The person in question doesn’t seem to be moving, just asking. And if this wasn’t an appropriate time, when is? When the officer has left and there is no way to track him down? Is it that hard to let folks know your badge number? Officers are supposed to be 100% transparent about such information, not deciding the place and time they will give it out.
Wow, quite the debate here. I for one have never been tasered. I have no idea if it is excessive force because I have never felt it. Being the good doper that I am, not jumping to conclusions and fighting ignorance, I would have to rely on the opinion of someone who has in fact experienced a taser.
Bear_Nenno has voiced his opinion and, until someone says they have been tasered(and they’re not making it up to mock me) and voices a different opinion, I will believe him.
I have worked as a bouncer in a college bar. I can tell you for a fact that it is very difficult for two guys to “escort” someone out of a bar if they do not want to go. I’m not a small guy. I’m 6’4" 220lbs and bench more than I weigh. I’ve found that if someone does not want to leave the bar, either one of the bouncers or the guy is going to get hurt. As a bouncer, you make sure it is the guy. If the cops did this and physically injured the guy, I would agree that there was excessive force.
In this case, there is no proof that the guy was violent or going to get violent. But, if there is a chance that someone is actually going to get hurt, and a taser is effective and does not have lasting injuries, I say use the taser.
It’s Judge Dredd, isn’t it?
Hey, congratulations for being the first person to make me throw up a little in my mouth since Paris Hilton. Jesus H. fucking Christ, you absolutely astound me.
You do know a taser is supposed to be a fucking self-defence weapon, right? As opposed to a tool of arbitrary coercion? You are exactly the sort of cunt that makes me worried about armed police, and exactly the sort of overbearing dickhead that makes me thankful I don’t live in a place where this sort of thing is even contemplated, let alone condoned. You saw the same video as all of us; the guy was tasered repeatedly while offering no resistance. If a guy goes limp and you want him out, drag him out. What the fuck purpose does tasering him serve, save to satisfy your own authoritarian wet dream?
Oh, no, I see the taser is a “Compliance Tool”. Oh, well then. That soothing nomenclature and the Significant Capitals make me feel a whole lot better about a fucking assault on a non-resisting subject. Hey, why not name it the “Cooperation Incentivizer” and distribute them to any old arsehole who wants one? Who could argue with incentivizing cooperation, right? How about “Electronic Dispute Resolution”? Perhaps “Fluffy Sparky Pacifier”? The soothing euphemisms are endless, if only we want to believe.
Sheesh.
The argument that the taser helped get the guy out the door faster has to be about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.
That’s law enforcement? Doesn’t sound that way to me.
Dude, explosives would’ve got him out faster. What’s your point? 
You win.
My heart, that is.
Well, the video is completely useless because it does not show anything. You never see the force. All you here is “I won’t leave”, “don’t touch me” and irrational screaming followed by the suspects reaction to the tazer.
The Use of Force Continuum stipulates that intermediate measures (gas, tazer) may be used to confront a physically resistant suspect when other means of control, including verbal and physical commands have proven ineffective or are not conducive to the safety of officers, the suspect, the public or property.
If you attempt a physical interdiction, and he “breaks away” acting in any way like the sound of his voice is (erratic and confrontational), then the use of an intermediate measure is justified. Pepper spray would have been less force (according to most police Use of force continuum’s) but, pepper spray in an enclosed area, with multiple students around, would have resulted in contamination of multiple, uninvolved entities. Thus, the use of a tazer would have been better.
I guess it comes down to: With a physically resisting subject, obviously acting irrationally, which one is better, wrestle with an obviously distraught suspect, in a small confined area, with expensive equipment (cops do have a duty to protect property) and potentially run into the crowd of onlookers who were very close, or use a tazer.
From the evidence so far, I do not see evidence of excessive force.
You do know that you are completely full of shit and have no clue what you are talking about, right?? Do you have any knowledge of the subject whatsoever?
Here… need a cite?
From The Seatle Police Department
*In its training materials, the Department provides an assessment of less lethal
options from a use of force perspective. The M26 Taser, when used as a touch
stun device, is viewed as a lesser use of force than OC spray and on a par with
pain compliance techniques such as wrist locks and control holds. When used
with the dart projectiles, the M26 is viewed as a greater use of force than pain
compliance techniques, but a lesser one than punches, kicks, or the use of other
impact weapons. *
Wow, I must have known what I was talking about all along. Go fuck yourself.
You’re that attracted to people pulling shit out of their ass?
Aw, shucks. I’m actually in love with a mad woman with commitment issues at the moment, but I’ll call you, yeah?
Bear_Nenno, come over here and I’m sure I can get you to agree with me. Oops, no, I mean “comply”. Silly me. Say, did you actually read your cite? Because it seems to me like you missed out a rather significant word from your description. Here, I shall bold it for you:
“pain compliance techniques”
Oh dear. How unfortunate that that un-fluffy word snuck in there. What are we to do about it? I know, let’s stick it up your ass.
Oh, it is also important to note that because of increased officer injuries, incidents of positional asphyxiation during prolonged struggles and increased injuries to suspects during physical altercations, many police forces have moved intermediate measures of intervention up in the continuum.
In some cases, pepper spray comes before physical force. In some situations, even tazers come before physical force. This depends on a lot of factors. These include: the location of the incident, the potentiality for a weapon, danger to personnel, attitude and demeanor of the subject, presence of uninvolved bystanders close to the incident and a myriad of other factors. Police must make this judgment call, based on dozens of factors in a matter of seconds, during very heated and emotionally volatile situations.
This, mind you, does not place them above the law, nor should it exempt them from oversight. I am not CONCLUDING this is a good use of force. I DO NOT, and neither do any of you, have enough information to do so. I am only stating that there is no evidence, at all, on the tape, to conclude in favor of excessive force. Furthermore, many assertions of excessive force are based on the belief that police should have to physically restrain a suspect before they use a tazer. I would like to remind all these individuals, that once physical force has been applied, it is many times, impossible to retreat to intermediate sanctions.
During ground fighting, pepper spray is completely useless (unless you spray it in your hand and then rub it in the suspects eyes) and a tazer is likely to hit a police officer. Ground fighting can be very devastating, people have lost eyes, fingers and have died from it. DO NOT underestimate the power of a severely deranged and motivated offender during ground fighting. Heavily armored personnel have been severely injured ground fighting with a single subject when they outnumber them 8 to 1.
I guess I am simply saying it is not easy to conclude one way or the other unless you have been trained in the tactics and understand the realities of use of force. I am not kidding when I say Law enforcement personnel go through 1,000’s of hours of training in use of force throughout their career. So do the people who investigate them. Make sure we educate ourselves before we jump to conclusions.
I would just like to note, however, that I am awfully heartened by your embrace of “less lethal” techniques for removing students from their labs. How we managed before such enlightened persons as your good self came along, I will never know. Lord knows, the body count in the Prolog labs I supervised this week was shocking (ha ha). If only we had had pain compliance devices available, the carnage would no doubt have been avoided, not to mention some of the dreadful mistakes I am now having to mark.
How about: engage the guy verbally and/or let the guy continue walking out the door and not be such goddamn jackboot nutballs over a freaking library card.
I haven’t read the responses, but just to weigh in after reviewing the video and the articles:
The use of the taser was almost certainly unnecessary. But he (the student) was definitley being a little bitch about the whole thing. This is your Patriot Act at work? Puh-leez.
What the hell are you talking about? Do you know what pain compliance means? It’s the same shit I was talking about earlier. Things like pressure points and the like. And I didn’t miss it, I included it. What the fuck are you rambling on about??
Oh and what’s up with the whole “come over here and I’ll make you comply” bullshit? Are you challenging me to a fight? Over the internet? Because of a debate? ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Very fucking mature. Loser.
Also important is that every department is a little different. I used the Seatle Police department to show a very liberal use policy. There are some departments who have much, much more strict policies. But the main point of that cite was to show that the Taser is not strictly a “self defense weapon” like a baton or firearm, as some complete fucking morons in this thread have tried to claim.
Maybe I’m crazy, but if the taser has been implicated in that many deaths then maybe it’s not a good idea to use it willy-nilly when some spoiled brat throws a temper tantrum. Less than lethal indeed.
Or were they tasering old people with heart conditions?
I am trying to point out that whatever comfortable terminology you choose to apply to the act, you are still electrocuting someone who is offering no resistance (and no, “no resistance” is not resistance, no matter what you like to think). It seems worrying that this point has eluded you; I can only hope that you are not about to be entrusted with anything more dangerous than string, let alone a personal electrocution device.
No, dear heart; that was what we in the UK call “a joke”. You, I assume, call it a “conversational humour convergence technique”. The idea, you see, was to highlight the fact that your comfortable terms for electrocuting people make it seem oh-so-applicable to the most inappropriate situations. But never mind; if it went over your head, I am sure it was because you were incapacitated on the floor.
I’m off to bed; I hope you will not take my lack of motion as a sign of dangerous insurrection.
Remmeber, we only saw a small part of a video, I am sure they engaged him verbally.
In regards to letting him leave. In some circumstances, this may be ok, but we don’t know how far it progressed from the start. Think for a second. Are there police officers in a computer lab? Likely, the answer is no.
Thus, this student refused to leave for an extended period of time. If, when the officers arrived, they ordered him to leave and he refused, and became even a smidgen as agitated as he was on the start of the video (45 seconds before force), then I would suspect he had refused orders, was ranting and was acting erratically.
Your assumption to let him go assumes that he would simply leave and behave peacefully, not returning to enter into conflict only after the police left. When he disobeyed orders to comply or leave, he was violating the law. If the police would have let him go, and then he came back with a gun and offed the clerk who refused to take his ID, would you have been one of the people screaming “the police should have done something”? If not you, I assure you, the parents and loved ones of the other people involved would have.
Asking the police to not arrest, or detain a subject who is obviously not in their right mind and is behaving erratically is similar to past police practices regarding domestic violence. In those cases, the police would arrive at a scene and the situation would appear relatively normal, but the suspect would be highly agitated and the victim would be complaining of threats or limited violence. Old police tactics would include having the suspect walk around the block, leave the house for a while, conducting conflict resolution counseling or sometimes just leaving. Too many times, this was followed by overt acts of violence against individuals in the household. Thus, domestic violence auto-arrest laws were created.
When police officers are trained, they are trained to enforce the law. If this subject was acting in the manner outlined herein, they needed to intervene and detain him, even if it was long enough for him to cool down and potentially receive mental health intervention.
Really people, would a person acting in their right mind take not having an ID, and being refused access to a computer lab, to this level?