|
UCLA police taser a student (pg. 15)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Orbital32 |
Like i said before, just because you "HEAR" something on video, doesn't mean that what it really is or sounds like.
Take for example "I HAVE A MEDICAL CONDITION!!!"
Does that statement mean for a police to deviate from his training? No, that statements means more to the victim...FOLLOW THE POLICE OFFICERS ORDERS! There are people in the world who use statements like that to attempt to get free or gain an advantage. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by Akridrot
Apparently, nearly all of us are wrong. You know there's more than one side to a story right? Well here's the other side (eye witnesses, sober people and such):
http://messageboard.tuckermax.com/s...36&page=1&pp=10
DAMN IT. The guy probably did deserve every jolt of pain sent into his body, and now we're mad at the wrong people. :whip: |
Of course there is more to the story - police did not enter a library, pick a random middle eastern person and harass him - and nobody here is really saying that - the simple fact is, troublemaker or not, he was met with undue subdual after saying he would leave.
As Swamper hinted at pages and pages ago, the quality of the camera footage seemed unusually good for being a cell phone camera - it was likely a digital camera - and, if so, why was somebody ready and waiting with a digital camera in a library? Seems supicious, almost as if this entire event was staged - but even if it were, why were the police so seemingly eager to deliver a predicted response?
The man met nobody else with violence, and was probably not yelling or causing raucous amounts of trouble and making a scene before he was threatened with authoritative action - no reports seem to truly indicate that he was "asking for it" prior to being investigated by campus police - so why/how did this happen?
This event is important because it signifies something much, much larger than this very incident. I am much more worried about the events that never get reported, the events that never get recorded and are in the public view and on youtube and in a ing library in front of hundreds of other people for 's sake.
Maybe it is nothing - and I truly hope that this "paranoia" is false, I really do.
But if people's suspicions distrust of the government is true as indicated by what they allow to be shown in public and the things that clearly the public was not meant to see, then maybe the paranoid will have been proven correct.
Infringement is a very slow process, hard to notice as all of your rights as an individual human being are traded away for the illusion of safety and nothing more. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Akridrot
Apparently, nearly all of us are wrong. You know there's more than one side to a story right? Well here's the other side (eye witnesses, sober people and such):
http://messageboard.tuckermax.com/s...36&page=1&pp=10
DAMN IT. The guy probably did deserve every jolt of pain sent into his body, and now we're mad at the wrong people. :whip: |
I'm really sorry I subjected myself to a few of those posts. It seems that Tiesto would feel right at home with all that lovely librul bashing taking place.
The one guy who seemed to have a cooler head stated the following and continued to defend himself pretty well despite the sophmoric namecalling and baiting:
| quote: | | After that point, however, he could easily have been dragged out of there without further tasering, and I think that's the point where it crossed into brutality. And the cop who told the student who asked for his badge number to go away or else she's be tasered, too, deserves to be fired. |
It seems the majority of posters there felt the kid was an and baited the cops into this whole thing. The "witness" (whom we know absolutely nothing about and could be Tucker's mother FFS thanx be to the anonymous "internets") pointed out how much of an the guy was on more than a few occasions.
I don't dispute this point at all. The problem I have is how the officers enforced such an attitude in compliance with the law as well as their own taser policies. What it seems that a number of those posters there tend to do is put themselves in the shoes of the police and feel they have the exact same sentiments as the cops wanting to and ultimately tasing the kid. Perhaps I would too, but that's exactly what differentiates me and those nutsack posters from being actual officers. Officers are trained for such situations to not get carried off into emotion, to always and continually assess the situation with a rational mind much more beyond the point that an average citizen would likely do. A personal example is a friend of mine on the local police force had the unfortunate event of killing an armed woman whom was waving a gun around at the officers. He kept his cool and did everything he could to talk her down for over 10 minutes, but only when he saw her the hammer did he finally pull trigger.
My point with that story is that cops should be trained in such situations to know when to keep their cool when everyone else around them loses theirs, and clearly folks around them were getting riled up (as well as the douchebag in handcuffs). So the question I have and tend to believe where the officers are incorrect in their use of force is this: Can officers detain someone in handcuffs and tase them multiple times for not getting up off the ground, or do they have a policy stating that tasers are not utilized for such events?
I would tend to feel that the tasers were not to be used for such things considering that they could have just dragged him out instead rather than continually tase a handcuffed man which seemingly only incited the surrounding crowd that much more. I think this is the ultimate question the courts and Internal Affairs will examine. One event, however, that does not seem to be in question is the officer threatening the other student to get tased if he doesn't back off from asking for their badge numbers. That simply doesn't cut it. |
|
|
| Akridrot |
Well, after reading this thread, some of tuckermax (why is that a bad site?) and watching the video again.. I really don't know what to think.
I can't even call the repeated tasering unjust because I've never been tasered, so I don't know if he really COULD get up. If he can scream "I have a medical condition," so loudly he can scream "I will get up, but can't because of the taser" or something similar.
Since we don't know what happened to make him YELL "DON'T TOUCH ME!!!" AT THE TOP OF HIS LUNGS, I really can't say what the this. But this was still a good discussion.
I'm going to leave it at that. |
|
|
| RickyM |
Thats weird, over in America the police seem to be overly tough, yet over here they let the paramilitaries riot and walk all over them.
Thugs throw petrol bombs and rocks at the police and very little is done. If the police show any kind of force, and start giving the rioters a crack with their truncheons, or rubber bullets, there will be an investigation, by some moany ing politician complaining about police being sectarian bastards and abusing their powers. You can't win.
Anyway, what exactly does a tazer do to you? Does it disable you completely so you can't move? |
|
|
| Clovis |
| I think its safe to say both parties did not act in a civil manner. |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
I think its safe to say both parties did not act in a civil manner. |
We agree on that. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by tiesto14
We agree on that. |
Its unfortunate that either side of the debate is going to use this for their own purposes :/ |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Well I hope I'm understanding your question here, but I guess my default answer is to comply with those law enforcers who have authority to detain you, question you, or subdue (sp?) you if necessary. I don't have statistics with me on this, nor would I know exactly where to get them, but more often than not I think it would be benefitical to everyone involved at least here in the U.S. for a person in question to comply with the officer at that moment rather than resist them regardless of whether or not your rights are being infringed at that moment. |
i asked about what's beneficial to the individual in question, not to everyone involved (who are 'everyone' in this context anyway? the suspect and the authority figures?), and also, as i said - we are diverting slightly off topic with this, meaning this isn't about whether rights are being infringed or not; you might as well just take it as granted that the individual is being questioned for doing something which is indeed illegal in your country.
my point is, if you do not agree with a local law, after having done anything within your legal rights to prevent it or avoid it and failing, you can only comply or resist. declaring that compliance is the only beneficial option is ignorant (mind you, i'm not accusing you of saying that, you still have to clarify your standing on that).
and lastly, two extreme examples to drive the point home: the jews during the holocaust complying with the nazis to take on various jobs against other jews; the lower rank officers complying with the higher rank orders of extermination (not only with nazis, but with any slaughter).
legal authority is not the highest power a man needs to respect/fear (and no, i'm not referring to god). |
|
|
| mezzir |
| quote: | Originally posted by tiesto14
We agree on that. |
/thread?
actually no, this is one of the best discussions we've had in the cor in a while |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by tiesto14
We agree on that. |
I think we all agree on that |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| Clovis ruined this thread with his compromising. |
|
|
|
|
