabama, Georgia, Auburn and LSU fans to the mix while we're at it. Pig I think we can agree to leave out Vandy, Mississippi State and Kentucky since it's no fun to torture the miserable.
I agree with you otherwise. The right thing to do would have been to take the guy outside then tase him. I don't see anything wrong with removing him bodily from the auditorium for being the rude dick he was. The tasing could have waited until they had him outside. |
Quote:
|
isn't this the same thing, or almost the same thing, as the kid in cali that got popped earlier this year? i think the arguments are predominantly the same here as there. not to cut off discussion, but this is going to eventually come to:
1. are tasers really 'non-lethal' or not 2. where the line is 3. what affect being on school grounds should have 4. were these particular cops/guards really making 'all the right moves' by juicing him? /only a cluster of fucking retards would adopt 'rocky fucking top' as a fight song. siva assslapping vishnu, if that's not a cry for cultural education, i don't know what is. i'll take visor boy over phil 'please don't fire me yet' fulmer anyday. :P |
Quote:
Jesus also said bro. Quote:
|
The yellow book that he was waving was Greg Palast's "Armed Madhouse." You don't have to be an asshole (as this guy obviously was) to get heated about the Ohio voter suppression in 2004, one of the topics in the book.
It's a great read and I recommend it. |
Quote:
The taser is not a handcuff. It is meant as an alternative to a gun. If he is not enough of a threat to shoot, he's not enough of a threat to tase. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
You ever been cuffed by the police Will? I have. Being hand cuffed does not mean you are being arrested. It's called being detained, they secure a suspect by cuffing him. Then they proceed with whatever investigation. Once they arrest you, yes they must mirandize you. But just because you are cuffed doesn't mean you are being arrested, nor does it mean they must mirandize you, unless they start asking you questions (which is moot because if they don't, any answers would be inadmissable as they must make you aware of your rights if you are detained and asked questions). Cops are allowed certain things. Like asking for ID, or detaining people briefly and questioning them, or in an instance where a person is being disruptive they are allowing to escort them using reasonable force. IN this instance this idiot resisted the escort and was struggling, so they opted to cuff him, at some point they took him down or he dead weighted. As clearly shown on the video he was resisting the police in their attempt to secure him, something they are allowed to do, as such tazing ensued. No where in the legal system must they tell you why you are being arrested/removed/detained on a moments notice. Once you are safely in custody and everything is figured out they might tell you what they are taking you in for, but they do not owe anyone an upfront answer as to why they are being cuffed/detained/arrested. |
This is what I thought of when I saw that video.......
Hilarious. |
Quote:
If a police officer witnesses you commit a crime, they can arrest you on the spot. No investigation necessary. Had the man in the video been committing a crime, they would have read him his Miranda rights and arrested him, if, during or after this process, he had made any physical or vocal attempts to resist, he would have been "resisting arrest". If they don't read your Miranda rights, which include the naming of the charge, then you're not being arrested properly and you'll be set free assuming your lawyer isn't Alberto Gonzales. |
They are allowed to secure a suspect first, that would mean detaining him i.e. cuffing him, and proceeding from there. He was resisting the detention and the escort from security, they were well within their rights to cuff him in the very least.
|
I agree with most of the people here.
Sure, he's a dumb kid, who was out of line, but to the extent that he deserved to get tasered? No. I think the situation was blown way out of proportion and the cops should be at fault. That's violating freedom of speech. If the boy started threatening John Kerry then yes, I would definitely see how tasers would be used. But otherwise, it's completely out of line. |
Another video of the event:
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y3vSgJNj_c0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y3vSgJNj_c0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object> At ~1:18 he is repeatedly warned to stop or he will be tased (sp?) At ~1:59 he is finally tased, after it appears that one of his hands is cuffed and that he pulls the other away from being cuffed as well. I am having trouble seeing how this use of the taser is unreasonable since he was warned 40 seconds ahead of time that if he did not cooperate it would be used. If someone tells me to cooperate or I'll be tased, I'm gonna do whatever they tell me to do! From the 1:18 to 1:59 timeframe, there appear to be at least 5 officers trying to hold him down, but they are unable to get him cuffed. So I guess my question would be, barring incompetency by the police (which is possible, but since they were the only ones there it's not like there was any other alternative): what else could have been done to restrain him? They did not use batons, a choke hold, or fists (likely those are no longer allowed if Florida is like California) and it seemed that all they wanted to do was get him out of the hall to stop being disruptive - otherwise they would have tasered him with no warning. What other option do they have that they could have used? |
Quote:
|
You don't have to be charged with anything to get cuffed. Which is what my point was.
|
Quote:
|
Is it bad that I laughed when he said, "don't tase me bro"? I think they did go overboard, but I'm not surprised by their actions. He got himself in that situation. Never defy someone in position of authority when the people they're supposed to have authority over are watching, unless you're willing to endure the inevitable pain.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I kind of wish he would have said this as he was being whisked away. "Help, Help, I'm Being Repressed! Come see the violence inherent in the system!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o76WQzVJ434# And it was totally unnessesary to tase him. Hell, it wasn't nessesary to even take him away, he wasn't a threat to anybody. |
something i'm not understanding about alot of people here so maybe these questions can be answered by them.
1)If you are not breaking ANY law, do the police have the authority to impose their will by giving you an order? 2) If you believe that they don't have that authority, do you then agree that resistance to these orders, verbal and physical, is warranted? If you believe that they do have this authority, is their a personal line that you draw where you will no longer accept an order from someone with a badge? 3) if you believe you have the right to resist what you consider an illegal or invalid order from law enforcement, how far do you believe that resistance should be pursued? |
It's nice to be on the same side of an issue, dk.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Actually, it is my understanding that you are able to defend yourself against excessive and unjustified use of force by the police. Edited to add: Of course, you would also have to both survive the incident and convince a jury to see it your way.
However, this kid was being an asshat and was resisting arrest. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Disorderly conduct is a crime, I could think of any number of bullshit to make the point the guy was out of line.
|
Dude, you gotta wonder if they tased him just because they hadn't done it before and wanted to see it work in real life / non-training environment.
...or they had done it before and it possesses addictive qualities to the user. POINT: How cool would it be to shock the crap outta somebody? That's better than a Nerf bat! |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Why does he keep stating that he's being arrested in the beginning wherein as I can see he's being escorted out.
Handcuffs do not equal being arrested. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I will say, though, that while you may feel that disturbing the peace is a catchall charge for the police, I think we saw an example of it on tape. If nothing else, I expect you'll agree with me that he was being rude. That said, the taser is in the "less-than-lethal" weapon catagory. It's meant to be used in place of a gun. It was not by any means appropriate in this situation in my opinion. |
Quote:
So this person was acting like a cow, not moving when asked, so he got treated like one. |
Quote:
Poke and prod? Cattle? There are better tools for that than a taser. |
Quote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/new...tm?bw=nb&mp=wm The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester wasn't incapacitated for any longer than it looked like needed to subdue him. Is there a different incapacitated? Because a nightstick can make anyone quite incapacitated with correct blows to the right areas. What are better tools? Talking didn't work. Human force of pushing didn't work. With the tools they had with them, what would have been appropriate? Should he just been ignored like a 5 year old child throwing a temper tantrum while everyone else just tried to "enjoy" the speach? |
I suffered a temper tantrum from a toddler from midnight to 1 a.m. this morning. Bad analogy Cyn. Granted, John Kerry had little or nothing to do with it, but it's still a sucky analogy as I try to keep my eyes open.
It was 5 on 1. The taser wasn't necessary. No one was being threatened. There was no threat of force from the detainee. He simply wasn't complying with their orders. If he'd had a knife or a gun, I'd have a much different stance, but when the manufacturer touts the product as an alternative to a gun, then I think the police have overstepped their bounds. They could have carried him out. They could have drug him out. |
An alternative to a gun is not the same thing as a defense against a gun. I don't think anyone markets the taser as a defense against guns or knives.
It's a way to apply non-lethal (mostly) force. |
Quote:
that's the crux of this discussion right? what, when, how to apply non-lethal force in order to coerce a subject to react in the requested manner. |
Quote:
i'm still flabbergasted that these cops, between the 5 of them, didn't think 'hey, that kid has camera right in my face and i'm getting ready to juice this kid. maybe i should hold off...naahhh!!! take this you fucking pinko punk!!!' |
Quote:
Isn't there some responsibility to the person being as will uses "civilly disobedient?" Or is their disobedience absolving them from any responsibility of their actions? |
I tend to think those officials in the possession of tasers have the responsibility to use them on people they would deem to be dangerous if they were not subdued.
I'm very psychically uncomfortable with the acceptance of the use of weapons to subdue people who's only crime is civil disobedience of a political nature. People forget so quickly. |
Quote:
As I look at more of the feedback from the youtube community all I can think of is the art imitating life imitating art cycle and the advent of reality TV. This guy is hamming it up for the cameras. IMO he thinks he is the visual martyr along the lines of the one man stopping tanks in Tienemann Square. Prefacing his question lining it up to make the "gotcha" moment apparent. |
I agree that the guy was hamming it up, but I fully support the rights of people to be conscientiously disobedient when they feel it is right. I have no reason to believe that this guy didn't truly feel he had the right to ask those questions without being shut down. The fact that he made the most of it is irrelevant to me. It's a matter of principle.
|
The responsibility for those that aren't being obedient doesn't seem to matter to me. The responsibility lies with the officer. If the disobedient aren't cooperating and they aren't a threat to themeselves or others, I don't see why an escalation to taser use is appropriate under any circumstances. Again, if there were a gun or knife, things would be different; they weren't.
Those who are practicing civil disobedience have the responsibility to protect themselves from harm. If they choose to ignore that responsibility and, for example, get chopped up in the propeller of Lucifer's ship when they fall off, then the only responsible party is the protester. It seems to me, Cyn, that you're arguing that two wrongs make a right in this case, and I just can't accept it. Yes, the guy was a rude asshole and was warned that he would be tased if he didn't comply. Yes, the police were wrong for escalating to that level of force. All that does is make everyone involved wrong. The guy was punished with the tasing. What about those who shot the darts and those that ordered it? |
Quote:
So at what point do I the innocent bystander have to tolerate this disobedience? At what point do those person's rights of not having to put up with his crap, AND the crappy response by the police. In short, it takes ONE asshole to ruin it for everyone, and then everyone suffers ad infintum because of it. He was well within his rights of first amendment to stand outside the hall and shout to the high heavens his opinons. He had no established right to stay inside the building after being told to leave. People seem to think that first amendment rights means that they can say what they want WHERE they want. |
Innocent bystander?
Since when did inconvenience become such a horrendous burden for people to bear? I think when people start thinking in these kinds of terms the time is ripe for civil disobedience. |
Quote:
Once he's inside, he's got every right to be heard. If it's a "controlled" venue, with a proper place designated, then he's in the wrong by being outside of that area. The innocent bystander? They have the right to tune him out. They can't silence him. Problematic, eh? |
He resisted arrest here. If a cop arrests you go with it. If you believe the cop is wrong in arresting you let him arrest you and then sue the department for false imprisonment or other violations. But don't resist them. These officers fought to get him in handcuffs and he kept resisting. The cops were within their right to do this and I am confident they will be cleared as a result of the investigation.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
From what I've read he barged in front of others who also had a right to be heard. People who were in line and orderly. He's trumped their rights by cutting in front of them, and then causing a disturbance which distrupted the rest of the questions presented from what I can hear in the background audio. So his civil disobedience rights, trump their rights? Or like the innocent bystander, they have the right to stand there and not be heard? Further when time is over, but someone still hasn't been heard, then what? |
As soon as the authorities (school officials) ask him to leave, he's trespassing. He may have a right to political speech, but he doesn't have a right to trespass.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Student Andrew Meyer barged to the front of the line to ask Senator Kerry a question. other news coverage state similar, so barging/cutting whatever you like to call it. what I was referring to "and then causing a disturbance which distrupted the rest of the questions presented from what I can hear in the background audio" is for the Q&A during and after the incident. You can see from multiple footage that people are distracted by the incident including Mr. Kerry. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
http://www.alligator.org/articles/20...rrestbreak.txt
Quote:
|
Quote:
If he were making farting sounds with his hands and had been removed, I don't think that there would be any sort of protests similar to what you're describing. That would be the same protected speech, interestingly enough, albeit low-class, low-humor speech. My big problem is the tasering here, not the removal of a disruptive individual. |
The_Jazz: Indeed, that's the entire reason I thought this event was thread-worthy.
I think there is general, although not universal, agreement that the end game of the scenario is over the line. The discussion points, to me, lie in exactly at what point the situation went over the line, why it did so, and how it could have been avoided. |
thanks mm, a bit better context, and nice that Mr. Kerry did continue to answer the question.
ub, I guess the question is ultimately how do you deal with real life trolls. There's no ban stick or moderation delete button. |
i do think this is interesting, as mixed and jazz have referred in some way, to the points made in lucifer's thread on the greenpeace incident. what message does this send? what message does it send that some of us condone the use of tasers to subdue a non-complying student at a political speech?
is it only police officers / security guards who have this right to tase for noncompliance? should parents be allowed to tase unruly kids, or school administrators tase students? to answer your question cyn, and i guess it echo's jazz: i hold the police / security to a higher standard than i hold a student at a political rally. i expect the police to be smarter than this. i expect them to be better trained. as for the responsibility of the non-compliant...when did the law become that we had to become compliant? what the fuck does that even mean? he wasn't breaking any laws, under what legal right was he removed and tased? trespassing? disorderly conduct? inciting a riot? i think these are the interesting questions, personally. edit: just saw the bit on trespassing and so forth. that actually strikes me as odd...that a student at a university can be trespassing on school grounds, but i guess so. i still think he has the right to protest that removal, and that the appropriate response is not a taser in the ass. |
Quote:
BTW, if someone shot me with a microwave weapon, they would melt my artificial aorta and would be directly responsible for my death. I'd hardly call a microwave weapon non-lethal. |
Actually Will the second he was asked to leave and he refused he could have been arrested for a number of things (like trespassing). When he fought with the police trying to remove him he broke more laws thus they could arrest him. When the tried to cuff him he continued to resist thus he resisted arrest.
In the end was he arrested? Yes. Did he resist? Yes. Thus he resisted arrest. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
The police where there on behest of the people running the event. The people running the event gave them the authority to remove people from the premises. A better analogy would be if your friend called the police asking them to remove you from his property and you told the police to fuck off.
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:27 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project