This is Fucked up, Cops should get sued and go to Jail

[Ryujin]

debatable.

Suppression of free speach is an act of facism. Tazoring some kid speaking with a loud voice, as to be heard should not be tolerated. However, people are so afraid today that they are willing to give up on common sense and their freedoms so they can feel 'safe'. Its utterly disgusting.

Edit: I think cops should taze those bible thumpers that stand on street corners. They disturb my peace while 'threatening' me by telling me I'm going to hell. They pry into my personal life and ask questions that are none of their business. Oh and they might have bombs to use on abortion clinics (just like this kid might have had a gun).

RATE up ...... lol u r so right

 

[Raesvelg]

My one post on this particular sub-topic, since it's something I've said before and I don't want to derail this thread any further.

Freedom of speech is not absolute. You are not free to say whatever you want, whenever you want. There are laws limiting what you are permitted to say in public, and those laws exist for a good reason.

You can't yell "Fire!" in a theater. You can't incite a crowd to riot. You can't disturb the peace, which is one of those lovely vague laws that give the police permission to arrest you for being a dumbass. You can't issue death threats. And so on, and so forth.

The cops didn't taser the kid for disturbing the peace. That's a non-issue, it's a misdemeanor and had he gone peacefully, he would almost undoubtedly have walked out of the station after a few hours, no charges pressed. They tasered him for resisting arrest, and they're allowed to do that to get you to comply.

Apparently the kid never read up on the techniques of passive resistance, and why they're generally more successful than being a giant douche.

 

[Thelona]

debatable.

Suppression of free speach is an act of facism. Tazoring some kid speaking with a loud voice, as to be heard should not be tolerated. However, people are so afraid today that they are willing to give up on common sense and their freedoms so they can feel 'safe'. Its utterly disgusting.

Edit: I think cops should taze those bible thumpers that stand on street corners. They disturb my peace while 'threatening' me by telling me I'm going to hell. They pry into my personal life and ask questions that are none of their business. Oh and they might have bombs to use on abortion clinics (just like this kid might have had a gun).

Yeah suppression of free speech is an act of fascism, good thing there was no suppression free speech there, they didn't tell him to stop speaking, they told him to LEAVE the building if he won't, his refusal to do that and then the subsequent resisting arrest is what got him tazed.

Your guaranteed the right to say pretty much anything you want, but not the venue!

Oh and I'm sure there have been some bible thumpers tazed, If a bible thumper is out in front of a store, in a collage, yelling or creating a huge scene, and the police ask them to quite down or leave the building/store front. They refuse like this douche bag, and then resist the officers like that when they try to remove them, then the SAME thing can happen a bible thumper will get tazed for resisting arrest just as fast as this douche bag did.

But your gonna continue to believe whatever the hell you wanna believe, and really its your COMPLETE warping of the facts and of the events that took place in that video that I find "utterly disgusting"

 

[Sirelrohir]

Yeah suppression of free speech is an act of fascism, good thing there was no suppression free speech there, they didn't tell him to stop speaking, they told him to LEAVE the building if he won't, his refusal to do that and then the subsequent resisting arrest is what got him tazed.

Your guaranteed the right to say pretty much anything you want, but not the venue!

Oh and I'm sure there have been some bible thumpers tazed, If a bible thumper is out in front of a store, in a collage, yelling or creating a huge scene, and the police ask them to quite down or leave the building/store front. They refuse like this douche bag, and then resist the officers like that when they try to remove them, then the SAME thing can happen a bible thumper will get tazed for resisting arrest just as fast as this douche bag did.

But your gonna continue to believe whatever the hell you wanna believe, and really its your COMPLETE warping of the facts and of the events that took place in that video that I find "utterly disgusting"

Yes, im going to believe what my eyes saw and what i heard on that video tape. I'm going to believe that the kid was asking a question in a raised voice and that kerry was trying to answer it. I am going to believe that the cops used excessive force.

What i'm not going to do is worry that people might have a gun or some other such nonsense. I'm pretty sure there was some security at the door, such as a metal detector before people actually made it into the venue. I used reason to deduce this and come up with a theory that the guy was actually not a threat, and therefore the use of force was unwarrented. But, i wouldnt expect you to understand that.

PS. thelona, are you windaria? Just curious to know, because your demeanor is very similar to hers.

 

[Elemmire]

Didn't.. this happen before? or am I having major deja vu?

 

[Lecreuset]

I used reason to deduce this and come up with a theory that the guy was actually not a threat, and therefore the use of force was unwarrented.

Care to show us this so far unimpressive display of deductive reasoning as to how you came to this conclusion?

So far you're just coming off as a proponent of utter stupidity without an understanding how security should be run with HIGH PROFILE PUBLIC FIGURES.

Even with a metal detector and other rudimentary security (can you tell me what security measures were in place aside these campus cops/guards?) I'd love for you to tell me that if someone WANTED to take someone out of Kerry's position, that weapons composed entirely of synthetic polymers with no metal pieces for these hypothetical metal detectors to miss, that they couldn't whack Kerry.

Time and time again, people have found ways to get their target.

Assassination is an art and not one lost over time.

Refined and requiring much more finesse and ingenuity than it used to IMO.

Seriously, tell me it couldn't happen.

People are becoming more and more desperate to make a statement, and that statement is felt much harder claiming a life, and some loudmouth may just be trying to make it.

You say people "give up common sense," if anything it's heightened to maintain this feeling of security and safety.

To not maximize security around a figure like Kerry or the President is a pure display of giving up common sense.

High profile individuals can be used just to make a statement be heard further than many could get that message around on their own.

Also, taking that tape for face value after that poke you made at common sense... Rofl, how quaint.

I'd love to bean you over the head, call you an ignorant twit who needs a dictionary/spell check while you continue to live in a fantasy world where rudimentary security gets the job done for persons who are more likely to be wanted dead by other people; but this would accomplish nothing.

You said to continue being scared of life in your returned rate down, I prefer to think I'm safety savvy.

I can understand someone like you wanting to look at life's simplicities and being the "it-couldn't-happen-to-me" type of guy, and if that's what makes you happy, shit live it up.

But I'd rather be more proactive and be aware of what's around me and what could happen, so I don't piss myself, crying that it happened to me; when I can react and do something about it. - Even if it's just hiding under a table like a chickenshit lmao...

I've got nothing against you personally, but so far you haven't given us anything intelligent in this thread to work off of. Show me this reasoning you mentioned that it was safe, by all means!

To sum it up with a popular idea, albeit a more extreme one...

"Just cause you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you." Yes?

I can agree to disagree as I have before with a different issue in regard to the occurrence(edit: specifically the fact that maybe the kid was removed hastily); but to come off so presumptuous that someone actively resisting people in a position of maintaining public safety shouldn't be neutralized to be taken into custody or handed over to the police to sort whether an arrest is necessary..? Hah.

Edit: Spelling. >_<; Needz moar alcohol.

 

[Darkdante]

The kid did not become aggresive until the cops grabbed him. He was exersing his right for Free speach.

i also have a heart condiontion so i know 1st hand if i get punched in the ribs or tasered i will DIE.

Thease rent a cops ^^^ had no right to taser him as much as they did. They have huge egos and they needed to surpress it..

Mark my words the cops will get sued, and so will the organizers. Its a cops word against a video that is everywhere.

Then don't resist arrest, because if you get arrested you will die. The guy in the video obviously was looking for a fight.

http://www.lawinfo.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/Client.lawarea/categoryid/144
"Your innocence does not make the arrest illegal as long as the officer has conformed to the requirements of a legal arrest. If you resist, even if you are innocent of the charges for which you are arrested, you could be charged with resisting arrest."

http://slate.com/id/2164299/
"These sworn officers have the same authority as any other members of the police—they carry weapons, make arrests, and enforce local, state, and federal laws."

"Private security guards may be licensed to carry firearms, batons, or Tasers, but in general, they'll be limited to making citizen's arrests and detaining suspects until real police officers can arrive on the scene."

"If someone has placed you under citizen’s arrest, do not resist. While you won’t be charged with resisting arrest if you resist a citizen’s arrest, you may be charged with assault and battery, which is an even more serious crime."

In other words, don't resist arrest from anyone wearing a badge/uniform especially if you know they are the current law enforcement of the area you are in.

 

[Thelona]

Yes, im going to believe what my eyes saw and what i heard on that video tape. I'm going to believe that the kid was asking a question in a raised voice and that kerry was trying to answer it. I am going to believe that the cops used excessive force.

What i'm not going to do is worry that people might have a gun or some other such nonsense. I'm pretty sure there was some security at the door, such as a metal detector before people actually made it into the venue. I used reason to deduce this and come up with a theory that the guy was actually not a threat, and therefore the use of force was unwarrented. But, i wouldnt expect you to understand that.

PS. thelona, are you windaria? Just curious to know, because your demeanor is very similar to hers.

Doesn't matter if your a threat or not, you RESIST ARREST, the cops are going to Use whatever means necessary to make you comply, be it tazer, pepper spray, nightstick. Call it an "Inconvenient Truth". sorry but thats just how it works buddy. that douche bag found out the hard way.

and no I'm not windaria.

 

[Raesvelg]

Yes, im going to believe what my eyes saw and what i heard on that video tape. I'm going to believe that the kid was asking a question in a raised voice and that kerry was trying to answer it. I am going to believe that the cops used excessive force.

Yes, Kerry was trying to answer his question. Then the kid asked another question. Then Kerry tried to answer that question, then the kid asked another question, at which point the cops decided to take him away. He was violating the rules of the forum, and at that point was guilty of disturbing the peace.

When initially leading him away, the police officer takes him by the arm in a reasonably gentle fashion, the kid breaks away. Now he's resisting arrest. Two officers take him by the arms, and he breaks away again. Then they try to carry him out and he starts flailing wildly. Now he's resisting arrest with some measure of violence. At this point, they pile onto him and try to get him to place his hands behind his back. He's busy telling them that if they let him go, he'll leave. Apparently his idiocy extends to the point that he fails to realize that once you've been taken into custody, it's too late to go away, now you're under arrest. So, failure to comply with police instructions, he gets warned that that failure will result in him getting tasered. Tasering him, in the eyes of the police in particular, is preferable to dislocating his shoulder trying to get his arms behind his back, which is quite possible and even likely given the degree to which he's resisting.

You're trying to make it sound like the kid asked a question and the cops immediately tasered him. That's not at all how it happened.

 

[Darkdante]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/21/ohio.taser/index.html

I wonder how many beatings she would have gotten up from, since a beating is prefferable to a taser for some.

 

[Stouter]

Law enforcement does not function like that (or at least it doesn't here). It isn't a fucking power trip - respect my authority or I'll tazer you as I please. Police are supposed to contain situations with restraint and if they do exercise excessive force, then their actions are indeed questionable. Why do you think the officers were suspended?

Suspended with pay, that's like your parents telling you that you can't eat your broccoli with dinner, but still get dessert.

 

[Lukas]

Ok, I'm going to post once more in this thread since we seem to be going in circles.

There were reportedly six officers there. Apparently a single bouncer can remove a person from a club without dislocating a joint or breaking a limb, but six security guards cannot.

The guy was a douche. He was an unarmed douche who spoke loudly. He was tasered whilst being pinned to the floor - IE. after he was already subdued.

The use of force continuum proposes that law enforcement officials use the bare minimum amount of force required to diffuse a situation. The use of intermediate weaponry (capsicum spray, tasers, batons) lies after unarmed means of restraint. The security guards here escalated the situation needlessly.

Whether one thinks the use of holds or other unarmed tactics is more damaging is irrelevant, because law enforcement authorities would disagree.

Two were suspended because I believe it is protocol to do so whilst an investigation is taking place. An investigation was commissioned because the officer's actions were perceived as questionable.

 

[Stouter]

Apparently a single bouncer can remove a person from a club without dislocating a joint or breaking a limb, but six security guards cannot.

Normally when a bouncer removes a person from a club it's done in one of four ways:

1 - They intimidate the person with their size/muscle, and the person leaves because they are afraid of getting an ass beating.

2 - They kick the person's ass, they don't have to taser them or dislocate shoulders because they knock their ass out. Cops would get in more trouble for this than using a "non-violent" means of subduing a person, look at Rodney King (yeah bad example, but I can't name anyone that got their ass kicked by police on video that was actually resisting arrest)

3 - The person is drunk, and puts up less of a fight than a 10 year old.

4 - There are multiple bouncers getting the person out, and this normally involves the person getting their ass kicked anyway.

 

[Lecreuset]

Normally when a bouncer removes a person from a club it's done in one of four ways:

1 - They intimidate the person with their size/muscle, and the person leaves because they are afraid of getting an ass beating.

2 - They kick the person's ass, they don't have to taser them or dislocate shoulders because they knock their ass out. Cops would get in more trouble for this than using a "non-violent" means of subduing a person, look at Rodney King (yeah bad example, but I can't name anyone that got their ass kicked by police on video that was actually resisting arrest)

3 - The person is drunk, and puts up less of a fight than a 10 year old.

4 - There are multiple bouncers getting the person out, and this normally involves the person getting their ass kicked anyway.

QFT, but there's also a #5, where it's trying to localize where the person stays in the establishment and try to keep him contained to a certain area and let the cops come and remove them.

 

[Raesvelg]

Actually, until you are cuffed and going along quietly, you are not subdued. You may be restrained temporarily, but that's not the same thing.

It's generally not police policy to have some fat cop sit on your chest until you get tired enough to put your hands behind your back.

As for bouncers... ; Bouncers beat the crap out of people to get them to leave. I've known bouncers that beat people so badly that they got fired for doing so. And regardless of how bad a bouncer is liable to beat you up, his primary goal is to get you out of the building, not take you into custody. He doesn't have to cuff you and put you in a squad car, all he has to do is throw you bodily out of the establishment.

 

[beeznuts]

Yes, Kerry was trying to answer his question. Then the kid asked another question. Then Kerry tried to answer that question, then the kid asked another question, at which point the cops decided to take him away. He was violating the rules of the forum, and at that point was guilty of disturbing the peace.

He was guilty of nothing more than being an annoying ass. While annoying, it's not a crime. It's really questionable the manner in which his removal took place to begin with, but that's another story entirely.

Doesn't matter if your a threat or not, you RESIST ARREST, the cops are going to Use whatever means necessary to make you comply, be it tazer, pepper spray, nightstick. Call it an "Inconvenient Truth". sorry but thats just how it works buddy. that douche bag found out the hard way.

and no I'm not windaria.

Yes, it does matter whether you're a threat or not. It matters a whole fucking lot, and this is why:

Ok, I'm going to post once more in this thread since we seem to be going in circles.

There were reportedly six officers there. Apparently a single bouncer can remove a person from a club without dislocating a joint or breaking a limb, but six security guards cannot.

The guy was a douche. He was an unarmed douche who spoke loudly. He was tasered whilst being pinned to the floor - IE. after he was already subdued.

The use of force continuum proposes that law enforcement officials use the bare minimum amount of force required to diffuse a situation. The use of intermediate weaponry (capsicum spray, tasers, batons) lies after unarmed means of restraint. The security guards here escalated the situation needlessly.

Whether one thinks the use of holds or other unarmed tactics is more damaging is irrelevant, because law enforcement authorities would disagree.

Two were suspended because I believe it is protocol to do so whilst an investigation is taking place. An investigation was commissioned because the officer's actions were perceived as questionable.

This is pretty much it. Yes, he was struggling and resisting the arrest. That's a bad thing, and not a proper way to protest being arrested. He should see trouble for that.

However, he was subdued by normal conventional means, and handcuffed, with six police officers on top of him. Yes, he was still struggling, but all he could do at that point was squirm and flop around a bit. For police to use weaponry, the suspect must be presenting a clear threat to the safety or lives of the officers or nearby civilians. Now, for the question of the day: What threat does a young man, subdued on the ground and literally covered in other people present to anyone's lives?

Is he going to annoy them to death?

Tasers are not intended to be use to force compliance, they are intended as a less lethal alternative to using a gun to stop a suspect who is a danger to the health and safety of others.

Again, both sides are wrong in this, but two wrongs do not make a right.

 

[Sirelrohir]

Care to show us this so far unimpressive display of deductive reasoning as to how you came to this conclusion?

So far you're just coming off as a proponent of utter stupidity without an understanding how security should be run with HIGH PROFILE PUBLIC FIGURES.

Even with a metal detector and other rudimentary security (can you tell me what security measures were in place aside these campus cops/guards?) I'd love for you to tell me that if someone WANTED to take someone out of Kerry's position, that weapons composed entirely of synthetic polymers with no metal pieces for these hypothetical metal detectors to miss, that they couldn't whack Kerry.

Time and time again, people have found ways to get their target.

Assassination is an art and not one lost over time.

Refined and requiring much more finesse and ingenuity than it used to IMO.

Seriously, tell me it couldn't happen.

People are becoming more and more desperate to make a statement, and that statement is felt much harder claiming a life, and some loudmouth may just be trying to make it.

You say people "give up common sense," if anything it's heightened to maintain this feeling of security and safety.

To not maximize security around a figure like Kerry or the President is a pure display of giving up common sense.

High profile individuals can be used just to make a statement be heard further than many could get that message around on their own.

Also, taking that tape for face value after that poke you made at common sense... Rofl, how quaint.

I'd love to bean you over the head, call you an ignorant twit who needs a dictionary/spell check while you continue to live in a fantasy world where rudimentary security gets the job done for persons who are more likely to be wanted dead by other people; but this would accomplish nothing.

You said to continue being scared of life in your returned rate down, I prefer to think I'm safety savvy.

I can understand someone like you wanting to look at life's simplicities and being the "it-couldn't-happen-to-me" type of guy, and if that's what makes you happy, shit live it up.

But I'd rather be more proactive and be aware of what's around me and what could happen, so I don't piss myself, crying that it happened to me; when I can react and do something about it. - Even if it's just hiding under a table like a chickenshit lmao...

I've got nothing against you personally, but so far you haven't given us anything intelligent in this thread to work off of. Show me this reasoning you mentioned that it was safe, by all means!

To sum it up with a popular idea, albeit a more extreme one...

"Just cause you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you." Yes?

I can agree to disagree as I have before with a different issue in regard to the occurrence(edit: specifically the fact that maybe the kid was removed hastily); but to come off so presumptuous that someone actively resisting people in a position of maintaining public safety shouldn't be neutralized to be taken into custody or handed over to the police to sort whether an arrest is necessary..? Hah.

Edit: Spelling. >_<; Needz moar alcohol.

So in your mind its more plausable that the kid had a gun made up of undetectable material then he had no gun at all? I just want to know what type of person I'm dealing with here.

Now, lets say your an assassin. Are you going to get up and make a huge scene and bring attention to yourself? Or are you going to try to get as close as you can to your target before you try to kill them. Again, use common sense. In fact, I challenge you to find one high profile assasination attempt where the person was yelling at his victim before he attempted to kill him.

And for your information, I am not the "It -couldn't-happen-to-me" type. I am a realist and am aware the dangers in the world. However, I do not allow these dangers to rule my life much like a number of people in this thread.

And as for the Nirvana quote? Who exactly are you worried are after you?

Are you from texas?

 

[Neisan]

If they assumed he was maniacal, then no, they wouldn't believe him to act rationally for a second.

Then again, it's always the quiet ones...

 

[Ryuoho]

Again, the number of cops subduing him has nothing to do with it, not really. You be that one cop that stands back and decides you're not needed and shit hits the fan... It only needs to happen once.... either way there were only about 2 or 3 with their hands actually on him.

 

[Makelith]

Tasers are not intended to be use to force compliance, they are intended as a less lethal alternative to using a gun to stop a suspect who is a danger to the health and safety of others

Before i became a chemistry major i was contemplating law enforcement, and i got to do alot of ride arounds with several different officers, and while they didn't carry tasers, they had pepper spray, which i would say is pretty much in the same field. I didn't think to ask about tasers about 2 years ago when i was doing this.

Pepper Spray, in order to be used by police officers, you have to have it used on yourself. Rite of passage sorta deal. Anyway, they said that if someone is struggling, no matter how many cops were piled on them, if they don't have the cuffs on they can still pose a threat to officers. One of the guys i rode with had a decent sized scar on his wrist from a woman using her nails and her teeth on him when there were multiple officers holding her down already. He wished he had used the pepper spray from the git-go and just been able to cuff her. Hindesight is 20/20.

Take that story how you will, but it pretty much sums up my feelings on it.

I hope they just don't give tasers to rent-a-cops like that, but you never know.

He was warned, he didn't stop, he was warned again, still didn't stop, i think he had it coming.

It's generally not police policy to have some fat cop sit on your chest until you get tired enough to put your hands behind your back.

Pretty much for this reason. They were the law at that forum. He didn't have respect for what he was told and gently lead away, and he decided to make a much larger scene then was needed. If it were me, i would have tasered him alot sooner than that.

Also, Lol to the people who say that "if they didn't do anything wrong, why were they suspended?"

First, they were suspended with pay. Thats pretty much the place trying to cover its ass. Second, if they had really done something that was outrageously wrong, they would have done it without pay, or even fired them for the use of excessive force.


Also, after watching the video for the first time, he was not simply being loud and raising his voice. If you honestly think that, that was his only problem, then i commend you for having that much patience. Lord knows i don't have that much anymore.