Actually, it is. By not obeying the lawful orders of the cops in a timely fashion, he’s delaying them from other duties. They don’t have all day to wait while pissy college boy decides to give up peacefully. He gets no sympathy from me.
I’m not sure that it ever was an option, for some police officers. I’ve read about firehoses being used at peaceful civil rights demonstrations in the 1960s.
I want him to be responsible for his actions. He was in the library without his I.D. card. Since that’s against the rules, he should indeed have left the library. And he was stupid not to. I hope they punish him fairly for his breaking of the rules.
All I ask is that the cops concerned are punished for what they did, too.
Not for a lot of the video, you’re correct. You can, however, see him at certain instances of the video, and he appears limp and not struggling.
True. And hey, if people didn’t keep all their money in banks, robbers wouldn’t have access to them! And if those dudes weren’t black, we wouldn’t have to go beat them up! Damn victims.
Dragging a limp student out of a building takes how much time longer than tasering him, waiting for him to comply, tasering him again, waiting for him to comply, tasering him again, and waiting for him to comply before he willingly walks out under his own power?
Probably considerably less time than it would have taken for him to given up on his own and gone with them quietly, judging by his attitude.
Right. He was in the Illinois system.
I’m already familiar with the cites you provided. Agan, I’m asking for a clear indication of a direct cause, not a implication. To my knowledge, nobody in reasonably good health has ever died as a direct result of being tasered.
That’s disappointing Q.E.D., since you’re someone I have great respect for on this board. Of course, since you likely don’t know me from Adam there’s no reason why my disappointment in you should matter at all. But still…
Is there a reason why they couldn’t have just dragged him out like bouncers do around the world every Friday and Saturday night, and cops seem to do all the time (both what I’ve seen personally and also on those stupid COPS shows)?
The question particularly stands if (as appears to be the case) he isn’t swinging punches, biting, kicking, or in any way fighting back? If it turns out that he was being aggressive, then I’ll gladly change my stance that it was fully justified.
The issue is not whether he should have been arrested, detained, removed, etc. But rather whether he should have been tasered repeatedly in non-violent process of said actions.
Right. So the quickest way would be to drag him. What was your point, again?
Nevermind, I misread what you said. Nevertheless, as has been pointed out, it’s not clear from the video that he WAS merely limp and not actively resisting in any way.
According to a 1992 Ninth Circuit court opinion, the Los Angeles policy states that the taser is for use against “violent or potentially violent suspects.” This provision was added to the policy to make it constitutional, so I presume that it hasn’t been removed.
Assuming that is still the policy, isn’t this a clear violation?
Fully agree, Q.E.D., that it’s not at all clear what his actions were from the video. However, it’s clear that there was no shortage of eyewitnesses and I assume that the account in the news articles was based on those. Such as “David Remesnitsky, a 2006 UCLA alumnus who witnessed the incident.”
As I and others have pointed out, the video is not clear enough to determine whether or not he was merely passively resisting or whether there was some active resistance on his part. IF he was entirely passive, then I’ll grant tasering may have been a bit unnecessary, although I can think of worse things that could have been done to him. Arguably, pepper spray (another commonly-used less-than-lethal compliance tool) is far worse since the effects can last for an hour or more. I’ve never been tasered, but I have been pepper-sprayed and if tasering is anything like the HV zaps I’ve gotten from automotive ignitions and TV sets, I’ll take those over the spray any day.
Banks get robbed, all the time.
The beating up black dudes thing, umm, not really following you there, but it sounds like you are calling me a racist. Which you had better fucking explain in your next post to me.
If a person is struggling, even if in restraints, it is risky for *all involved * to simply carry him out of the building.
The fact that he was inciting a riot, maybe you should address that issue next. One shove from the back of the crowd could have sent a person stumbling into the officers. That could escalted the entire incident to really huge fucking deal. The incident as it stands now, no big deal.
Allow me to rephrase:
An officer acting in the lawful performance of his duties is not a vigilante.
If this thread is about abusive cops acting outside of establish policy, then lets see some cites. These cops acted accordingly.
It seems to me that the issue should be about Department Policy and the use of Tasers nationwide. All the cites here about how dangerous the Taser is really isn’t relevant to the actions of these officers. They don’t decide policy. Dont get pissed off at the cops because the department’s lawyers are convinced the Taser is a safe effective tool
[/quote]
That’s not punishment?
[/quote]
No. The community service the kid gets later or the fines or whatever. That’s the punishment.
It was a library. Am I wrong to assume that before this hippy started making a huge scene it was quiet and peaceful?
This is where we branch off. It’s the officers’ conformity to SOP. I think they were within established guidelines. Certainly near the edge, but still within regs. If the department later says otherwise, then I’m wrong.
This kid wasn’t making rational decisions before getting tasered. He was acting like a self-righteous attention whore. “Patriot Act” indeed.
If not, they’re lowering the enlistment standards over there at UCLA.
Well, the first tasering could easily be justified against a “potentially violent suspect” since he was screaming, “DO! NOT! TOUCH! ME!”.
The others don’t seem as justified.
Question-I couldn’t see anything for most of it other than a crowd of students and some study kerrels. But am I the only one who heard him repeatedly screaming, “I AM NOT LEAVING!”
How is that complying?
Who is at fault? Right now, it’s hard to see-I could go either way.
The thing is, the ‘real cops’ aren’t coming to enforce the ‘ID’ rule, they are coming to arrest you for tresspassing. When the real cops get there, you don’t have a choice to leave anymore. You have to stop being an asshole, right then. When you failed to comply with the security officer, you were wrong and that is that.
I’ve looked at the video a few times. I can’t really make out if the suspect is ‘black’.
OK, but I don’t think I need to tell you that “it’s not the worst thing they could have done to him” doesn’t hold an awful lot of argumentative weight. Either the initial situation required that level of response or it didn’t. And for the subsequent shocks on the ground?
No argument here that idiotically yelling about the Patriout Act doesn’t build sympathy.
Tabatabainejad sounds like a persian name, I believe. No telling what race the kid was though, or more precisely what race the cops would percieve him to be.
A bouncer is paid by the establishment to be at that facility, and that facility alone, to keep the peace. It’s not like he’s got other calls somewhere else, the way a police officer could profitably stopping a real crime elsewhere if not for a disobedient and rebellious student.
I can’t watch the video from work, so I don’t know how far this kid went in trying to incite other students to riot and resist the cops for his own stupid mistake, or whether or not this particular incident was justified. I can’t say yet.
But how long do you expect the cops to have stood around waiting for that kid to comply of his own volition? Are you comfortable with the sheer number of cops we’d need if every crime required enough officers to peaceably carry out all offenders by brute physical force? How many cops should one rebellious jackass be able to waylay from more important duties? I would think you’d be happy that tasers allow us to have fewer cops keeping the peace, rather than roaming around in packs of 10-20 at a time, so they could carry around their noncompliant suspects.