PDA

View Full Version : Florida Student Tasered at Kerry Forum


RobQel-Droma
09-19-2007, 01:06 AM
Here's the link to a main article:

http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/runninscared/archives/2007/09/florida_student.php

I don't know about you, but I find the actions of the police outrageous. They advanced on this kid and ended up tasering him with no provocation, and in doing so violated his rights of free speech. What is this, the world of the secret police, where they arrest you for speaking out against someone politically? I thought free speech was one of the most important rights we have - and here we have police violating them.

Web Rider
09-19-2007, 01:14 AM
To my knoweledge of the case, the kid was imposing into the time of others, began kicking and fighting the cops when they attempted to seperate him from the mic LONG after his time ran out.

not to mention this was a private function and people could be asked to leave if necessary. Free speech does not give you a free ticket to be an ass. Which is what this kid was being.

RobQel-Droma
09-19-2007, 01:25 AM
The kid wasn't being an ass. In fact, he said thanks to Kerry in the beginning, then gave some background info to his questions, and then asked them. Then, all of a sudden - bam. His mic is cut *without* warning. Then police began to drag him off.

As I said, no provocation either. He wasn't asked, he was dragged and then told to leave. True, I agree. Just cause you have free speech doesn't mean you can be an ass, but.... he does have the right. The cops were the ones acting wrongfully anyways, they didn't ask him to leave, they just began dragging him off.

Not only that, they have no right to drag some kid to the ground who has done nothing wrong and taser him multiple times, while the kid is screaming for them to stop. What sickens me is that at first the audience was laughing and applauding like it was a show.... although they weren't when they started tasering him. It was totally uncalled for.

Seriously, if you watch the video, you can hear the kid say "I'll leave the building" or something similar to the officers. But they don't let him up and throw him on the ground. And then these taser-happy cops start shocking him; come on, like 5 cops, and they can't subdue him without a taser?

It was also sickening to hear John Kerry make remarks about "too bad he (the kid) couldn't inaugurate me as President" and not even make any effort to step in.

stingerhs
09-19-2007, 02:30 AM
now that video was appalling. if there isn't an outcry over this, then there truly is no justice in this world. my guess is that those cops were under orders to arrest him, but the way that they underwent it was way overdone.

in truth, he was being rather combative towards those police, but honestly, i don't see why he would have acted differently given the fact that he was being arrested without anything explained to him.

seriously, this was just plain wrong, and something needs to be done.

Bob Lion54
09-19-2007, 02:38 AM
He was tasered because he resisted the police. That is all there is to it. Trying to make something of it that its not, is silly at best.

He was getting worked up and two officers came in to escort him out. It is VERY unlikely he would have been arrested. For one thing, its more paperwork for the cops. Seriously, arresting someone means paperwork. Escorting someone from a building does not. Also, at public events, cops are more likely to escort people out of a building than arrest them. Its only when they person is drunk or really disorderly that they are arrested.

They would have preferred to let him go on his merry way after he left the room/building, but the kid saw the cops and decided he was being arrested. At that point he freaked out and started yelling about being arrested and tried to fight with the cops. He was clearly agitated BEFORE the cops stepped in and when he saw a badge, his "fight or flight" told him to fight.

People act like a idiot and when the cops come in they decide to fight them, but its the cops fault...

I couldn't get the video you posted to load for some reason, but I found this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE&mode=related&search=

Watch the order of events carefully.
1) The kid was on the mic talking to Kerry and getting worked up. You can see the cops are standing behind him. They likely moved into that position when they felt he might be trouble. Notice, they are just standing there watching. You can see the female cop turn to her partner, likely they are discussing if they need to take action. Its also possible they where already standing there, or a few feet back, as it appears the mic was set up there.

2) The mic cuts out. At a public even, especially a political even, the sound system operator has to be ready. An even such as this is supposed to be an orderly question and answer type of thing, but the kid was overworked and the sound operator cut his mic. The cops, who where already in position, stepped in to escort him out.

3) The kid realizes the mic is cut off and makes a frustrated gesture. He then sees the cops stepping up to him and freaks out. Important note: They DID NOT have their handcuffs out at this point.

4) The kid decides hes being arrested unfairly and starts yelling about it as well as fighting with the cops. At this point, we see a cop with a taser step in, but he does not fire. You can hear him yelling "Put your hands behind your back." The kid does not.

5) After more struggling and yelling, the cops wrestle him to the ground but he continues to fight them. He is warned multiple times that if he does not stop struggling, that he will be tased. He yells "Don't tase me," but still continues to struggle. Asking not to be tased isn't going to stop them if you're still fighting...

Did they need to tase him? Probably not. But to make it sound like they did so with no provocation is in error.

in truth, he was being rather combative towards those police, but honestly, i don't see why he would have acted differently given the fact that he was being arrested without anything explained to him.
You posted as I was typing my response. Anyway, I just want to point out that he was NOT being arrested until he started fighting with the cops. He was being escorted out. I made the point earlier, but notice they did not have their handcuffs out.

Rogue Warrior
09-19-2007, 05:33 AM
The tazer gun was maybe overstepping the margin. Those who feel there is something to answer to should chase up someone like the DPP or an Inspector so an internal investigation would be launched. Any move to put this into effect should be public so that an investigation is not quashed.

Dagobahn Eagle
09-19-2007, 06:50 AM
Another important note is that Kerry tried to tell the cops not to taze the guy.

mimartin
09-19-2007, 10:50 AM
I agree the police may have overreacted, but I don’t see how they violated his right of free speech. His allotted time was up, so he was actually violating the next questioner’s rights. Also when a police officer ask you to jump, the correct answer is how high. He was after all resisting arrest, plain and simple; the police have the authority and duty to place people under arrest. They do not have the authority to lock you away for life, just as the police may have overreacted so did the college student.

How did he know they were not just going to escort him outside to stop any kind of disturbance? He never gave them a chance to explain. He just started yelling and waving his body around without any real provocation by the police. Thus assuring himself of actually being placed under arrest.

Caius Fett
09-19-2007, 11:15 AM
Latest from Fox
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297287,00.html

Looks like this guy is widely known for being a attention hound and a practical joker.
IMO he deliberately provoked this incident. As for the Police it looked to me as is they were exercising considerable restraint and were completely within their rights to taser him especialy considering they warned him several time to quit resisting.

Dagobahn Eagle
09-19-2007, 12:22 PM
No. Tazering should be restricted to self-defense against people who truly pose a threat to the police. Not a single unarmed person already being subdued by several officers. That US police resorts to violence this easily is disturbing.

MdKnightR
09-19-2007, 12:46 PM
I'm really on the fence about this. Both parties - the student and the cops - should have acted differently. The student should not have acted the way he did, but for the cops to taser him while he was already on the ground subdued is ridiculous. He was begging for mercy and they shot him anyway. I find it hard to believe that it took so many cops to bring him under control. I have seen people strung out of PCP subdued by far fewer cops than it took to control this skinny kid. It shouldn't have taken a taser in addition to 10 or more cops to get him out of there. In fact, the kids attorney is now saying that the cuffs were on BEFORE they shocked him.

However, in light of the fact the kid is known for pushing the envelope, I am inclined to believe that this was just his latest endeavor to wake people up. If his intention was to show that we truly don't have as free a speech as we think we do, he definitely proved his point. The cops ignored Kerry when he said he would answer the boy's questions and proceeded to take him away before he heard the answers. Just another chip in the stone of Liberty.

Caius Fett
09-19-2007, 12:52 PM
Sorry Dagobahn I will have to disagree. IMO if someone is stupid enough to actively resist and strugle with a POLICE OFFICER they deserve to be tasered. Thats just my opinion. Is it harsh? Yes I'll admit that all day long, but then I have nothing but the highest respect for Law Enforcment Officers. Again just my opinion.


EDIT. Removed a statment that was too broad a generalization and went too far.

tk102
09-19-2007, 01:59 PM
I agree with Caius Fett here. The officer issued commands to submit and be quiet while before the handcuffs were applied. There was a moment where he could have decided to comply but instead the kid continued to yell as the cuffs were being applied including using the F word. At that point it was obvious the kid's hysteria was not going to subside. The taser was used to end the spectacle and bring order back to the chaos this kid brought on.

Handcuffs don't prevent headbutts or kicks from a hysterical person.

Prime
09-19-2007, 03:05 PM
Listen to the police. Don't get tazered. It's easy.

PoiuyWired
09-19-2007, 03:23 PM
Another important note is that Kerry tried to tell the cops not to taze the guy.

I would like to be sure about this, any more info on this point?

Web Rider
09-19-2007, 06:55 PM
However, in light of the fact the kid is known for pushing the envelope, I am inclined to believe that this was just his latest endeavor to wake people up. If his intention was to show that we truly don't have as free a speech as we think we do, he definitely proved his point. The cops ignored Kerry when he said he would answer the boy's questions and proceeded to take him away before he heard the answers. Just another chip in the stone of Liberty.

no, he's right, you DONT have free speech at a private gathering where each speaker has an allotted amount of time to say what they will. You are not free to simply go on and on infringing upon the time allotted to others to speak.

Free speech does not give people permission to use that right to infringe upon other's rights.

John Galt
09-19-2007, 07:04 PM
That makes me extremely angry.

Sure, the guy was more than a little worked up, but that does not by any means justify escorting him out of the building. Kerry should have interrupted him, answered a few questions, and let him respond. The rent-a-cops were unnecessary in the first place, and I think this event, especially the crowd's reactions, is indicative of how degraded the rights of the individual are in this country.

He should not be deprived of his right to speak his mind, "practical joker" or no, if he waited in line and followed proper forum procedures. I am thoroughly disgusted.

Rogue Nine
09-19-2007, 07:15 PM
Serves him right. There are way too many rude, inconsiderate and arrogant people like that running around, especially on college campuses. It's one thing to speak your mind, it's another to be so damn obnoxious about it that you deserve to have your ass tazered.

Personally, I would've nightclubbed him. In the face.

>________________>

Web Rider
09-19-2007, 07:23 PM
He should not be deprived of his right to speak his mind, "practical joker" or no, if he waited in line and followed proper forum procedures.

that's the point, he DIDNT follow proper procedures and refused to step down when asked to do so, upon being removed, he freaked out.

RobQel-Droma
09-19-2007, 07:47 PM
Sorry Dagobahn I will have to disagree. IMO if someone is stupid enough to actively resist and strugle with a POLICE OFFICER they deserve to be tasered. Thats just my opinion. Is it harsh? Yes I'll admit that all day long, but then I have nothing but the highest respect for Law Enforcment Officers. Again just my opinion.

Well, my personal opinion is, just cause you have the badge doesn't mean you can throw your weight around for no reason. That should make sense, right? I mean, these guys were way over the line. 4-5 cops and they couldn't handle him quietly? Come on.... An ex-cop made a remark about this, couldn't remember when she said it, but she knew a simple pinky move that could take someone down to their knees. Just her, with no help. She was surprised by the need to use a taser.

And also, just so you know, tasers hurt like hell. Just a fact. So maybe you might want to rethink "deserved" to be tasered. After all, as I said:

Just cause someone is being a little loud, maybe even obnoxious.... does that mean that they should not be allowed to speak and should be dragged off and tasered?

Serves him right. There are way too many rude, inconsiderate and arrogant people like that running around, especially on college campuses. It's one thing to speak your mind, it's another to be so damn obnoxious about it that you deserve to have your ass tazered.

Is that your real opinion, or is that partially motivated by the nature of his political remarks? No offense BTW, dude.... I'm just asking.

Because, again (I'm repeating myself), simply being obnoxious does not warrant your right for free speech to be taken away and have you tasered by 4 wimpy police who can't handle you otherwise. Or maybe they were just itching to use a taser, I don't know.

Or think about this: would this have happened if the kid had been praising Kerry? I honestly don't know. But the fact is, someone didn't like what he was saying, or how he was saying it. But that isn't a crime, people. It's just not.

that's the point, he DIDNT follow proper procedures and refused to step down when asked to do so, upon being removed, he freaked out.

In doing what? Besides, the police cut his mic first. He wasn't asked, they just flat out cut him off and said "you have to leave". At which place, joker or not as John Galt said, he protested. And was right to protest. I mean, the cops were not following "proper procedure".... there was no reason to drag him out. Let Kerry handle it, he's now saying that he should have handled it himself and that the cops were too jumpy. But there would have been no situation if the cops had just backed off.

If someone's going to drag you off for no crime, wouldn't you ask "what the....?!" Unless you didn't have any guts to stand up for your rights.

Web Rider
09-19-2007, 07:55 PM
In doing what? Besides, the police cut his mic first. He wasn't asked, they just flat out cut him off and said "you have to leave". At which place, joker or not as John Galt said, he protested. And was right to protest. I mean, the cops were not following "proper procedure".... there was no reason to drag him out. Let Kerry handle it, he's now saying that he should have handled it himself and that the cops were too jumpy. But there would have been no situation if the cops had just backed off.

If someone's going to drag you off for no crime, wouldn't you ask "what the....?!" Unless you didn't have any guts to stand up for your rights.

No, his mic was simply cut. We don't know if the cops did it, if the sound controller did it, or if one of the political figures requested it. It was simply cut. Which was taken as a cue for the cops to ask him to leave.

And they had no reason to drag him out, he was told to leave, requested to leave, what difference does it make? The cops came up to him and told him he needed to leave. Wow, big deal, so he wouldn't get to blast his agenda in front of a couple political figures who were probly the wrong target anyway.

Any sensible person would think thusly:
My message was just cut off
The Police as asking me to leave.
I don't want to get hurt, so I should just leave.

At some point in this guy's train of thought, he thought the best solution would be to refuse to leave, struggle when he was made to leave and completely freak out and try and get away.

He wasn't even being accused of a crime, he was simply being asked to leave. Which anybody with the authority to do so can request of ANY person in such a meeting. Police, Kerry, sound guy, whatever.

People who have done nothing wrong have no reason to freak when the cops ask you to leave. You simply realize that now's not the place for whatever you're doing, and you leave. And given that this guy has a record of causing trouble, I wouldn't be surprised if this was just another instance of that.

Rogue Nine
09-19-2007, 08:14 PM
Is that your real opinion, or is that partially motivated by the nature of his political remarks? No offense BTW, dude.... I'm just asking.
That's my real, honest opinion. I couldn't give two ****s about the nature of his remarks. Fact of the matter is, he was being a snot and taking up other people's time at a debate where such time is obviously limited and when asked to leave, he stood his ground. That's abusing your right to free speech.

Emperor Devon
09-19-2007, 08:18 PM
Interesting article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Meyer) they have on him, especially for his background.

Andrew Meyer has been described as "a known prankster who often posts practical jokes online."[12] His website, www.theandrewmeyer.com, contains videos posted by Meyer including pranks against Harry Potter fans along with a written diatribe against the media and the Iraq War. The official police report states that Meyer asked a woman if she was recording him moments before beginning his questions.[9] The report states that "as [Meyer] was escorted down stairs with no cameras in sight, he remained quiet, but once the cameras made their way down stairs he started screaming and yelling again." Additionally, the report states that Meyer was "laughing and being lighthearted in the car, his demeanor completely changed once the cameras were not in sight."[13] During the ride, Meyer is reported to have said to the police officers that "I am not mad at you guys, you didn't do anything wrong, you were just trying to do your job."[1] Meyer then asked if there were going to be cameras present at the jail.

It's not strictly related to the event there, but it does help establish his character.

The kid sounds like a snotbag to me. The police say "keep struggling and we'll tazer you," while he screams "DON'T TAZER ME BRO" and goes on struggling... Given his background I really wouldn't be surprised if it was all a publicity stunt. :rolleyes:

tk102
09-19-2007, 09:44 PM
I mean, these guys were way over the line. 4-5 cops and they couldn't handle him quietly? Come to think of it, a tranquilizer gun would have been perfect in that situation. :bluidea:

Jae Onasi
09-20-2007, 12:33 AM
The reason the mic was cut was because each person had a time limit to speak to Kerry (heard this on WGN radio today). The kid's time was up.

It's very easy to arm-chair quarterback this. Look at it from the perspective of what the cops saw:

Guy is asking some odd questions that make him sound kind of paranoid.
Guy's time is up at the mic. He doesn't leave. Mic is cut. Guy still doesn't leave.

Kerry's an ex-Presidential candidate who's still a target by loonies. Guy talking about conspiracy theories and refusing to leave the mic even after it's turned off could fall into the loony category. Or someone high on some meth, coke, or any number of interesting drugs. The upstart of that is this: The cops have no idea what kind of person they're dealing with. Is he high and combative? Is he crazy and combative? Is he a threat to Kerry? Other students? Is he going to pull out a weapon that got missed going through security? Does he know martial arts so a weapon might not even be necessary?

Next, guy is asked to leave by campus police. Guy refuses and starts resisting. Cops tell him he's under arrest and try to do so. Guy then resists arrest. At this point the risk to the cops and to the guy has increased substantially. Guy is taken down and is kicking and struggling, which puts both the cops and him at high risk for injury.

I can see why it would take 5 or more people to subdue him. When you have someone fighting arrest and they're high or panicked, they can easily generate tremendous power. If they have any kind of combat/martial art experience, they're capable of generating even greater power. You never want to partly subdue someone. You want to completely and unequivocally subdue someone. While having 5 people pile on you will generally subdue you, it's not a sure thing. One time, I was helping do first aid on a guy who had gotten badly dehydrated during one of our mock Renaissance battles. He was just lucid enough to tell us he'd been in a hunter-killer unit in Vietnam, but hallucinating enough to tell us he was seeing the VC in rice paddies. In the hills of Western Pennsylvania. We didn't know if he had any head/neck/back injuries and since he'd been in an HK unit in Nam, we knew he knew how to kill in unarmed combat. We had one person each sitting or lying on his arms and legs--4 people, none of them lightweights, and a fifth holding his head still, trying to talk him down while we waited for the ambulance. He was not a big guy at all--maybe 140 or 150 or so. We just about got him settled down when the signal cannon 50 feet away went off to signal the end of that battle. The guy broke with reality, thinking he was getting bombed, and literally sat straight up to try to bolt, carrying three people with him. The people lying on his legs nearly got kicked off as he panicked completely. It took 2 more people, 7 total, to get him back down and subdued--and this is a guy who had been weakened quite a bit by the severe dehydration. We were extremely lucky that none of us got injured trying to help him.

So in the case of this guy, since he was resisting arrest even with 5 officers trying to deal with him, if I'd been in that situation and the guy was still bucking me even with 5 of us, I think I would have felt it was necessary not only for officer safety but also the guy's safety. With the limited information the cops had about the guy based on his comments and actions, I don't know if they really had any other viable choice. Tasering is preferable to nightsticks and guns, and they couldn't pepper spray the guy because there were too many other people around who'd be exposed to the chemical. Since physical restraint wasn't adequate, I think this was the only remaining choice they had to remove the threat the guy might have posed.

Tranquilizer guns aren't as effective--first, you have to hit the person just right for the dart to stick. Then, you have to wait for it to work. If the person yanks out the dart, the tranq won't get into his system. Third, there's a risk of life-threatening allergies and drug interactions--sticking someone with a tranq on top of whatever legal and/or illegal drugs are in a suspect's system could create bad interactions. Fourth, you might tranquilize to the point that someone stops breathing, especially if they have depressants or other tranquilizers on board already, and if the ambulance doesn't get there in time, it could cause serious injury or death. The taser's actually safer in that regard--no drug-drug interaction or anaphylactic allergy issues, and it works instantly and pretty reliably.

RobQel-Droma
09-20-2007, 12:44 AM
I'm not ruling out the possibility that this kid might be an absolute jerk, I know that. But I'm focusing on what the police did, which was way out of line.

No, his mic was simply cut. We don't know if the cops did it, if the sound controller did it, or if one of the political figures requested it. It was simply cut. Which was taken as a cue for the cops to ask him to leave.

Yes, his mic was cut. And I don't know if you know this, but the cops were talking to the guy who did it, and when the guy cut the mic they were told to move in and get him out of there. Both the cops and the sound person were cutting his mic off.

And they had no reason to drag him out, he was told to leave, requested to leave, what difference does it make? The cops came up to him and told him he needed to leave. Wow, big deal, so he wouldn't get to blast his agenda in front of a couple political figures who were probly the wrong target anyway.

It would have been much simpler if they let him go on, or maybe even just gave him a "tap on the shoulder" or whatnot and said, "hey, your time is almost up bro." But no, I guess they had to be antagonistic.

Any sensible person would think thusly:
My message was just cut off
The Police as asking me to leave.
I don't want to get hurt, so I should just leave.

I don't think I would. I'm not saying I would fight the police, but I sure wouldn't be thinking "oh, I should just leave." No. I'd would be thinking "why the ---- are you guys dragging me off, I haven't done anything!"

Besides, like he said, he wasn't doing anything wrong. And as I said just before, they could have handled it much differently.

At some point in this guy's train of thought, he thought the best solution would be to refuse to leave, struggle when he was made to leave and completely freak out and try and get away.

Think about the context here. He's at a *political* forum here. And when you've done nothing wrong, and are getting dragged off for asking questions of a *political* nature, it starts to smell a bit.... hmmm, I'm not sure what word to use. I'm not saying it was, but that sure sounds like it. Remember, people do have the right to Free Speech here, and exercising shouldn't be a crime. Especially when that right seems to have been walking all over by some recently (in the sense of, "I can say what I want, but you can't" kind of thing).

He wasn't even being accused of a crime, he was simply being asked to leave. Which anybody with the authority to do so can request of ANY person in such a meeting. Police, Kerry, sound guy, whatever.

Doesn't make it right. Or proper procedure by the cops. Just because they can, doesn't mean there should be no consequences for their wrong actions.

People who have done nothing wrong have no reason to freak when the cops ask you to leave. You simply realize that now's not the place for whatever you're doing, and you leave. And given that this guy has a record of causing trouble, I wouldn't be surprised if this was just another instance of that.

On the contrary.... I think it would be exactly a reason to start freaking out. When you have done nothing wrong except ask tough questions (which I think political candidates should have to answer) then there should be NO, repeat, NO reason for the cops to remove you from the site. That, as I said, starts crossing the line from upholding peace to upholding a political agenda. Perhaps that would be your response. But I wouldn't stand for that kind of, I don't know, perhaps "censorship" would be the right word. I have the right to ask that question, and some cheap cops can't stop you on someone else's orders.

Because, really, was it the kid with an agenda, or the cops with the agenda that wanted to stop him from talking?

Even if the kid was an obnoxious punk.... I'm more worried about the cops trying to suppress what he was saying and then feeling that they could throw him out of the building based on that, than I am on this kid's behavior. Because who is going to police the police, I guess you could say.....

Jae Onasi
09-20-2007, 12:53 AM
I think this point about the mic might have gotten lost in my long post.

There was a time limit for people to ask questions. The kid's time was up, but he tried to continue talking. He was violating the rules set up for the people asking questions, and he was talking about odd stuff on top of it.

MdKnightR
09-20-2007, 01:16 AM
I think this point about the mic might have gotten lost in my long post.

There was a time limit for people to ask questions. The kid's time was up, but he tried to continue talking. He was violating the rules set up for the people asking questions, and he was talking about odd stuff on top of it.


Actually, his mic was cut when he used a sexually explicit remark that detailed why Clinton was impeached.

Jae Onasi
09-20-2007, 01:58 AM
Well, he did do that, too, but he'd already gone past his time limit anyway. :)

tk102
09-20-2007, 03:18 AM
Tranquilizer guns aren't as effectiveWorks in the movies pretty well.

And this was a home movie.


Ergo... :indif: :p

ET Warrior
09-20-2007, 03:24 AM
The kid's time was up, but he tried to continue talking. He was violating the rules set up for the people asking questions, and he was talking about odd stuff on top of it.Now I obviously don't know the context of what EXACTLY went on before the video I've seen begins, but his mic gets cut off, he continues talking for about a second (You've got to try and say a few words before you realize that you've been turned off, yes?) and then the police step in right quick and GRAB HIM.

Now maybe I simply am unaware that the police tried to ask him nicely to leave before clutching at his arms, but what kind of response do they really expect? He's a 21 year old in a political forum, doing nothing wrong, and suddenly he is being forcibly ejected without even being given the opportunity to leave of his own volition? Yes, he could have handled it better, but the police created a situation where none should have existed.

Rogue Warrior
09-20-2007, 05:42 AM
The police subject cadets to things such as capsicum stray so they know the effect it has. I doubt any member would have the 'shocking' opinion that someone deserves what they get.

On Andrew Meyer, it seems he wanted to play up the issue of police brutality and otherwise gain attention for the cameras and incite anger.

Web Rider
09-20-2007, 06:22 PM
I'm not ruling out the possibility that this kid might be an absolute jerk, I know that. But I'm focusing on what the police did, which was way out of line.

Tasering him 10 times might be out of line, once is not so bad. A little overreaction? Sure, but cops are supposed to be the strong-arm that makes you play by the rules. Not you're best friend.

Yes, his mic was cut. And I don't know if you know this, but the cops were talking to the guy who did it, and when the guy cut the mic they were told to move in and get him out of there. Both the cops and the sound person were cutting his mic off.
as is brought up by the posters before me, he also made some explicit remark about Clinton(Bill), which likly violated some "play nice" rule of the question forum. This also likly stirred the cops and sound guy into doing something.

It would have been much simpler if they let him go on, or maybe even just gave him a "tap on the shoulder" or whatnot and said, "hey, your time is almost up bro." But no, I guess they had to be antagonistic.
And they did, they said "time up" and gave him a light tug on the arm, at which point he completly weirded out, thus requiring to be drug off. "letting people go" is not how you control a situation.

I don't think I would. I'm not saying I would fight the police, but I sure wouldn't be thinking "oh, I should just leave." No. I'd would be thinking "why the ---- are you guys dragging me off, I haven't done anything!"
And fighting with the police would prove this? The best way to prove you are innocent, is to simply leave.

Besides, like he said, he wasn't doing anything wrong. And as I said just before, they could have handled it much differently.
As I and others have been saying, he was in clear violation of the rules of the forum. Thus, YES he WAS doing something wrong.

Think about the context here. He's at a *political* forum here. And when you've done nothing wrong, and are getting dragged off for asking questions of a *political* nature, it starts to smell a bit.... hmmm, I'm not sure what word to use. I'm not saying it was, but that sure sounds like it. Remember, people do have the right to Free Speech here, and exercising shouldn't be a crime. Especially when that right seems to have been walking all over by some recently (in the sense of, "I can say what I want, but you can't" kind of thing).
Again, he's being dragged off for freaking when told to leave and being an ass and disrespecting the forum rules. There is nothing this student is saying that a thousand other people who nobody listens to aren't saying, or havent said to Kerry before.

Exercising free speech is great, but the Forum had rules to be followed when doing so, one was a time limit, and another was likly respect and lack of cursing, all of which this kid broke, that sounds like good enough reason for me to throw somebody out of a political forum. In fact, that's why people get thrown out of THIS political forum.

Doesn't make it right. Or proper procedure by the cops. Just because they can, doesn't mean there should be no consequences for their wrong actions.
They could have shot him. They could have beat the crap out of this guy. A single taser shot may hurt, but it ain't gonna kill you. As is proven by the fact that this kid is in good spirits afterward and ready again to freak before some cameras.

On the contrary.... I think it would be exactly a reason to start freaking out. When you have done nothing wrong except ask tough questions (which I think political candidates should have to answer) then there should be NO, repeat, NO reason for the cops to remove you from the site. That, as I said, starts crossing the line from upholding peace to upholding a political agenda. Perhaps that would be your response. But I wouldn't stand for that kind of, I don't know, perhaps "censorship" would be the right word. I have the right to ask that question, and some cheap cops can't stop you on someone else's orders.

Again, he was removed from the forum for violating the rules he agreed to by being there in the first place. Which were a time limit and respect. Ask the tough questions by all means, but there's no need for disrespect or expletives.

Because, really, was it the kid with an agenda, or the cops with the agenda that wanted to stop him from talking?
yes, because one random college student's oppression is going to stop it.[/sarcasm] If anything it'd make it worse and the agenda of the student get more attention. No, if you want to suppress an agenda, you don't do it where the mass media can get their hands on it. That only vindicates the student and promotes his agenda.

Even if the kid was an obnoxious punk.... I'm more worried about the cops trying to suppress what he was saying and then feeling that they could throw him out of the building based on that, than I am on this kid's behavior. Because who is going to police the police, I guess you could say.....
I highly doubt whatever he had to say was very constructive anyway. Mud raking is great for sensationalism, but utterly pointless in the political system as it provides no solutins to the problem being complained about.

He violated the rules of the forum, and when he refused to go on his own, was made to leave.

Rogue Nine
09-20-2007, 06:46 PM
I'm more worried about the cops trying to suppress what he was saying and then feeling that they could throw him out of the building based on that, than I am on this kid's behavior.
Why would the cops give two ****s about what political drivel he was trying to say? People (celebrities, political pundits, Fox News commentators, etc.) say more outrageous things all the time and on national television, no less. You don't see them getting their asses tasered. The cops reacted to how he acted, not what he said.

He's a 21 year old in a political forum, doing nothing wrong, and suddenly he is being forcibly ejected without even being given the opportunity to leave of his own volition? Yes, he could have handled it better, but the police created a situation where none should have existed.
I'm pretty sure that he was given the opportunity to leave of his own accord. :rolleyes:

Imagine if you were the next person in line. This guy takes up more than his allotted time in questioning Kerry, when you're patiently waiting your turn at the mic. Are you going to tell the police "Oh no, don't make him leave, I want him to take up my mic time and cause a general ruckus by being a complete douchebag."

The police didn't create the situation, he did.

Darth333
09-20-2007, 07:39 PM
There was a time limit for people to ask questions. The kid's time was up, but he tried to continue talking. He was violating the rules set up for the people asking questions, and he was talking about odd stuff on top of it.
And that gives a reason to half a dozen cops to jump on him? The guy might have said stupidities but he was not threatening or endangering anyone's well being (other than their ears :p ).

If someone would have been tasered or given any kind of physical pain for that here, even after trying to resist arrest, it would have been a huge scandal and an investigation would likely have been launched (and some suspensions would have very likely been issued).

Maybe it's a culture thing but how this guy got tasered for that after being thrown on the floor by 5-6 police officers is beyond me...heck he couldn't even move, just "speak" :confused:

tk102
09-20-2007, 08:14 PM
It's not like the half dozen cops jumped on him while he was standing at the microphone. They tried to escort him out and he raised his voice and arms, saying "Is anyone taping this? I'm not going anywhere!" Then as he is being pushed towards the door he defies the officers again saying "Get away from me man!" and makes a move to get back into the forum. That's when the half dozen officers tackled him. At all times he refused to acknowledge the authority of the police including after they told him would be tased if he didn't settle himself.

Edit:

Alright I've been watching a number of other YouTube videos and it seems to me the cops were partially at fault for setting the stage for this. I was under the impression that this student had gone over his time allotment, but there are a number of statements that said he was only speaking for less than one minute after being physically escorted. Supposedly, two minutes was the time limit.

Plus the cops resorted to physical control over him right from the beginning. That was probably unnecessary. All that physicality that followed afterwards was set up by that.

So I retract some of my earlier venom towards this person, especially if the time limit thing wasn't actually violated.

Darth-Meatbag
09-20-2007, 09:30 PM
I'm on the side of the cops here. I personally believe they reacted to how he was acting, as in...

• Taking up other people's time on the microphone.
• Openly using profanity during the discussion.
• Resisting arrest.

As it has been stated above me, sure we have the rights of free speech. Does that mean we can abuse that and take up other's free speech? No it doesn't. He was asked to leave, and he didn't and tried to create chaos. He deserved his 'taserism' and i'm assuming he created more chaos after he was removed--

Andrew Meyer Arrested for Speaking at Kerry Forum
NOTE: The following is not posted by Andrew Meyer, but has been posted by his friends.


Andrew Meyer is currently incarcerated in Alachua County. While asking U.S.
Senator John Kerry a question during a question and answer period following Kerry's speech at the University of Florida, Meyer was attacked by five police
officers, manhandled and tasered. Fortunately there are videos and many
witnesses to this injustice. Some articles and videos are linked below.
Please show your support by educating yourselves and raising awareness by
letting others know what has happened. Continue checking back to this website for updates.

I found that on his site-- http://www.theandrewmeyer.com/. Note that it says he is incarcerated in the Alachua County Jail. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't still be incarcerated right now unless he caused more trouble after.

Regards,
Krysk

Krysk--using dark colors such as dark red and royal blue are extremely difficult to read on a dark background when you're using it for large chunks of text. Please use white or very light colors, please. Those of us with 'older eyes' thank you. :) --Jae

JoeDoe 2.0
09-20-2007, 09:41 PM
But still, was he that big of a thread. I'm ok with the police arresting him, but using a taser against him instead of tackling him down was just too much.

Darth-Meatbag
09-20-2007, 09:47 PM
But still, was he that big of a threat. I'm ok with the police arresting him, but using a taser against him instead of tackling him down was just too much.
I disagree. He was a threat to the people around him, as one person above stated it was very possable he may have a weapon or martial arts training. The taser was justified because he could have quietly walked out, or even gave up after they jumped on him, but he didn't and had to be restrained to restore order.

Regards,
Krysk

JoeDoe 2.0
09-20-2007, 09:54 PM
True, but come on, one officer was enough, maybe even two if he had martial arts training (doubtful by looking at him). If he had a weapon, then I agree. Bust still I'm not convinced that it was the best course of action, it was a hasty decision taken without deliberation.

Darth-Meatbag
09-20-2007, 10:15 PM
True, but come on, one officer was enough, maybe even two if he had martial arts training (doubtful by looking at him). If he had a weapon, then I agree. But still I'm not convinced that it was the best course of action, it was a hasty decision taken without deliberation.

Now you just agreed with me that IF he had a weapon it would have been justified, but how do we know he has a weapon or not? That would be the question. Theres been alot of psychopath incidents lately, the highlight of which would be either Combine ten years ago, or the incident where two high school students used heavy-grade weapons, killing on sight and suiciding soon after (This happened about six months ago maybe?).

Regards,
Krysk

Darth333
09-20-2007, 10:33 PM
Now you just agreed with me that IF he had a weapon it would have been justified, but how do we know he has a weapon or not? That would be the question. Theres been alot of psychopath incidents lately, the highlight of which would be either Combine ten years ago, or the incident where two high school students used heavy-grade weapons, killing on sight and suiciding soon after (This happened about six months ago maybe?).

Regards,
Krysk
Shoot first, ask questions later... Nice mentality btw... come on there wasn't the slightest hint that the guy could have been dangerous and he was already held on the ground by several police officers...even without the taser, there was nothing he could do.

Darth-Meatbag
09-20-2007, 10:57 PM
Shoot first, ask questions later... Nice mentality btw...
What can I say to that...? Lol. ;)

come on there wasn't the slightest hint that the guy could have been dangerous and he was already held on the ground by several police officers...even without the taser, there was nothing he could do.

I suppose I do have to admit he probably couldn't have done anything... whatsoever in any way. None-the-less I still think that that the taser was justified, considering he was even warned that if he didn't stop he could be tasered.

Regards,
Krysk

mimartin
09-20-2007, 11:14 PM
What I heard on the news was his time was up, but if that was not the case, it still does not mean he had the right to resist the police.

When this first broke, I was under the impression that a Taser Gun was a painful yet safe way to subdue someone. However, after reading further I have discovered that people actually have died after being tasered. That being the case, I believe the police should have used better discretion before actually using the weapon on the subject. They had more then enough officers to subdue this jerk and did not actually have to use the Taser.

I do not believe the fear of him having a concealed weapon is a ligament, having been to a number of political rallies I know you are searched head to toe before entering the building.

All that said I would still put 90% of the blame on the jerk that had a problem with authority figures. If he just would have left quietly when the police came up to him he never would have got the shock of his life, not to mention a few days vacation at the counties expense.

If his motivation was to get publicity all I can say is job well done.

Jae Onasi
09-20-2007, 11:14 PM
I imagine that there were metal detectors and searches of people prior to entering the auditorium for Kerry's protection. However, as my experience with the hallucinating 'Nam vet showed, just because you have 5 people holding on to him, there's no guarantee that person is going to stay down, or not try to hit one of the cops. They may well have handled it with more physical force than they absolutely needed to, but we don't know if they were instructed to do that by the Secret Service (who I believe is still guarding Kerry as a former Presidential candidate and current Senator), or it's part of their protocol, or whatever. The guy was repeatedly asked to leave and resisted arrest, and escalated the situation by hollering and struggling. If I were a cop and someone was resisting, my assumption is that he's doing so to try to hit me or pull a weapon on me, because that's what people resisting arrest are trying to do in the US--I don't know how bad guys in Canada do things, but that's what they do here. If it's me (and my family)/my buddy or him, he's going down. You cannot partially subdue someone--you either do it completely or not at all.

If the guy had been respectful instead of confrontational and had not resisted arrest, it would never have gotten to the taser point. Probably wouldn't have even made it to arrest level, either.

Totenkopf
09-21-2007, 12:38 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IATPoHdpak0

mimartin
09-21-2007, 09:07 AM
Nice find Totenkopf, he violated the rules of the forum. This was supposed to be a question and answer format, but it is oblivious that his intention is to be the speaker and not the questionnaire. People are there to hear John Kerry’s opinion and stand to the audiences’ questions, not the opinion of some random fellow college student.

If someone violated the rules on this forum wouldn’t the moderators cut them off and/or close or even delete their post, how is that any different from cutting off his mic. He violated the rules and disobeyed the police officers request.

By the end of the clip I was ready to taser him.

Prime
09-21-2007, 09:26 AM
Maybe the police went a little far, but the guy still had his destiny in his own hands. If he had just gone out quietly he would have been fine. He pushed the issue and paid the price.

As Chris Rock says, "If the police have to come and get you, they're bringing an ass-kicking with them."

Web Rider
09-21-2007, 03:51 PM
When this first broke, I was under the impression that a Taser Gun was a painful yet safe way to subdue someone. However, after reading further I have discovered that people actually have died after being tasered. That being the case, I believe the police should have used better discretion before actually using the weapon on the subject. They had more then enough officers to subdue this jerk and did not actually have to use the Taser.


Tasers are deadly on the sick, the elderly, children(little tots), and when used in excess. A single shot with a taser on a healthy 20 something college student who took multiple cops to restrain, is not going to kill him.

mimartin
09-21-2007, 04:09 PM
Tasers are deadly on the sick, the elderly, children(little tots), and when used in excess. A single shot with a taser on a healthy 20 something college student who took multiple cops to restrain, is not going to kill him.
And just how do Police Officers know that someone is healthy without first completing a medical examination? People can look and act perfectly health and then just drop dead of a heart condition, even if they are a 20 something college student. Without knowing the persons complete medical condition I just believe the police should error on the side of caution. The Taser Gun is a weapon and should be only used when absolutely necessary. Of course like I wrote in post #47, by the end of the clip I was ready to taser him.

Edit for below: Corinthian I don’t think that is what I was saying, what I was trying to say is, without all the knowledge of the subject’s medical condition it would be prudent for police not to use the Taser until it is absolutely necessary.

Corinthian
09-21-2007, 04:30 PM
Mimartin is right. Before tasering someone, they should ask for a full blood workup, a medical analysis from a trained professional, and make sure he doesn't have any other medical conditions before taking him down.

Jae Onasi
09-21-2007, 05:20 PM
See page 15 (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05464.pdf) on who shouldn't be tased. Children, pregnant suspects, or suspects near flammable substances or close to bystanders shouldn't be tased. I read somewhere they refrain from tasing the elderly, too. I think the recommendation of the maximum number of times a suspect can be tased is 3--I think I read that on the Taser int'l site.

Rogue Warrior
09-22-2007, 01:49 AM
Thank you very much for the video Totenkopf. Examining it we can judge exactly what went wrong. I can indicate where I think blame is to be placed if you would like me to.

Corinthian
09-22-2007, 01:57 AM
Cops aren't omniscient. They can't even read minds. Shocking as it may be to you, they cannot even use such elementary abilities as the Mind Trick. When somebody loses their marbles, they cannot reliably take somebody down without use of specialized equipment, like ankle cuffs, for example. Guys jumped up on PCP can do incredible things before they're finally brought down. If the guy didn't want to be tazed, he shouldn't have started causing problems. He continued resisting after repeated warnings. Why should the cops have to be kicked and struck as they drag him out? They've got enough on their plates without having to deal with squirming jackass teenagers looking for publicity.

RobQel-Droma
09-22-2007, 02:19 PM
Ugh, I don't have time to do a full length post right now, but I do want to say this.... You don't taser someone just because they're being an *******, guys....

That seems to be some of your viewpoints. A taser is used when the copscannot otherwise subdue someone without it. And, come on.... half a dozen cops sitting on him? I don't buy this "they don't know what he could do" thing. He was fighting the cops, he was resisting arrest (there's a difference - he wasn't taking a swing at them, just trying not to be handcuffed. If those cops weren't trained enough to take him down without a taser, then they shouldn't be cops.

Rogue Nine
09-22-2007, 06:28 PM
Ugh, I don't have time to do a full length post right now, but I do want to say this.... You don't taser someone just because they're being an *******, guys....

That seems to be some of your viewpoints. A taser is used when the copscannot otherwise subdue someone without it. And, come on.... half a dozen cops sitting on him?
They tasered him because he was resisting. Yes, they were sitting on him at that moment, but they needed to remove him from the premises and he wasn't being cooperative at all. The second they let him get up, he was probably going to start thrashing around again. He was constantly resisting and trying to escape, so they tased him to take him down a notch.

They could have very easily nightsticked him in the face to get him to comply. But they didn't. He was very lucky to have been tasered.

I don't buy this "they don't know what he could do" thing. He was fighting the cops, he was resisting arrest
Exactly! I'm glad you see that! Resisting arrest is a felony! He's lucky they didn't beat the snot out of him!

(there's a difference - he wasn't taking a swing at them, just trying not to be handcuffed.
'Trying not to be handcuffed? That's called resisting arrest! No, he wasn't taking a swing at them because that would have been another felony called assaulting an officer. At least he had the common sense not to go down that route.

If those cops weren't trained enough to take him down without a taser, then they shouldn't be cops.
They took him down like they were trained to. His ass was on the ground in a matter of seconds. Like I said before, the taser was to take some of the fight out of him because they don't want him going berserk the minute they let him up so they can take him out of the room. Remember, they could have easily whacked him upside the head and dragged his unconscious ass out. But they didn't. They used non-lethal weaponry. Non-lethal. That guy isn't going to have any lasting injury from getting tased. So don't be all outraged like they shot him or something, because being tased is nowhere near being shot.

tk102
09-22-2007, 08:17 PM
Hey RN, I agree with everything you've said regarding why they used the taser. Wouldn't you say though that the cops very a bit aggressive right at the get go? I think they could've prevented the scene from escalating as it did if they would've done more talking and pointing rather than physically escorting the moment his mic was cut.

That action to me seemed to be the first thing that was out of line. (Unless you count the guy's Clinton impeachment comments... which I would've let slide.)

Anyway, my point of view on the whole situation is proof of chaos theory. A little thing can escalate to a point where actions are taken that divide people. I don't think the guy was completely innocent and I don't the cops were either. It was just a passion of the moment incident and look how we're all arguing about who's right and who's wrong.

Rogue Nine
09-22-2007, 10:37 PM
Taken from the SomethingAwful forums:

I was about 3 feet from the where the mic this guy was talking at.

Here is an account of everything I heard/saw (the mic was behind me).

So the moderator of the lecture announces that we are out of time and this will be the last of the open forum questions posed to Kerry. Then Kerry then points to someone (not the tazered kid) and asks him to go ahead with the last question of the night.

The questioner asked him to clear up statements from earlier in the discussion about suggested support for a Hamas government official. About half way through Kerry's answer I hear over the mic a male voice (BlueShirt) asking if he can be heard and "hey john, the police are going to arrest me for asking you a question."

The police are following right behind BlueShirt (i think three or four at this point) and as they grab him, BlueShirt is going on about how he had to listen to Kerry for an hour and a half and now he -BlueShirt- should be given a chance to speak. Kerry, obviously taken aback by the intrusion, asks the kid "why, if you're tired of listening to me are you going to ask me a question." At this point the police started to drag the kid away from the mic and Kerry addressed the police asking them to let BlueShirt stay and he'll answer the question after he's done with what was supposed to be the final question of the lecture.

Kerry spent about 3 minutes answering the previous question, thanked the questioner for working on his 04 campaign, and moved on to BlueShirt.

This is where the video on YouTube started and you have a pretty good idea of what happened then. But to clear up a few things:

The police department had obviously told BlueShirt that time was up and he couldn't ask his question before the first time he rushed the mic.

This wasn't just an open forum for everyone; it was a speaking event put on by a department of the student government with an allotted amount of time. It wasn't held in some public square, it was a private function put on by the speakers assoc and I'm pretty sure they are allowed to eject anyone they want to.

Which comes in handy because what was initially a decent question about voter fraud turned into a rant about oral sex/skull and bones/ and impeachment; so I imagine that was the final reason he was asked to leave before he resisted the police.

From the view point I had after the question was asked, it seemed the officers asked him to leave a final time when he swatted at one. Then like 3 more officers joined in the fray as BlueShirt was pulling away from the officers who grabbed his arms to pull him away.

Once an arm got loose he kept flailing around asking what he was being arrested for.

I then saw a bunch of red dots on his chest and arm(which was really weird at the time - thoughts of snipers in the bell tower immediately came to mind); I then very specifically heard the police say, calm down or we will taser you.

The look on Kerry's face was fairly bewildered at this point.

I heard the taser, a yelp, and then like 5 girls jumped out of their audience seats to yell at the police. The drag him back to the annex where the scuffle could still be heard, blueShirt saying "just let me go and I'll leave" (quite obviously after he was told he was under arrest), more scuffling, and another zapping sound. I'm pretty sure this is where the "just don't taser me bro" line came in.

Kerry then answered the question, went into why we should always have a paper trail for ballots, and ended the lecture.

I'm definitely no lawyer but I'm pretty sure the speakers group had the right to end the session and eject anyone who tried to disrupt. I'm also pretty sure the police are allowed to enforce those decisions. I'm also fairly certain that while it may be protocol to use tasers on someone taking swings at cops, they had plenty of officers to subdue BlueShirt and certainly escalated the situation needlessly in front of a visiting senator, press, and student body.

Sadly, it was a really good lecture. All anyone is going to remember is this guy, right or wrong, and not the excellent points Kerry brought up during his time on stage.

You have to take this with a grain of salt, since it's from SA forums, but it's the closest thing to a firsthand account that I can find.

Jae Onasi
09-22-2007, 11:48 PM
I then saw a bunch of red dots on his chest and arm(which was really weird at the time - thoughts of snipers in the bell tower immediately came to mind)

That would be because the Secret Service _did_ have him targeted in case he became a true threat to Kerry....

Corinthian
09-23-2007, 12:14 AM
I think what Rob is trying to say is that Cops should learn means of of taking people down that have absolutely zero risk of hurting the person. Maybe if we can get Captain James T. Kirk to come back in time and give us some phasers set to stun.

Rogue Warrior
09-23-2007, 03:30 AM
Tazers are valid when a suspect or civilian are non compliant. I can find the source if you like.

tk102
09-23-2007, 03:52 AM
Maybe if we can get Captain James T. Kirk to come back in time and give us some phasers set to stun.If Kirk comes back with Spock, we'll just get him to teach us the Vulcan nerve pinch.

Corinthian
09-23-2007, 04:16 AM
I aint reaching in that close. He's got these big pointy teeth. If it's anything like the Black Beast of Caer Bannog...

Jae Onasi
09-23-2007, 12:08 PM
There is no technique that I know of for subduing someone that has absolutely zero risk. There's always going to be some risk inherent in taking someone down who's resisting arrest no matter what technique you try.

Totenkopf
09-23-2007, 02:36 PM
If Kirk comes back with Spock, we'll just get him to teach us the Vulcan nerve pinch.


Works everytime, no muss, no fuss and apparently no marks. :thumbsup:

Web Rider
09-23-2007, 02:59 PM
The look on Kerry's face was fairly bewildered at this point.
I'm suprised after all the botox Kerry can exress that much emotion.

You could always do the classic karate-chop on the neck to knock somebody out, that seemed to work for Sulu.

Totenkopf
09-24-2007, 02:29 PM
Anyone ever see the Presidio? That scene in the bar where Connery takes the guy down with his thumb......

mimartin
09-24-2007, 03:10 PM
Cops aren't omniscient. They can't even read minds. Shocking as it may be to you, they cannot even use such elementary abilities as the Mind Trick. When somebody loses their marbles, they cannot reliably take somebody down without use of specialized equipment, like ankle cuffs, for example. Guys jumped up on PCP can do incredible things before they're finally brought down.

So it is alright for a police officer to assume that a suspect is hoped up on drugs, but they should not show a little caution and consider the suspect could have a medical condition before zapping them? Why don’t we just do away with Tasers and let the police just shot them or beat them with their nightsticks. After all we are only giving lip service to the Taser being a non-lethal alternative.

In all honesty, the Taser maybe the “god sent” police consider it to be, but that does not explain the deaths. To me “non-lethal” means no one is going to die from its use. Maybe they should change the name to 98% non-lethal. Either there is a problem with the Taser itself or the police/prison guards are not being properly trained in its use.

Again I’m not saying they should not be used, I’m saying they should be used with caution just like any other weapon that has the potential to kill someone.

What would be easier for the Police Officer getting kicked a few times or the knowledge that their action ended another’s life?

Web Rider
09-24-2007, 04:25 PM
In all honesty, the Taser maybe the “god sent” police consider it to be, but that does not explain the deaths. To me “non-lethal” means no one is going to die from its use. Maybe they should change the name to 98% non-lethal. Either there is a problem with the Taser itself or the police/prison guards are not being properly trained in its use.

everything is lethal. It depends entirely on how much effort you put into making it so.

Totenkopf
09-24-2007, 05:36 PM
everything is potentially lethal. It depends entirely on how much effort you put into making it so.

fixed. And quite right. The nightstick and revolver/auto can be used w/o killing a perp.

Frankly, this whole thing has nothing to do with freedom of speech and everything to do with creating a disturbance. The first mention of arrest appears to be in Myer's histrionics, not from the officer's themselves. Simply put, had he gone along peacefully, after having rudely hijacked the event for his "message", the whole incident never would have occurred. Only hope that the University doesn't settle with this buffoon, especially given his well documented history of prankster/troublemaker.

RobQel-Droma
09-27-2007, 10:05 PM
I think what Rob is trying to say is that Cops should learn means of of taking people down that have absolutely zero risk of hurting the person. Maybe if we can get Captain James T. Kirk to come back in time and give us some phasers set to stun.

Boy, isn't someone awfully sarcastic today.

Exactly! I'm glad you see that! Resisting arrest is a felony! He's lucky they didn't beat the snot out of him!

Arg, I apologize. That was supposed to be *wasn't* in the first part. My point was that he was not fighting the cops, just resisting arrest. Unlawful arrest.

Oh, and why can't the cops just drag him outside? One cop was taking care of him just fine, dragging him, but b/c he makes a fuss they drop him on the ground inside the building and taser him. No reason to taser him - I know all of you are saying: "oh, he was making a fuss" "they don't know what he could do, he could be hyped on drugs"... etc, etc.

Please, neither of those situations should require a taser. The drugs thing makes no sense anyways - you just acknowledge here that he wasn't fighting the cops, just resisting, and not very effectively at that. So there would be no precedent for the cops to think "uh-oh, drugs" and feel the need to taser him. Someone who was hyped on drugs would probably lose all sense and start outright fighting the cops, but this guy didn't. And the cops knew that.

Also, Rogue, on the post from SA, I think that that should be taken with a little more than a grain of salt. I could be wrong, but that sounds completely fake - it contradicts every video and summary of the incident I've seen. Again, I could be wrong, but...

Rogue Warrior
09-28-2007, 06:00 AM
New York SWAT teams have tazers as a viable option in controlling noncompliant suspects and civilians, as well as other less than lethal options such as CS tear gas, flashbangs, stingball grenades, ect. A Highway Patrol officer last week was shown pulling up to a man who was on crack cocaine and had cracked, he was bent over his motor vehicle and would not move. In an effort to save his life the trooper tazered him so that he could be taken to hospital.