In essence, in accordance to the UCLA police policy, they are allowed to tase against passive demonstrators. In other words, sitting down and not moving for reasons of protest can get you tased.
Uningbelievable. If this is true, then in accordance to the UCLA police policy these officers were within their policy guidelines. So it may not be the officers' heads that will be rolling, rather someone much higher up in the department. I can't ing believe this is policy. Wow.
What a diry policy. Well, for their sakes, what goes around comes around.
Arbiter
quote:
Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Uningbelievable. If this is true, then in accordance to the UCLA police policy these officers were within their policy guidelines. So it may not be the officers' heads that will be rolling, rather someone much higher up in the department. I can't ing believe this is policy. Wow.
I don't agree with that assessment. There's no reasonable claim that the use of such a technique "appear[ed] necessary to further a legitimate law enforcement purpose" in this case. Further, consider that there was no significant potential for injury to the officers or others if the technique had not been used, nor was the offense involved anything particularly indicating a need for such a technique. Furthermore, there was no particular need for a prompt resolution of the situation, and there were other reasonable alternatives (simply restraining the individual physically and removing him from the facility, for example).
Since the officers could not have reasonably believed that such a technique was necessary to further a legitimate law enforcement purpose, and since they failed to consider "the totality of the circumstance" as noted above, it's quite clear that their actions were inconsistent with this policy.
MisterOpus1
quote:
Originally posted by Arbiter
I don't agree with that assessment. There's no reasonable claim that the use of such a technique "appear[ed] necessary to further a legitimate law enforcement purpose" in this case. Further, consider that there was no significant potential for injury to the officers or others if the technique had not been used, nor was the offense involved anything particularly indicating a need for such a technique. Furthermore, there was no particular need for a prompt resolution of the situation, and there were other reasonable alternatives (simply restraining the individual physically and removing him from the facility, for example).
Since the officers could not have reasonably believed that such a technique was necessary to further a legitimate law enforcement purpose, and since they failed to consider "the totality of the circumstance" as noted above, it's quite clear that their actions were inconsistent with this policy.
Hmm, on a closer inspection, I think you have a point. At best it seems a bit confusing with that passive demonstration mark, but at worst it would appear the officers were responsible as you have pointed out. In any case, I think someone at the top should have reconsidered putting in the passive demonstration clause.
shaolin_Z
quote:
Originally posted by MisterOpus1
In any case, I think someone at the top should have reconsidered putting in the passive demonstration clause.
I think the person on the top deserves a good taseing until the mother****** is screaming and begging for it to stop, including the pigs who conducted it.
shaolin_Z
Here's an interesting clip with Olberman and the students lawyer (which goes over racial profiliing too)
josh4
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
Here's an interesting clip with Olberman and the students lawyer (which goes over racial profiliing too)
Booyah! I called it! Olberman asked the same thing I did: why didn't the officers just carry the kid out? Still no real answer to that one, or to a lot of questions.
This lawyer has an agenda. He appeared on the scene much too quickly not to have one. I'd say hes in it for the publicity. Apparently hes not even up-to-speed on the details either. He seemed kinda unsure and unprepared as to how the whole thing exactly started.
I think the case is going to come down to that question. How it started will determine if what was done was necessary.
When Tabatabainejad, a fourth-year student, refused to produce university identification, he was asked to leave the premises.[4] When, according to Young, Tabatabainejad failed to leave immediately, UCPD officers were called to the scene and eventually "resorted to use of the Taser."[3]
So thats it, the kid was being a jackass. I called it again! I asked: why were the officers there in the first place? I knew it was unusual to have uniformed officers patrolling the library for IDs. If they were called to kick the kid out then thats it. Its going to come down to the witnesses.
If you ask me both the student and the officers are at fault. The student is probably a jackass looking for trouble and the officers handled the incident badly.
shaolin_Z
I think it's pretty damn obvious and there aren't any questions. The officers were ing brutes, which they demonstrated by taseing him 4 times when cuffed and threatening to tase the students asking for badge numbers. Why are people so ing obsessed with the infalible word of "authorities"? Is that how conditioned most of you are? (Sorry Josh, nothing personal against you, this is just a general comment)
shaolin_Z
quote:
Originally posted by josh4
If you ask me both the student and the officers are at fault. The student is probably a jackass looking for trouble and the officers handled the incident badly.
:mad: No he isn't. I would have done the same ing thing as he did.
"Hey you Arab , where's your ID?"
"Ask all the white dudes for one too bitch, that way I know you're not profiling me."
"In that case, get the out."
"Alright mofo, go yourself. I'm not going to participate in my own profiling. I'm leaving."
some white prick gets scared of an Arab looking dude refusing to show his ID. Cops come in when the dudes headed out.
"Let me go."
" you, we're going to tase you."
It's that ing simple. You want me to break it down any simpler?
shaolin_Z
Not wanting to be racialy profiled and getting pissed off about it after having force used on you for no good reason while you're not using force even though you were leaving since you'd rather not be in a place where you're going to be profiled = being a jackass :rolleyes:
Authorities CAN'T be responsible for a scenario leading them to act inappropriately for no good reason, because we all know the authorities are ALWAYS so nice and lawbiding :rolleyes:
It's ok to tase the out of someone who wasn't violent or using force in the first place :rolleyes:
Now do you understand why I'm getting so pissed off at some of you?
Lilith
quote:
Originally posted by MisterOpus1
So I do hope you accept my apology, and I do hope you post here more often in the future. I just hope you please consider the differences between this forum versus the other forums when you do post something.
The other thing too consider is that this forum is about arguing too some extent, just because we don't agree don't take it as we don't like you personally.
Unless youre obviously out too get some sort of personal reaction or hatred out of readers then you'll reap what you sow.
Groundhog Boy
Oh boy, this gets more interesting every day
quote:
Officer named in Taser incident
UCPD identifies Terrence Duren as police officer who used a Taser on a student in Powell
Terrence Duren, whose tenure with university police has included an award for UCPD Officer of the Year as well as allegations of police misconduct and use of excessive force, was the officer who used a Taser against Mostafa Tabatabainejad in Powell Library last Tuesday, university police said Monday.
Duren arrived on the scene with Officers Alexis Bickamong, Kevin Kilgore and Andrew Ikeda, and the sergeant on duty was Philip Baguiao, said Nancy Greenstein, UCPD director of police community services.
The 43-year-old officer, who was on active duty Monday, was also the subject of media attention three years ago after he shot a homeless man in Kerckhoff Hall.
Interesting development, that would sort of indicate what most of us all realize: the force applied to the guy after he was cuffed was excessive.
My speculation though is that the first tasering was justified.
Afterall, if I was that police officer, I would be slightly scared. We have this innocent looking kid that is simply going crazy, shouting at the top of his lungs in a library for no real reason. Its not the behavior of a rational individual, and I would be suspicious, try and neutralize the situation as quick as possible, and get the kid out of there before he starts a riot, pulls out a knife, jumps out the window, or who knows what.
Its very easy to look at this from the perspective of the students or yourself in your situation, but cops deal with a lot of on a daily basis as well and fear for there lives at many occurances. While us at the safety of our armchairs can see how this kid didn't pose any threat or most likely wouldn't, the cops at the ground don't get to make that call, they have to assume the worst, or it is there lives, jobs or worse on the line (of course making a bad call also puts your job on the line obviously).
