FightingArts Estore
Pressure Points
From a medical professional, straight facts on where and how to hit that can save your life.
Stretching
Limber or not, anyone can add height and speed to their kicks with this method.
Calligraphy
For yourself or as a gift, calligraphy is special, unique and lasting.
Karate Uniforms
Look your best. Max snap. low cost & superior crafted: “Peak Performance Gold” 16 oz uniforms.

MOTOBU
Classic book translation. Hard to find. Not in stores.
Who's Online
0 registered (), 35 Guests and 3 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
TomRosenberg, jessylin, play, Keith_G, LeroyCFischer
22937 Registered Users
Top Posters (30 Days)
jwwmantis 2
LeroyCFischer 1
William_Bent 1
futsaowingchun 1
Zombie Zero 1
December
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31
New Topics
Freeing Hand-Wing Chun's last movements
by futsaowingchun
12/17/14 09:40 PM
2015 Master Yang Jwing-Ming Seminar
by jwwmantis
12/05/14 10:36 PM
unrecognized kata
by William_Bent
11/19/14 07:05 PM
Where Are They Now?
by Dobbersky
05/30/13 08:08 AM
The Beginners Guide To Stretching
by
12/27/06 11:43 AM
Your true goal
by
03/03/06 07:16 AM
Recent Posts
Freeing Hand-Wing Chun's last movements
by futsaowingchun
12/17/14 09:40 PM
Your true goal
by Beefcake
12/11/14 02:44 AM
The Beginners Guide To Stretching
by LeroyCFischer
12/04/14 02:07 AM
unrecognized kata
by William_Bent
11/19/14 07:05 PM
Forum Stats
22937 Members
36 Forums
35591 Topics
432526 Posts

Max Online: 424 @ 09/24/13 10:38 PM
Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... 10 11 >
Topic Options
#302870 - 11/21/06 05:40 PM opinions on taser case
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
please look at this

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5g7zlJx9u2E

ok, apperently this kid was in the library at UCLA. the rule is that you have to show ide, when asked for id, he refused to show it. he was asked to leave, he refused. police were called. he yelled and got histerical. he lay down on the floor and wouldn't get up. when the cops tried to pick him up, he thrashed about. they tased him, at the lowest possible setting, and then handcuffed him. he wouldn't stand up, and they tased him again.


here is the question - I said that, the old school way would be to grab hold of a part of him that hurt, like his ear or a handful of hair, or pin his arm behind him, and march him out. my argument was that no cop would try to reason with kid to get up, in front of a crowd of screaming and chanting students who were supporting the kid. in any event, this was going to have hurt the kid - if not a shock, then he was still going to have his hair or ear pulled.

anybody see a way to end this, without involving 6 guys and a streatcher, without the kid being discomforted?

Top
#302871 - 11/22/06 12:19 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: globetrotter]
crablord Offline
th3 t4sty sn4ck

Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 1530
Loc: Australia, QLD, GC
mixed feelings about that, they gave him clear orders, but at the same time he was going crazy, he could have a medical condition. Those cops were in my opinion idiots because there was about 7 of them and they didnt carry him. Tazers are a last resort.
_________________________
"They say the only way to kill a lion is with a rear naked choke, but I'd just kick it in the head"

Top
#302872 - 11/22/06 08:10 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: globetrotter]
JoelM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 07/26/04
Posts: 6355
Loc: Georgia, USA
Told to stand up literally dozens of times and apparently he didn't, since they had to keep telling him. As far as I know tazers don't have a lasting effect, so he wasn't unable to stand, just unwilling.

Tazered, hair pulled, or wristlocked, the moron was going to get hurt. He kept saying he was going to leave, but would never get off of the floor.

My view is this moron got what was coming to him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emEK7t2m35Q&NR
"students who demanded police stop were warned that they would be tazered"
DUDE, WHERE THE [censored] DO YOU GET THE NERVE TO TELL POLICE TO STOP DOING THEIR JOB????

He was a resisting suspect, do what you need to get him out of there. Enough of the PC crap, you don't handle people with cotton balls and q-tips, you do what is necessary to get them out of the situation.

And to those people who think university police are rent-a-cops, most major universities' police departments are real law enforcement officers with guns and badges that can and will take you to jail.

[/rant]
_________________________
We should all take ourselves seriously...and then crumple that image up and toss it out the window.

Top
#302873 - 11/22/06 10:29 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
JoelM--I couldn't have said it better myself

Top
#302874 - 11/22/06 01:00 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
I have to agree with Joel. Disobeying a police officer allows them to use force to get someone to comply. Moral? Don't disobey the police.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302875 - 11/22/06 05:20 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: crablord]
kman Offline
Member

Registered: 05/15/03
Posts: 368
Loc: minnesota
Crablord, use of force continuims differ a bit from department to department but generally tasers and chemicals are below things like wristlocks due to their being less likley to cause an injury. When I went through my taser training were basically told that we could tase pretty early on in the escalation. Tasers and chemicals were both considered pure pain compliance with low likelihood of injury. Police depts and security live in mortal fear of lawsuits. A visit to the ER, a sprain, fracture or even a bruise are evidence that might concievably support a claim of excessive force. A taser leaves a pair of tiny marks, pepper spray is undetectable an hour after exposure. The suspect could hurt themselves in a fall after either. Tasers work really well on pyschos who are othrwise impervious to pain due to muscle shutdown, but they are unbelievably painfull. ( been tased in training.) It's also fun to see a violent drunk morph into a cooperative and sober gentleman after a couple of shocks. K-

Top
#302876 - 11/22/06 10:58 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: kman]
crablord Offline
th3 t4sty sn4ck

Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 1530
Loc: Australia, QLD, GC
oh, right. Thought tasers could seriously hurt you.
_________________________
"They say the only way to kill a lion is with a rear naked choke, but I'd just kick it in the head"

Top
#302877 - 11/23/06 10:50 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Disobeying a police officer allows them to use force



Public servants do not originate orders, they follow them.
Quote:

Moral? Don't disobey the police.



There is nothing remotely moral about violently attacking someone who had not harmed the life or property of another. Violence does not become morally justified when you wear a badge.

The job of the police was to protect the victim's right to act as he pleased so long he did not violate the life or property of another. Not only did they fail to protect an innocent man, they actively committed assault. The officers should be removed from their position as public servants and face trial for their attack. Other police officers should protect the integrity of their jobs by demanding that the attackers be tried under the provisions of the Fifth Amendment.

Top
#302878 - 11/23/06 11:02 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
JoelM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 07/26/04
Posts: 6355
Loc: Georgia, USA
Quote:

Public servants do not originate orders, they follow them.



And one of the orders of a public servant is to protect the peace. This man was inciting a riot, breaking the rules, and failing to comply with orders given by police.

Quote:

protect the victim's right to act as he pleased so long he did not violate the life or property of another



But he violated the property of the university.
Quote:

protect the victim's right to act as he pleased so long he did not violate the life or property of another



He was not innocent, see above.
Quote:

they actively committed assault



He would not get up and leave, what were they suppose to do, tickle him?



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061123/ap_on_re_us/videotaped_beatings

Top
#302879 - 11/24/06 09:28 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote:

Public servants do not originate orders, they follow them.




You are right and wrong. Police have to follow their orders - to enforce orders on the public. So they are empowered to "originate" orders, as you put it.


Quote:

There is nothing remotely moral about violently attacking someone who had not harmed the life or property of another. Violence does not become morally justified when you wear a badge.




Are you saying that enforcement of low-level rules should be flouted until major catastrophe occurs? Who's to say what that guy may have done since he was already violating the entrance rules to the library (police POV).

And violence IS morally justified in self defense. Defense of the library.

Quote:

The job of the police was to protect the victim's right to act as he pleased so long he did not violate the life or property of another.




They did protect the victim - the library was the victim. Get off your ill-informed high horse.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302880 - 11/24/06 09:38 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
crablord Offline
th3 t4sty sn4ck

Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 1530
Loc: Australia, QLD, GC
This calls, dear friends, for a moo
_________________________
"They say the only way to kill a lion is with a rear naked choke, but I'd just kick it in the head"

Top
#302881 - 11/24/06 10:09 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

This man was inciting a riot, breaking the rules, and failing to comply with orders given by police.



In other words, he didn't do anything to anyone.
Quote:

But he violated the property of the university.



That would be an excellent point if the university were privately owned. It is not. It was as much his land as it was anyone's.
Quote:

He was not innocent, see above.



He was innocent of harming the life or property of another. There is no moral justification for assaulting such a person.
Quote:

what were they suppose to do, tickle him?



They were supposed to protect the right of a peaceful person to do as they please on public land so long as they do not violate the life or property of another citizen. In that simple task they completely and utterly failed. And if police are not going to protect the liberty of peaceful people to live as they please, we would actually have greater freedom, peace and liberty without police departments.

Top
#302882 - 11/24/06 10:25 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Police have to follow their orders



No they don't.
Quote:

- to enforce orders on the public. So they are empowered to "originate" orders, as you put it.



Then they are not public servants. They are now our masters and citizens are their servants. Dictatorships throughout history have found that arrangement very convenient.
Quote:

Are you saying that enforcement of low-level rules should be flouted until major catastrophe occurs?



Are you saying that violently attacking one who has not harmed anyone is morally justifiable?
Quote:

Who's to say what that guy may have done since he was already violating the entrance rules to the library (police POV).



Anyone who dares refuse to produce their state papers in a library is clearly an ax-murderer waiting to happen.
Quote:

And violence IS morally justified in self defense. Defense of the library.



A) If the victim attacked the library, please explain who he attacked, who was killed or hospitalized and how many rooms he burned or destroyed so that I can change my position and agree with you entirely.

B) Self defense is SELF defense. If the victim attacked the library, the specific person at the library who was assaulted should have tasered the attacker.

C) The student did not taser the police; the police tasered the student. The student did not initiate violence; the police initiated violence. The student did not make threats or demands; the police made threats and demands. No amount of excuses will change that.
Quote:

They did protect the victim - the library was the victim.



Again, please explain to me who was attacked or injured as a result of the student's violence and I will change my position entirely. Until you produce a victim, stop attempting to claim victim status. There was only one human being who was violently assaulted in this incident, and it was not a librarian.
Quote:

Get off your ill-informed high horse.



I am not the topic. The topic is the topic. Stay on it.

Top
#302883 - 11/24/06 10:40 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
crablord Offline
th3 t4sty sn4ck

Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 1530
Loc: Australia, QLD, GC
Im finding myself leaning towards sopwith right now. He has a point
_________________________
"They say the only way to kill a lion is with a rear naked choke, but I'd just kick it in the head"

Top
#302884 - 11/25/06 03:28 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: globetrotter]
JAD Offline
Newbie

Registered: 09/05/06
Posts: 20
Loc: Michigan, USA
Our use of force continuim calls for compliance controls when the subject refused to comply with the directions of the officers. Compliance controls can be thought of as techniques that cause discomfort (not injury) to the subject until he/she complies. Tazer's and chemical agents are compliance controls, but some pressure point control techniques could have been a better choice in this instance.

Top
#302885 - 11/25/06 08:51 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote:

That would be an excellent point if the university were privately owned. It is not. It was as much his land as it was anyone's.




I am terribly sorry to inform you that public land DOES have rules.

Quote:

No they don't.




Look, I agree that tasering the student was a bit much. However, the police were within their rights to do so, in order to keep the peace and protect the public. Again, why didn't the guy just produce the ID or leave? HE created that situation, not the police.

Quote:

Then they are not public servants. They are now our masters and citizens are their servants. Dictatorships throughout history have found that arrangement very convenient.




So police = dictatorship? Get real. That point is so stupid, I will not even argue that.

Quote:

Are you saying that violently attacking one who has not harmed anyone is morally justifiable?




Notice how you avoid my question. I have already answered your question several times. Police are empowered to use force to make people comply with rules, period.

Quote:

Anyone who dares refuse to produce their state papers in a library is clearly an ax-murderer waiting to happen.




That was not my conclusion. But rules are rules. The guy could have simply produced the ID, or left. His choice and his resposibility to face the consequences of his actions.

Quote:

A) If the victim attacked the library, please explain who he attacked, who was killed or hospitalized and how many rooms he burned or destroyed so that I can change my position and agree with you entirely.




Rules are rules, no matter how insignificant they seem to you.

Quote:

B) Self defense is SELF defense. If the victim attacked the library, the specific person at the library who was assaulted should have tasered the attacker.




All the people inside were being threatened by someone attempting to improperly gain access. How do you know his intentions were peaceful? Please produce character references and polygraphs showing the truth of his intentions at that specific time. The police have a DUTY to protect the public.

Quote:

C) The student did not taser the police; the police tasered the student. The student did not initiate violence; the police initiated violence. The student did not make threats or demands; the police made threats and demands. No amount of excuses will change that.




The student apparently demanded or threatened to enter the library without ID. Then he demanded or threatened not to leave when asked. The police responded in a manner allowed by their rules.

Quote:

Again, please explain to me who was attacked or injured as a result of the student's violence and I will change my position entirely. Until you produce a victim, stop attempting to claim victim status. There was only one human being who was violently assaulted in this incident, and it was not a librarian.




Again, you are completely missing the point. He was assulting THE PUBLIC (police POV) by attempting to break the rules - no matter how small. Rules are rules.


Quote:

Quote:

Get off your ill-informed high horse.



I am not the topic. The topic is the topic. Stay on it.




_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302886 - 11/25/06 12:26 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JAD]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Compliance controls can be thought of as techniques that cause discomfort (not injury) to the subject until he/she complies.



Let's use simpler words...

"We will hurt you until you do as we say."

Top
#302887 - 11/25/06 12:46 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Look, I agree that tasering the student was a bit much.



Then stop defending people who violently assault an individual who has not harmed the life or property of another. Just stop. No excuses, no compromises... just stop.
Quote:

the police were within their rights to do so, in order to keep the peace and protect the public.



A) As government agents, police do not have rights. The Bill of Rights grants no rights whatsoever to government agents; quite the opposite in fact. It restricts them.
B) Even if someone did have some twisted legal "right" to physically attack another human being, I would expect them to have the moral courage not to act upon it.
C) The public was not under attack, therefore no "protection" was necessary.
Quote:

why didn't the guy just produce the ID or leave?



"They were holding onto him and they were on the ground, he was trying to just break free. He was saying, 'I'm leaving, I'm leaving.' It was so disturbing to watch that I cannot be concise on that. I can just say that he was willing to leave. He had his backpack on his shoulder and he was walking out when the cops approached him."

- student witness affidavit
Quote:

HE created that situation, not the police.



He did not approach the police, the police approached him. He did not attack the police, the police attacked him. He did not taser the police, the police tasered him. He did not demand state papers from the police, the police demanded state papers from him.

I think we both agree on that much.
Quote:

Police are empowered to use force to make people comply with rules, period.



Let's put that into plain English...

"We're going to hurt you until you do as we say."
Quote:

How do you know his intentions were peaceful? Please produce character references and polygraphs showing the truth of his intentions at that specific time.



A) Do you believe that all citizens should be forced by threat of violence to prove their intentions before taking any action?
B) For 800 years of English history we have been innocent until proven guilty. He had no obligation to "prove" anything to anyone.
Quote:

The student apparently demanded or threatened to enter the library without ID.



A free human being in a free country freely entering his own property.

Good heavens... this must be stopped!
Quote:

Then he demanded or threatened not to leave when asked.



I'm curious... how is "not leaving," i.e., the act of doing nothing, a "demand" or a "threat?"
Quote:

He was assulting THE PUBLIC



Then please give me the name of the victim.

Top
#302888 - 11/25/06 01:19 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote:

Then stop defending people who violently assault an individual who has not harmed the life or property of another. Just stop. No excuses, no compromises... just stop.




I have already answered this, in the same quote that you cut short.

Quote:

A) As government agents, police do not have rights. The Bill of Rights grants no rights whatsoever to government agents; quite the opposite in fact. It restricts them.




Funny. I could have sworn that the police are people, too. Don't people have rights?

Quote:

B) Even if someone did have some twisted legal "right" to physically attack another human being, I would expect them to have the moral courage not to act upon it.




For the millionth time, the POLICE were defending the library. They have the right to use force in defense of themselves or others.

Quote:

C) The public was not under attack, therefore no "protection" was necessary.




Rules were broken and action was taken.

Quote:

"They were holding onto him and they were on the ground, he was trying to just break free. He was saying, 'I'm leaving, I'm leaving.' It was so disturbing to watch that I cannot be concise on that. I can just say that he was willing to leave. He had his backpack on his shoulder and he was walking out when the cops approached him."

- student witness affidavit




LMAO. So I can go into a bank and rob them or even threaten to rob them (ie; break the rules) and then cry "I'm leaving!" when the police try to stop me? A bit late for that, don't you think?

Quote:

He did not approach the police, the police approached him. He did not attack the police, the police attacked him. He did not taser the police, the police tasered him. He did not demand state papers from the police, the police demanded state papers from him.




AGAIN, all he had to do was produce ID or leave. He did neither, and suffered the consequences.

Quote:

A) Do you believe that all citizens should be forced by threat of violence to prove their intentions before taking any action?




Of course not. But it is not unreasonable for institutions to make demands for entrance into certain places. 'Please show your ID' is not unreasonable. Why can't you agree that the guy was being immature and disrespectful?

Quote:

B) For 800 years of English history we have been innocent until proven guilty. He had no obligation to "prove" anything to anyone.




Wrong. Very common to have to "prove" who you are or what your intentions are, all the time. At least here in the USA. Ever tried to buy a car, rent an apartment, get a job?

I'm guessing that you haven't.

Quote:

A free human being in a free country freely entering his own property.




LMAO. So he owned the university? I have an idea! Why don't you walk into the White House unannounced? It's PUBLIC, right? Go ahead, it should be no problem whatsoever.

Quote:

I'm curious... how is "not leaving," i.e., the act of doing nothing, a "demand" or a "threat?"




You apparently have never heard of 'trespassing'. You see, when you are on someone's property, and they don't want you there.......oh the hell with it. Look it up yourself.

Quote:

Quote:

He was assulting THE PUBLIC



Then please give me the name of the victim.




No problem.

T-H-E P-U-B-L-I-C.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302889 - 11/25/06 02:00 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
Chen Zen Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 02/09/03
Posts: 7043
Loc: Ms
My God, some guy gets tased and everyone gets all emotional.

As none of us were on the scene we cannot assume the intentions of the man who was tased. Heres what we do know. 1) he didnt have ID 2) he was asked to leave and refused 3) the cops were called.

Thats pretty much how it goes when you are considered trespassing. Had it been on my land it would have went a little differently. somewhere along the lines of " hey Leave" "No" *BANG* "yes police, I just shot this guy who wouldnt leave,...send the meat wagon."
_________________________
"When I let Go of who I am, I become who I might be."
Lao Tzu

Top
#302890 - 11/25/06 07:18 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

I could have sworn that the police are people, too. Don't people have rights?



They do not have the right to assault a peaceful person whose greatest "crime" is not producing his state papers.
Quote:

AGAIN, all he had to do was produce ID or leave. He did neither, and suffered the consequences.



And all the police had to do was leave a peaceful man alone. They chose to attack him instead.
Quote:

it is not unreasonable for institutions to make demands for entrance into certain places. 'Please show your ID' is not unreasonable.



The person who was assaulted might disagree. He also might be of the opinion that he has the right to peacefully stand on his own land without producing state papers.
Quote:

Why can't you agree that the guy was being immature and disrespectful?



If the police had been disrespectful to the student, would you have supported the student's right to violently assault the police?

Didn't think so.

So in reality, whether he was immature and disrespectful is utterly irrelevent. The fact remains that it is morally indefensible to violently assault a person who has not harmed the life or property of another.
Quote:

So he owned the university? I have an idea! Why don't you walk into the White House unannounced? It's PUBLIC, right? Go ahead, it should be no problem whatsoever.



Yes, he owns the university. And yes, you should be able to walk right into your White House unannounced. That was common for over 125 years. The doors to the White House were quite literally open to anyone and everyone. Grover Cleveland would routinely have a cigar across the street at a nearby hotel and speak with strangers, who would later pop in at the White House for dinner or an evening of conversation.

Cleveland - and nearly every other president for over a century - knew that the White House was not government property, it was the people's property, and he was a temporary guest on their land.

We seem to have forgotten that now.
Quote:

You apparently have never heard of 'trespassing'. You see, when you are on someone's property, and they don't want you there.......oh the hell with it. Look it up yourself.



How can you trespass on your own land?


On a sadder note, it is disgraceful to see the extent to which we will go to justify violently attacking people who have harmed no one.

That's really what all this is about. You are reaching out for some sort of absolution that will justify a violent, potentially deadly attack on a person who had done nothing to anyone. A badge, a rule, a law, a bureaucrat, an agency... ANYTHING that will permit you to violently assault others and still be able to face yourself in the mirror. But no such absolution exists. It is wrong. It is immoral. No rule, bureaucrat or badge can make it right. The fact that anyone would support such malicious violence is frightening. It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.

Top
#302891 - 11/25/06 08:17 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: Chen Zen]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

My God, some guy gets tased and everyone gets all emotional.



I hesitate to dismiss crime so lightly. Tasers are deadly weapons that frequently kill. Nearly 200 taser murders have been committed in the US alone with 61 of the killings occuring just last year, largely against unarmed or lightly armed people (if a suspect has a firearm, police respond with firearms, not tasers).

I also hesitate to quietly ignore violent acts against people who have not harmed anyone else. I believe there is a a moral duty to stand up against this sort of aggression.

You're right, it was only one incident, but it is not unique and I believe that our right to be free from violent attack is only as good as our neighbor's. For that reason I believe people - and police officers, above all - should stand firmly against such violence regardless of who commits it.

Top
#302892 - 11/25/06 09:58 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
still wadowoman Offline
Improved beefier techno-prat

Registered: 04/10/04
Posts: 3420
Loc: Residence:UK- Heart:Md, USA
Soppywith,

Has it occurred to you that the use of ID in public buildings, and indeed the enforcement of rules are for everyone's safety - including yours?

Thought not.
Sharon
_________________________
Anyone mind if I sit down?

Top
#302893 - 11/25/06 11:27 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Well I was going to stay out of this "debate" but it's just gotten so ridiculous that I have to comment on some of the latest:


Quote:


They do not have the right to assault a peaceful person whose greatest "crime" is not producing his state papers.




First off, unless you deeply and personally know this man who was tasered you cannot comment that his "greatest crime" was not producing valid ID. You don't know if as a juvenile he set a house of fire or even robbed a bank last week.


Quote:

And all the police had to do was leave a peaceful man alone. They chose to attack him instead.




Which I'm sure they did. I highly doubt they walked in there tasers drawn ready to shoot the first person they saw. Also, I don't know if we saw the same video or not, but at the very beginning the "victim" was loudly shouting "Get your <expletive delted> hands off of me!" Yeah sounds like he was really willing to cooperate with them. Futhermore, before each additional tasing the police asked him to comply with their orders two or three times, even notating that he would be shocked again if he didn't comply--but he refused to--and got shocked again. Can't tell me you're suprised about that. It was probably this disrespectful and beligerent attitude that got him in this situation in the first place.

Doesn't exactly sound like he was being too cooperative to me. What do you expect the police to do in situtions like this, just sit there with an uncomplying suspect and see who has to get up to use the bathroom first???


Quote:

The person who was assaulted might disagree. He also might be of the opinion that he has the right to peacefully stand on his own land without producing state papers.




Which is why he is more than willing to address it at a school board meeting, to the student government body, writing a letter to the dean, or many of the other student organizations and affilates he has access too. Heck, the vast majority of colleges in America even have some form of student law services which he could have utilized for litigation against the library if he felt so strongly against displaying student ID.


Quote:


If the police had been disrespectful to the student, would you have supported the student's right to violently assault the police?

Didn't think so




In a word--yes. However that was not the case for one simple reason--it was not a violent assualt. The kid was asked numerous times to comply before each tasing to which he did not. How many muggers are you going to encounter on the street asking you to comply with handing over your wallet before they attack? Probably just once. And said muggers are probably not going to be brandishing tasers, but rather more lethal weapons such as blades and guns.

As stated above, you can clearly hear the police asking multiple times before tasing him. Second, you cannot compare apples and oranges in this situation.


Quote:

So in reality, whether he was immature and disrespectful is utterly irrelevent. The fact remains that it is morally indefensible to violently assault a person who has not harmed the life or property of another.




Incorrect. His attitude and demeanor dictated how the police responded. Had he been respectful and mature the situation probably would have not escalated to the point it did. Do you honestly think that the kid would have been tased has he been polite and mature with the officers? Of course not.

Furthermore, he did not own the property. As much as you would like to think that the term "public property" means he owns it, alas it does not. Public property means it's open to the public, not that they own it. If public property means that everyone owns it, then by this same arguement the librarian would own it too. She asked for ID before entering her property and he refused. Being on someone else's property without their consent--isn't this the standard definition for tresspassing?

On top of that, open to the public does not mean that you're allowed to do whatever you want while on it. If you don't believe me, go to your closest public library and walk around naked. Why not? You're allowed to walk around your house naked, why not a library; which as you put it, is yours as well.


Quote:

Yes, he owns the university. And yes, you should be able to walk right into your White House unannounced. That was common for over 125 years. The doors to the White House were quite literally open to anyone and everyone. Grover Cleveland would routinely have a cigar across the street at a nearby hotel and speak with strangers, who would later pop in at the White House for dinner or an evening of conversation.

Cleveland - and nearly every other president for over a century - knew that the White House was not government property, it was the people's property, and he was a temporary guest on their land.

We seem to have forgotten that now.




While I've already address the issue of his "ownership" I'd like to point out the issue of merely walking into the White House. The reasons you cannot walk into the White is #1--you don't own it as already address above, and #2--the world we live in today is vastly different than it was 125 years ago. Today we have things like terrorists, machine guns, armor piercing rounds, and nuclear bombs. How many of those were around 125 years ago? It's not that we forgot, it's that we now have a greater need to protect ourselves.

Taking this back to the incident in question--the library has a set of standards and rules in place so everyone there knows they can be a bit safer knowing that the person sitting next to them is a UCLA student as well and not some homeless vagrant off the street who might be high on drugs. When this student refused to show ID he violated the potential safety of all students and personnel in the library, which is why the police were called.

Yes you could say that the college has right to protect all their students, but since this kid in question did not produce any student ID they had no way of knowing he was a student of their facility. Furthermore, as it has been stated multiple times, he refused to comply with the police only compounding the situation for him.


Quote:

How can you trespass on your own land?




Once again, not his land.


Quote:

On a sadder note, it is disgraceful to see the extent to which we will go to justify violently attacking people who have harmed no one.




While you may feel this way I personally find it saddening to see the extent people will go to justify the actions of those "victims" while putting responsibility of the end result merely upon the police and other law enforcement officers. Furthermore, as stated above it was not a violent attack. A violent attack would be the police putting a bullet or two in his leg(s).

Remember that old physics theorum--"Each action has an equal and opposite reaction" Don't like the reaction from the police--don't cause the initial action. Problem solved.

Quote:

That's really what all this is about. You are reaching out for some sort of absolution that will justify a violent, potentially deadly attack on a person who had done nothing to anyone. A badge, a rule, a law, a bureaucrat, an agency... ANYTHING that will permit you to violently assault others and still be able to face yourself in the mirror. But no such absolution exists. It is wrong. It is immoral. No rule, bureaucrat or badge can make it right. The fact that anyone would support such malicious violence is frightening. It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.




No, what this is about is people not wanting to take responsibility for their actions and trying to shift blame to the men and women of law enforcement. I honesty wonder what makes these hard working men and women go out each and every day and put their lives on the line for people who have absolutely no respect for the sacrifice and commitment they are taking to protect your life.

And yes, tasers can be deadly, however they are not marketed as being completely safe and painless. Which is why you don't see them advertised to kids on Sunday morning cartoons. Ask any law enforcement officer what category tasers fall under and you'll be given something to the extent of a "less lethal" device. Not non-lethal, but less lethal. Can it still kill someone, sure. But it's better off getting someone to comply than putting a bullet in them, isn't it?

Bottom line--don't like the rules of this country or the government then let me ask you respectfully to get out--there are plenty of other people who want in.

Top
#302894 - 11/25/06 11:37 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
bearich -

Thank you. I was getting tired of having to rebut Sopwith's ridiculous points.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302895 - 11/26/06 01:50 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
JAD Offline
Newbie

Registered: 09/05/06
Posts: 20
Loc: Michigan, USA
I you define "hurt" as merely causing pain, yes. Remember though, the police are charged with the task of enforcing rules to maintain order in our society. They are given this power by the citizens of this country by voting in the local police chief, sheriff, etc. who is ultimately held responsible for any abuses of this public trust. If you feel you have an issue with what transpired, there are many ways to redress this within the system. If you don't make use of these tools the system provides, I'll just assume you only want to complain. What have you done about it besides this forum?

Top
#302896 - 11/26/06 07:52 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
crablord Offline
th3 t4sty sn4ck

Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 1530
Loc: Australia, QLD, GC
you know matt, im actually agreeing with sopwith somewhat.

Quote:

First off, unless you deeply and personally know this man who was tasered you cannot comment that his "greatest crime" was not producing valid ID. You don't know if as a juvenile he set a house of fire or even robbed a bank last week.



No, and what the hell does that have to do with anything? stupid comment.
Quote:

Also, I don't know if we saw the same video or not, but at the very beginning the "victim" was loudly shouting "Get your <expletive delted> hands off of me!" Yeah sounds like he was really willing to cooperate with them. Futhermore, before each additional tasing the police asked him to comply with their orders two or three times, even notating that he would be shocked again if he didn't comply--but he refused to--and got shocked again. Can't tell me you're suprised about that. It was probably this disrespectful and beligerent attitude that got him in this situation in the first place.



what a load of [censored]. If he told them to "get your hands off me" it probably indicated it scared him. This guy could have been having a adhd physcho or something for all they know. And when he was on the floor they shouldnt have tazed him, even though that guy said before that it was better than using wristlocks due to liability in court, but they should have recognised he meant no harm and could just have been scared stiff. He did nothing, making some noise in a library doesnt warrant being "extremely painfully electrocuted" as that guy said before. If they REALLY had to remove him, they should have just grabbed his arms and pulled him out, or handcuffed him while he was on the floor.

Quote:


Which is why he is more than willing to address it at a school board meeting, to the student government body, writing a letter to the dean, or many of the other student organizations and affilates he has access too. Heck, the vast majority of colleges in America even have some form of student law services which he could have utilized for litigation against the library if he felt so strongly against displaying student ID.



Write a letter? ...no. As far as refusing to show i.d , we dont now what happened, they could have started being [censored] to him, he might have been a regular visitor who everyone knew etc. We didnt see that so we cant comment. we only saw him being tased, with a " apparently hes getting his ass zapped because he didnt show id" . So no more comments about that please.

Quote:

In a word--yes. However that was not the case for one simple reason--it was not a violent assualt. The kid was asked numerous times to comply before each tasing to which he did not. How many muggers are you going to encounter on the street asking you to comply with handing over your wallet before they attack? Probably just once. And said muggers are probably not going to be brandishing tasers, but rather more lethal weapons such as blades and guns.


Wrong, it was a violent assault. and as i said before he might have been too scared to get up etc, there are many reasons. And a guy doesnt scream "LEAVE ME ALONE" at the top of his voice, without some sort of problem, the cops there should have thought of that.
Quote:

Incorrect. His attitude and demeanor dictated how the police responded. Had he been respectful and mature the situation probably would have not escalated to the point it did. Do you honestly think that the kid would have been tased has he been polite and mature with the officers? Of course not.

Furthermore, he did not own the property. As much as you would like to think that the term "public property" means he owns it, alas it does not. Public property means it's open to the public, not that they own it. If public property means that everyone owns it, then by this same arguement the librarian would own it too. She asked for ID before entering her property and he refused. Being on someone else's property without their consent--isn't this the standard definition for tresspassing?

On top of that, open to the public does not mean that you're allowed to do whatever you want while on it. If you don't believe me, go to your closest public library and walk around naked. Why not? You're allowed to walk around your house naked, why not a library; which as you put it, is yours as well.



His attitude was the way it was because he was anrgy that he got tazed, or maybe its just my medical condition theory, either way it doesnt have much to do with this.
as far as being naked in your house, its allowed, but since its a PUBLIC library, your not allowed, just like walking around naked in the streets. All in all, the police should have assed the situation as 1/10 dangerousness, they failed, they responded as if it were 5/10 dangerousness.

Quote:

While you may feel this way I personally find it saddening to see the extent people will go to justify the actions of those "victims" while putting responsibility of the end result merely upon the police and other law enforcement officers. Furthermore, as stated above it was not a violent attack. A violent attack would be the police putting a bullet or two in his leg(s).

Remember that old physics theorum--"Each action has an equal and opposite reaction" Don't like the reaction from the police--don't cause the initial action. Problem solved.



1, thats a load of bs. 2, there was no "equal" reaction. He did something wrong, no doubt, but the police used the "hit us and we will hit back 100000 times harder" strategy.
Quote:

No, what this is about is people not wanting to take responsibility for their actions and trying to shift blame to the men and women of law enforcement. I honesty wonder what makes these hard working men and women go out each and every day and put their lives on the line for people who have absolutely no respect for the sacrifice and commitment they are taking to protect your life.



more bs.

Quote:

And yes, tasers can be deadly, however they are not marketed as being completely safe and painless. Which is why you don't see them advertised to kids on Sunday morning cartoons. Ask any law enforcement officer what category tasers fall under and you'll be given something to the extent of a "less lethal" device. Not non-lethal, but less lethal. Can it still kill someone, sure. But it's better off getting someone to comply than putting a bullet in them, isn't it?



yeah thanks, how about the "nonletha;" catagory. Such as handcuffs? hmm?
Quote:

Bottom line--don't like the rules of this country or the government then let me ask you respectfully to get out--there are plenty of other people who want in




moooore bs, that still doesnt make it right. I cant just pop a cap in someones head if they walk into my house now can i?
_________________________
"They say the only way to kill a lion is with a rear naked choke, but I'd just kick it in the head"

Top
#302897 - 11/26/06 11:24 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
aeclark82 Offline
Member

Registered: 10/19/06
Posts: 82
Loc: Davenport, IA, USA
I think I'll take a stab at a debate for once. I've viewed a few videos on the topic. And unfortunately, the videos were very biased (one was an interview with a UCLA Student Reporter, and the other was with the "victims" attourney.)

Personally, I think both parties were in the wrong.. to an extent.

The police might have tasered the student a few too many times though. I assist law enforcement officers quite often and have seen numerous instances where the suspect goes limp and the officers literally pick him up by his arms and drag him to their patrol vehicle(s). The thing that really disturbs me is when the other students asked for the officers identifications, the officers threatend them. This was completely uncalled for!

Obviously the student was in the wrong for not furnishing his ID when asked. Sure the campus is publicly accesible property, but the library obvviously has some sort of restricted access. In the US,try and go to an airport terminal (publicly accessible property) without a ticket.. you'll be denied. And if you act like this guy did, you'll be in a world of trouble.

The victim was immature (as evident by the tantrum he threw.) In my experience, immature people are more likely to act and react on their emotions before reason.

However, none of us know the entire story. We can only speculate what happened "behind the scenes".
_________________________
Obligation, Justice, Courage... HONOR!

Top
#302898 - 11/26/06 11:57 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: crablord]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

No, and what the hell does that have to do with anything? stupid comment.




The point of the comment was that sopwith stated that the kid that got tased greatest crime was only entering a library without showing ID. I was merely trying to show he cannot make this assessment because he more than likely does not know the kid, which it appears you agree with.


Quote:

what a load of [censored]. If he told them to "get your hands off me" it probably indicated it scared him. This guy could have been having a adhd physcho or something for all they know. And when he was on the floor they shouldnt have tazed him, even though that guy said before that it was better than using wristlocks due to liability in court, but they should have recognised he meant no harm and could just have been scared stiff. He did nothing, making some noise in a library doesnt warrant being "extremely painfully electrocuted" as that guy said before. If they REALLY had to remove him, they should have just grabbed his arms and pulled him out, or handcuffed him while he was on the floor.




You're right making noise in a library doesn't equate to being tased. However that was not the case. He was tased because he didn't comply with police orders. Was tasing over the line--probably. Is it within the police's right--more than likely.

However, I highly doubt that he was scared if he was cognitive enough to yell to the officers "[censored] you!" multiple times. Sounds like someone who's more angry than scared. A scared person would have a tremble in their voice or even cry. I didn't hear or see either of those in the video.


Quote:

Write a letter? ...no. As far as refusing to show i.d , we dont now what happened, they could have started being [censored] to him, he might have been a regular visitor who everyone knew etc. We didnt see that so we cant comment. we only saw him being tased, with a " apparently hes getting his ass zapped because he didnt show id" . So no more comments about that please.




First off, if he was a regular than he would know that he had to show id to get in. Furthermore, if he was a regular at the library I'm sure the librarian would have recognized him and let him slip by without ID. But instead she called the police, indicating she did not know who the student was.

Furthermore, he was not tased for showing ID, but rather tased for not complying with police orders as stated numerous times before.

But I will grant you one point--we don't know what happened. We don't know what happened up to the situation and we don't know what happened during the video (as it was mostly audio). We don't know the actions of the librarian, the police or the student. Unless you were there when it happened all of us are speculating and assuming from the shoddy video on youtube.

Let me ask you this, why is writing a letter to the dean or student body president so far out of line? Would it make an immediate difference, probably not, but if he felt so strongly about entering the library without showing ID than he could have taken the civil route and wrote a letter before he ever started to break the library's rules.


Quote:

Wrong, it was a violent assault. and as i said before he might have been too scared to get up etc, there are many reasons. And a guy doesnt scream "LEAVE ME ALONE" at the top of his voice, without some sort of problem, the cops there should have thought of that.




Or he didn't want to comply with the police. There are countless reasons that he could be shouting at the police--scared, rebellion, etc. We're all assuming on this point. The bottom line is he did not comply with police orders so they did what they felt was right for the situation they were in to resolve the issue.

And before you go off stating that they abused their power remember they also had to deal with not only this kid, but also a small mob forming around the situation.


Quote:

His attitude was the way it was because he was anrgy that he got tazed, or maybe its just my medical condition theory, either way it doesnt have much to do with this.
as far as being naked in your house, its allowed, but since its a PUBLIC library, your not allowed, just like walking around naked in the streets. All in all, the police should have assed the situation as 1/10 dangerousness, they failed, they responded as if it were 5/10 dangerousness.




Yeah, I'm sure he was completely compliant, mature, and willing to comply when he entered the library without showing his ID. Hence he didn't comply with with their rules. On top of that, he didn't get shocked because he didn't show ID, he got shocked because he didn't want to be mature and comply with police orders, even if he didn't agree with them. His attitude towards authority was the sole reason this situation escalated to the point it did. I highly doubt he was the model citizen until the cops had him on the ground and tasered him.

As far as having a medical condition, you're right, we don't know. However, since from the video we heard he did not state that, we have to assume that he didn't have one or that he did not inform the police of it. If they are not aware of any medical conditions there are no way that the police can know, with the exception of having Miss Cleo on speed dial.

And I see you agree with me that there are difference between public property and property you own. Sopwith seemed to believe that if it was public property that everyone owns a piece of it. I was merely using the walking around naked example to show my point. Which I see you agree with.

In regards to the police overracting--you and I were not in their shoes so we cannot judge. Like I said, it can be seen clearly in the video that a small mob was forming. Last thing the police want to be is trying to control an riot. Perhaps they felt they responded properly.


Quote:

1, thats a load of bs. 2, there was no "equal" reaction. He did something wrong, no doubt, but the police used the "hit us and we will hit back 100000 times harder" strategy.




#1--please explain to me how this is bs?
#2--Your misinterrepting the whole theroum. It's not a simple as beginning and end. The whole situation was a chain of events. Here's now it should look:

Action: Enter the library without showing ID
Reaction: Police were called

Action: Student refused to leave
Reaction: Was placed on the ground (assuming handcuffs)

Action: Student refused to comply with police orders with warning he would be tased
Reaction: Student was tased

Action: Student refused to comply with police orders with warning he would be tased
Reaction: Student was tased

Action: Student refused to comply with police orders with warning he would be tased
Reaction: Student was tased

And so on. . .

At any point the student could have altered his action and received a different reaction, but he chose not to comply, but rather rebel. All he had to do was say, "Okay, I'm getting up now" and avoided getting tased. Even after the first taser shot, did he think the police were bluffing??


Quote:

Quote:

No, what this is about is people not wanting to take responsibility for their actions and trying to shift blame to the men and women of law enforcement. I honesty wonder what makes these hard working men and women go out each and every day and put their lives on the line for people who have absolutely no respect for the sacrifice and commitment they are taking to protect your life.



more bs.




Once again, please explain how my opinion is bs. You may not agree with it, but then again, it is my opinion.


Quote:

yeah thanks, how about the "nonletha;" catagory. Such as handcuffs? hmm?




I'm sure handcuffs were utilized and they probably didn't resolve the issue. What should they do if handcuffs don't work, break out the tickle feather?


Quote:

moooore bs, that still doesnt make it right. I cant just pop a cap in someones head if they walk into my house now can i?




Perhaps I was a bit over the line on that statement, but in the end it stands ground. Don't like the rules and government of this country, than do something about it.

And while I don't know the laws of Austrialia, in America you can shoot someone if they break into your house if you feel they present you with an immediate danger.

And before the leap is made, the kid was not shot, he was tased. Big difference. And inciting a riot can create an immediate danger.


Without trying to sound like a broken record--Bottom line, he was tased for not complying with police orders, and not because he entered without showing ID.

Try contacting your local police department and finding out what their policies are for people who refuse to comply with police orders, even after being handcuffed and placed on the ground.

Top
#302899 - 11/26/06 11:58 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: crablord]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote:

No, and what the hell does that have to do with anything? stupid comment.




Not stupid and it IS valid. If the guy is a serial criminal - which no one here knows - then his refusal to show ID highlights a pattern of contempt for the law. Maybe he wanted in to the libray for a Columbine style assualt?

Quote:

what a load of [censored]. If he told them to "get your hands off me" it probably indicated it scared him.




If it scared him so bad, why didn't he just produce the ID or leave before it got to that point? His choice, his consequences.

Quote:

If they REALLY had to remove him, they should have just grabbed his arms and pulled him out, or handcuffed him while he was on the floor.




He was thrashing around and making it difficult for the officers to grab him. They also warned him several times - why not just comply? Consequences, my young friend.

Quote:

Write a letter? ...no. As far as refusing to show i.d , we dont now what happened, they could have started being [censored] to him, he might have been a regular visitor who everyone knew etc. We didnt see that so we cant comment. we only saw him being tased, with a " apparently hes getting his ass zapped because he didnt show id" . So no more comments about that please.




Now THAT is a stupid comment, Crab.

So what if he is a regular? Rules are rules. Show ID or leave, or face the consequences. He got tased because he wouldn't comply with the officers, even after being warned. So don't give me the "tased for ID" crap.

Quote:

Wrong, it was a violent assault. and as i said before he might have been too scared to get up etc, there are many reasons. And a guy doesnt scream "LEAVE ME ALONE" at the top of his voice, without some sort of problem, the cops there should have thought of that.




Crab, are you paying attention or what? Defense is not assault. And people scream all kinds of things when they know they have been caught. Have you never seen "COPS"?

Quote:

His attitude was the way it was because he was anrgy that he got tazed, or maybe its just my medical condition theory, either way it doesnt have much to do with this.




Wrong. It has everything to do with it. He was disruptive before the police showed - remember that's why they were called. Quit trying to spin the story.

Quote:

as far as being naked in your house, its allowed, but since its a PUBLIC library, your not allowed, just like walking around naked in the streets. All in all, the police should have assed the situation as 1/10 dangerousness, they failed, they responded as if it were 5/10 dangerousness.




Were you there that you know for sure what level of dangerousness it was? No? Didn't think so.

Quote:

Quote:

While you may feel this way I personally find it saddening to see the extent people will go to justify the actions of those "victims" while putting responsibility of the end result merely upon the police and other law enforcement officers. Furthermore, as stated above it was not a violent attack. A violent attack would be the police putting a bullet or two in his leg(s).

Remember that old physics theorum--"Each action has an equal and opposite reaction" Don't like the reaction from the police--don't cause the initial action. Problem solved.



1, thats a load of bs. 2, there was no "equal" reaction. He did something wrong, no doubt, but the police used the "hit us and we will hit back 100000 times harder" strategy.




Why is that BS? The guy broke the rules, and the cops made him comply, within the scope of their training and rules.

Quote:

yeah thanks, how about the "nonletha;" catagory. Such as handcuffs? hmm?




Yes, what about them? Were you there that you can say how you would have handled it? Have you ever been in charge of a large group of people? Have you ever done security?

If not, then you have no idea what you are talking about.

Quote:

moooore bs, that still doesnt make it right. I cant just pop a cap in someones head if they walk into my house now can i?




In the USA, if they are trespassing, you are allowed to use force to remove them in many jurisdictions. Crab, you are doing the same thing that Sopwith is - talking about something that you clearly have no knowledge of. You both need to do some research, and stop reacting emotionally.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302900 - 11/26/06 12:32 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
JoelM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 07/26/04
Posts: 6355
Loc: Georgia, USA
I'm sooo glad I haven't come back to this thread. You can't really call it a debate or discusion because one side (sopwith and crablord) really has no idea what they're talking about.
_________________________
We should all take ourselves seriously...and then crumple that image up and toss it out the window.

Top
#302901 - 11/26/06 02:00 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
my take on this includes something that hasn't been mentioned - the police have a responsibility to protect thier authority and image, as well. this isn't a bar fight where one may want to play fair or not. if person breaks the law, a law set up to protect people, and then in a crowded room tries to show that the police can't handle him, he is compounding the crime, because he is showing others that they can do it, too.


as to the idea of carrying him out - my experience is that this causes more damage than aittle tasing

Top
#302902 - 11/26/06 02:17 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: globetrotter]
Chen Zen Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 02/09/03
Posts: 7043
Loc: Ms
And by the way crab, you can shoot people in your house. In fact, in my state, they no longer have to be in the house. They can be in your yard and you can blow them right out of it. The guys lucky, IMO, that they didnt beat the hell out of him with their night sticks or sick the dogs on him.
_________________________
"When I let Go of who I am, I become who I might be."
Lao Tzu

Top
#302903 - 11/26/06 03:26 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: globetrotter]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote:

my take on this includes something that hasn't been mentioned - the police have a responsibility to protect thier authority and image, as well. this isn't a bar fight where one may want to play fair or not. if person breaks the law, a law set up to protect people, and then in a crowded room tries to show that the police can't handle him, he is compounding the crime, because he is showing others that they can do it, too.




Good point, GT.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302904 - 11/26/06 05:55 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
crablord Offline
th3 t4sty sn4ck

Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 1530
Loc: Australia, QLD, GC
Ok then, well did you notice in the video he screamed out " I HAVE A MEDICAL CONDITION!!!"? did you also notice that after all that tasing crap, the thing that got him out eventually was handcuffs?
_________________________
"They say the only way to kill a lion is with a rear naked choke, but I'd just kick it in the head"

Top
#302905 - 11/26/06 07:17 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: crablord]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
Quote:

Ok then, well did you notice in the video he screamed out " I HAVE A MEDICAL CONDITION!!!"? did you also notice that after all that tasing crap, the thing that got him out eventually was handcuffs?



well, he should have thought of that before he decided not to comply with the police then, shouldn't he have?

Top
#302906 - 11/26/06 10:58 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: globetrotter]
aoishi Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 123
Loc: Massachusetts
I have a simple question for everyone:

Do you think that it is okay for law enforcement personnel to tazer people engaged in a non-violent political protest in order to get them to comply with an order to leave University property? Yes or No and please explain why or why not. Also, is this opinion based on your "gut feeling" or based on US law enforcement procedure, etc.

Thank you. BTW, I'm trying to remove the emotional content from this debate if possible and try to find points of agreement rather than disagreement.

Top
#302907 - 11/26/06 11:23 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

I have a simple question for everyone:

Do you think that it is okay for law enforcement personnel to tazer people engaged in a non-violent political protest in order to get them to comply with an order to leave University property? Yes or No and please explain why or why not. Also, is this opinion based on your "gut feeling" or based on US law enforcement procedure, etc.

Thank you. BTW, I'm trying to remove the emotional content from this debate if possible and try to find points of agreement rather than disagreement.




Honesty, at times yes and at times no. In America, people who wish to hold a constitutionally approved public protesting are required to get it cleared by the local governments and any organization who's property it is going to take place on--like a university. If said protester can keep it non-violent without attempting to encite a riot, disturbing the peace, or any other unlawful activity than there should be no reason for the tasing. As soon as there is one instance of even someone spitting at a police officer another demonstrator with another group or any number of hostile events, it no longer becomes a non-violent protest.

However, many times there are those who start protests with the intent of starting a riot. I'm not saying always or even the majority of the times, but it does happen.

Futhermore, as it was stated above, for the right to assemble under constitutional law, you must receive approval by local governments and any organization who's facilities you wish to utilize. If you were to hold a non-violent protest with only the authorization of the local government than the university can revoke your right to protest on their property. Alternatively, if you obtain a university's authorization, the city can still break up the protest, regardless of no matter how peaceful it is.

As this question relates the video linked on this thread, the student was asked by the University to leave after failig to show id, thereby establishing their refusal to allow him to protest--regardless of how non-voilent it might have been--so in this particular instance yes the tasing is acceptable.

And to answer your final question, this answer is 1/10 emotion, 9/10 law.

Top
#302908 - 11/26/06 11:39 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
aoishi Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 123
Loc: Massachusetts
Thanks for the thoughtful response.

>As this question relates the video linked on this thread, >the student was asked by the University to leave after >failig to show id, thereby establishing their refusal to >allow him to protest--regardless of how non-voilent it >might have been--so in this particular instance yes the >tasing is acceptable.

So it sounds like your saying that tazering is acceptable as a compliance measure. Even if person is non-violent.
Correct?

Top
#302909 - 11/26/06 11:54 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
crablord Offline
th3 t4sty sn4ck

Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 1530
Loc: Australia, QLD, GC
Hey I asked my dad (lawyer) about this. I don't know about America but in Australia the police are only allowed to react with equal force as the person committing said crime. In that video those police would have been guilty of using a disproportionate response. Its ok to taser him once, but if its clear he wouldn't comply, they should have just picked him up and carried him out. Which in fact was how it ended, after all the unnecessary tasering. My main point is that he did in fact scream that he had a medical condition quite loudly, which really should have been a sign. And our point still remains, even if it were perfectly within the police in that videos rights, does that make it right?
_________________________
"They say the only way to kill a lion is with a rear naked choke, but I'd just kick it in the head"

Top
#302910 - 11/26/06 11:59 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: crablord]
Chen Zen Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 02/09/03
Posts: 7043
Loc: Ms
It doesnt necessarily make it right, however, would it be right without the police or to let the man continue to tread upon the rights of others? Its a question of rather one man is bigger than the system and he is not, as I am not, nor are you.
_________________________
"When I let Go of who I am, I become who I might be."
Lao Tzu

Top
#302911 - 11/27/06 12:03 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: crablord]
aoishi Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 123
Loc: Massachusetts
The following is a direct quote from the Las Vegas Police Department's Procedural Order re the taser, dated Nov. 2004.
Pay particular note to #3.
Also, a quick google search reveals that most Taser policies similarly disavow its use as a compliance device, but interestingly UCLA's recently discovered policy apparently allows it.
So the real moral question seems to boil down to "is this okay as a compliance device?" because to some people, it apparently is a little too close to torture for comfort.

_____________
The Taser may be used when a subject is displaying active, aggressive or aggravated aggressive resistance to an officer attempting to conduct legal law enforcement activities (see 6/002.00, Use of Force, for definitions).

The Taser WILL NOT be used:
1. When the officer knows a subject has come in contact with flammable liquids or is in a flammable atmosphere;
2. When the subject is in a position where a fall may cause substantial injury or death;
3. punitively for purposes of coercion, or in an unjustified manner;
4. When a prisoner is handcuffed;
5. To escort or jab individuals;
6. To awaken unconscious or intoxicated individuals; or
7. When the subject is visibly pregnant, unless deadly force is the only other option.

Top
#302912 - 11/27/06 12:15 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: Chen Zen]
aoishi Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 123
Loc: Massachusetts
Also this:

It is from the Seattle PD's procedures on use of less lethal devices (http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:e7PkAxnwgd4J:www.se... )

"At the same time, less lethal devices may not be used where statutory requirements
for use of force cannot be satisfied. Examples include use of less lethal devices
against non-combative/non-resistant subjects, or for the purpose of recovering
evidence or compelling compliance, absent suspect resistance justifying the legal
application of necessary force. In no situation are officers required to use less force
than is being threatened by a subject. Less lethal devices provide officers with
alternative resolutions short of the use of deadly force. Factors that may be taken
into account when considering use of these alternatives include, but are not limited
to..."

Top
#302913 - 11/27/06 09:00 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

As this question relates the video linked on this thread, the student was asked by the University to leave after failig to show id, thereby establishing their refusal to allow him to protest--regardless of how non-voilent it might have been--so in this particular instance yes the tasing is acceptable.

So it sounds like your saying that tazering is acceptable as a compliance measure. Even if person is non-violent.
Correct?




That is correct, if tasing is within the police department's policy of acceptable guidelines. Even a non-violent protest can break the law. Furthermore, as I stated in my previous post, a constitutional protest has to have permission from the local government and any ogranization in which the protestors wish to utilize. This kid probably had neither, let alone both. Also, the police were called becuase the student was trespassing--he was in the library without their permission.

Top
#302914 - 11/27/06 09:13 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

Also, a quick google search reveals that most Taser policies similarly disavow its use as a compliance device, but interestingly UCLA's recently discovered policy apparently allows it.




Then there should be no arguement as to whether the tasing was within guideline proceedures or not. UCLA has apparently found it as a suitable means for compliance.

Quote:

The following is a direct quote from the Las Vegas Police Department's Procedural Order re the taser, dated Nov. 2004.
Pay particular note to #3.

_____________
The Taser may be used when a subject is displaying active, aggressive or aggravated aggressive resistance to an officer attempting to conduct legal law enforcement activities (see 6/002.00, Use of Force, for definitions).

The Taser WILL NOT be used:
1. When the officer knows a subject has come in contact with flammable liquids or is in a flammable atmosphere;
2. When the subject is in a position where a fall may cause substantial injury or death;
3. punitively for purposes of coercion, or in an unjustified manner;
4. When a prisoner is handcuffed;
5. To escort or jab individuals;
6. To awaken unconscious or intoxicated individuals; or
7. When the subject is visibly pregnant, unless deadly force is the only other option.




Yes, but you're missing the point. #3 has two points, so we'll break it down into two section.

Part 1--Coercion--I think we call all agree that the police were not trying to coerce this student. The common definition for coercion is getting a person to behave a certain way. The police were not trying to get him to behave in a particular manner, but rather simply follow their orders.

Part 2--Unjustified manner--The term unjustified manner is vague as I'm sure we might have different opinions on it. However, if you look at the very top of the proceedures it states "The Taser may be used when a subject is displaying active, aggressive or aggravated aggressive resistance to an officer attempting to conduct legal law enforcement activities." This student was actively resisting the officer by defying their orders and refusing to get up. Therefore, the act of tasing would be well within these guidelines by the Las Vegas Police Department.

Quote:

So the real moral question seems to boil down to "is this okay as a compliance device?" because to some people, it apparently is a little too close to torture for comfort.




The problem with this question is there will be no ultimate answer because what is moral to one person might not be to another. Ask a million, a thousand, or even a hundred people and you'll never get a unified answer to this question

Top
#302915 - 11/27/06 10:08 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
aoishi Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 123
Loc: Massachusetts

Quote:

Then there should be no arguement as to whether the tasing was within guideline proceedures or not. UCLA has apparently found it as a suitable means for compliance.




But it doesn't bother you that other PD's have determined that it is NOT suitable? Shouldn't there be agreement on what is acceptable?

Quote:

Yes, but you're missing the point. #3 has two points, so we'll break it down into two section.

Part 1--Coercion--I think we call all agree that the police were not trying to coerce this student. The common definition for coercion is getting a person to behave a certain way. The police were not trying to get him to behave in a particular manner, but rather simply follow their orders.




That's what "coerce" means. Here's a definition:
Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[koh-urs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object), -erced, -erc&#8231;ing.
1. to compel by force, intimidation, or authority, esp. without regard for individual desire or volition: They coerced him into signing the document.
2. to bring about through the use of force or other forms of compulsion; exact: to coerce obedience.
3. to dominate or control, esp. by exploiting fear, anxiety, etc.: The state is based on successfully coercing the individual.

Quote:

Part 2--Unjustified manner--The term unjustified manner is vague as I'm sure we might have different opinions on it. However, if you look at the very top of the proceedures it states "The Taser may be used when a subject is displaying active, aggressive or aggravated aggressive resistance to an officer attempting to conduct legal law enforcement activities." This student was actively resisting the officer by defying their orders and refusing to get up. Therefore, the act of tasing would be well within these guidelines by the Las Vegas Police Department.




It looked to me like he was passively resisting (e.g. lying down and refusing to get up is not the same as actively resisting. In fact, that is clearly PASSIVE resistance)

Quote:

The problem with this question is there will be no ultimate answer because what is moral to one person might not be to another. Ask a million, a thousand, or even a hundred people and you'll never get a unified answer to this question




So let me ask you then: Is it morally acceptable to inflict tremendous pain on a person to get them to comply with law enforcement orders? What about an order to exit a vehicle after a traffic stop that is similarly ignored. Should it also result in tasering simply to enforce compliance to get subject out of the vehicle?

By the way, here is the definition of torture for your convenience.
tor·ture (tôrchr) Pronunciation Key Audio pronunciation of "torture" [P]
n.

1.
1. Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion.
2. An instrument or a method for inflicting such pain.
2. Excruciating physical or mental pain; agony: the torture of waiting in suspense.
3. Something causing severe pain or anguish.

Top
#302916 - 11/27/06 10:26 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
JoelM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 07/26/04
Posts: 6355
Loc: Georgia, USA
Quote:

Is it morally acceptable to inflict tremendous pain on a person to get them to comply with law enforcement orders?





yes

Top
#302917 - 11/27/06 10:37 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Do you honestly think that the kid would have been tased has he been polite and mature with the officers? Of course not.



That's an interesting thought to explore... if he had nicely and politely persisted in declining to show his state papers, and if, as you claim, they would never have tased a polite person, what would have eventually happened?
Quote:

as stated above it was not a violent attack.



Are you claiming that nearly 200 people have died from acts of non-violence?

Did they just die of old age?
Quote:

don't like the rules of this country or the government then let me ask you respectfully to get out



Homeland Security has issued a new order stating that after January 14th, every citizen will need special permission and clearance from state agents in order to have the liberty to leave our free country. They have also pressured other nations that previously had open immigration laws to clamp down on them considerably. So the system of force that you defend is what prevents me from leaving as you suggest.

It looks like your only remaining option is to tase me.


Edited by sopwith21 (11/27/06 11:01 AM)

Top
#302918 - 11/27/06 10:45 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
aoishi Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 123
Loc: Massachusetts
Quote:

Quote:

Is it morally acceptable to inflict tremendous pain on a person to get them to comply with law enforcement orders?





yes




What about this part: What about an order to exit a vehicle after a traffic stop that is similarly ignored. Should it also result in tasering simply to enforce compliance to get subject out of the vehicle?

Top
#302919 - 11/27/06 10:50 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Quote:

Is it morally acceptable to inflict tremendous pain on a person to get them to comply with law enforcement orders?





yes



Is it acceptable to kill them?

Top
#302920 - 11/27/06 10:51 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: Chen Zen]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

It doesnt necessarily make it right, however, would it be right without the police or to let the man continue to tread upon the rights of others?



How does one man have the "right" to use violent force to coerce another to perform an act against his will?

Top
#302921 - 11/27/06 10:55 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

It looked to me like he was passively resisting



Turbulent calm.

Luminescent darkness.

Passive resistance.

Top
#302922 - 11/27/06 11:01 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
JoelM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 07/26/04
Posts: 6355
Loc: Georgia, USA
Quote:

What about this part: What about an order to exit a vehicle after a traffic stop that is similarly ignored. Should it also result in tasering simply to enforce compliance to get subject out of the vehicle?




yes

What do you want the officers to do?Stand there and wait 3 hours until the person finally decides to get out of the car?

Top
#302923 - 11/27/06 11:02 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
JoelM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 07/26/04
Posts: 6355
Loc: Georgia, USA
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Is it morally acceptable to inflict tremendous pain on a person to get them to comply with law enforcement orders?





yes



Is it acceptable to kill them?




I would say no.

Top
#302924 - 11/27/06 11:03 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
JoelM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 07/26/04
Posts: 6355
Loc: Georgia, USA
Quote:

Quote:

It looked to me like he was passively resisting



Turbulent calm.

Luminescent darkness.

Passive resistance.




Breaking the law.

Disobeying police orders.

Inciting a riot.

Top
#302925 - 11/27/06 11:06 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
aoishi Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 123
Loc: Massachusetts
You think the term "passive resistance" is meaningless. But the distinction is important.

A protester who has chosen to do a "sit-in" and refuses to move will be "passively resisting" if they do not volunteer to get up and move but also do not prevent police from moving them.

Another type of non-violent resistance would be more "active resistance" and in my usage would connote a range of options from grabbing stationary objects and hanging on, to locking yourself in place or with other people, etc.

Now, "violent resistance" (as I use it) would mean using physical violence AGAINST the arrester to prevent being moved. This, in my opinion, is the only one of types that should be MET with the type of pain and violence you see in the UCLA incident.

Top
#302926 - 11/27/06 11:26 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
aoishi Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 123
Loc: Massachusetts
Quote:

yes
What do you want the officers to do?Stand there and wait 3 hours until the person finally decides to get out of the car?




Thanks for the straight response.

So should it be the policy that all protesters now be tasered as soon as they refuse to obey an order by the police to move?
That would seem consistent with your opinion.


Edited by aoishi (11/27/06 11:27 AM)

Top
#302927 - 11/27/06 11:38 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

But it doesn't bother you that other PD's have determined that it is NOT suitable? Shouldn't there be agreement on what is acceptable?




No. What one police department finds acceptable has nothing to do with what another police department finds acceptable. We're all people of different mindsets and beliefs--if we all conformed to the same standards for police proceedures, why stop there? Why not have standard for having to have children? After all, don't you find it scary that some people out in the world do? The point is, just because you or I may not agree with something doesn't mean there needs to be a standard.

And ultimately, most police chief positions are usually voted into office. So to an extent, the police polices and proceedures are somewhat determined by the voters (or lack thereof).


Quote:

That's what "coerce" means. Here's a definition:
Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[koh-urs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object), -erced, -erc&#8231;ing.
1. to compel by force, intimidation, or authority, esp. without regard for individual desire or volition: They coerced him into signing the document.
2. to bring about through the use of force or other forms of compulsion; exact: to coerce obedience.
3. to dominate or control, esp. by exploiting fear, anxiety, etc.: The state is based on successfully coercing the individual.




The problem with going soley by the definition is that you have to rememberthat police are often alloted ammeninties in preventing crimes and arresting offenders. How many times do you see undercover officers purchasing crack/cocaine from dealers in order to set up a sting? Surely the purchasing of said drugs is illegal, why aren't the undercovers arrested then?

Under the Fourteenth Amendment it is stated that "[T]he Fourteenth Amendment permits the States a wide scope of discretion in enacting laws which affect some groups of citizens differently than others. The constitutional safeguard is offended only if the classification rests on grounds wholly irrelevant to the achievement of the State's objective. State legislatures are presumed to have acted within their constitutional power despite the fact that, in practice, their laws result in some inequality. A statutory discrimination will not be set aside if any state of facts reasonably may be conceived to justify it."14th Amendment-Police Power Regulation

In summary its defined as being unconstitutional if it is "wholly irrelevant to the achievement to the objective" and "if any state of facts reasonably may be conceived to justify it" are not met.

As I have said before, tasing was probably over the line for this particular instance, but since it's within their policies and proceedures, and it met both the above criteria, I see no problem with it being used as a compliance method.


Quote:

It looked to me like he was passively resisting (e.g. lying down and refusing to get up is not the same as actively resisting. In fact, that is clearly PASSIVE resistance)




Not so. Here is the definition of passive:
1. not reacting visibly to something that might be expected to produce manifestations of an emotion or feeling.
2. not participating readily or actively; inactive: a passive member of a committee.
3. not involving visible reaction or active participation: to play a passive role.
4. inert or quiescent.
5. influenced, acted upon, or affected by some external force, cause, or agency; being the object of action rather than causing action (opposed to active).
6. receiving or characterized by the reception of impressions or influences from external sources.
7. produced or caused by an external agency.

The problem with this is a genuine lack of action on the part of the passive object, however when ordered to stand up, the student proceeded to shout "[censored] you!" multiple times. This does not prove he was passive--this shows he was beligerent and bull headed.

If you look specifically at definition #5, it states that passive objects are the objects of action rather than causing the action. By refusing to comply with the orders to stand, despite the warning he would be tased, he created the action to tasing to occur. Had he arisen he would not have been tased--hence he created the action.


Quote:

So let me ask you then: Is it morally acceptable to inflict tremendous pain on a person to get them to comply with law enforcement orders? What about an order to exit a vehicle after a traffic stop that is similarly ignored. Should it also result in tasering simply to enforce compliance to get subject out of the vehicle?




Once again, when you speak of morality we'll all have seperate opinions and beliefs. But to answer you're questions, no I do not find it acceptable to inflict tremendous amounts of pain in order to get a compliance out of a subject. However, since most tasers are only fired for a few seconds, I feel that they do not inflict tremdous amounts of pain. Do they over a brief period, maybe, I can't say since I've never been tased before, but I still find them acceptable as long as they're used appropriately (and by appropriately I mean by each police department's policy and proceedures).


Quote:

By the way, here is the definition of torture for your convenience.
tor·ture (tôrchr) Pronunciation Key Audio pronunciation of "torture" [P]
n.

1.
1. Infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion.
2. An instrument or a method for inflicting such pain.
2. Excruciating physical or mental pain; agony: the torture of waiting in suspense.
3. Something causing severe pain or anguish.




Thanks. Here's the definition of compliance for ya

compliance/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kuhm-plahy-uhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. the act of conforming, acquiescing, or yielding.
2. a tendency to yield readily to others, esp. in a weak and subservient way.
3. conformity; accordance: in compliance with orders.
4. cooperation or obedience: Compliance with the law is expected of all.

Top
#302928 - 11/27/06 11:44 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

That's an interesting thought to explore... if he had nicely and politely persisted in declining to show his state papers, and if, as you claim, they would never have tased a polite person, what would have eventually happened?




I honestly don't know. And unfortunately neither will we since it didn't happen. But I imagine that had he been polite and mature, he would have been escorted out of the building, possibly in handcuffs for the officers' precautionary safety, and then lead down to the station where he would have been booked. Like I said, just speculation. . .


Quote:

Are you claiming that nearly 200 people have died from acts of non-violence?

Did they just die of old age?




So should be ban cars too? I mean how many people have automobile related deaths per year?


Quote:

Homeland Security has issued a new order stating that after January 14th, every citizen will need special permission and clearance from state agents in order to have the liberty to leave our free country. They have also pressured other nations that previously had open immigration laws to clamp down on them considerably. So the system of force that you defend is what prevents me from leaving as you suggest.

It looks like your only remaining option is to tase me.




As I stated in a previous post that statement was a broad generalization. But the point still remains, we live in a country that lets us do something if we don't agree with it. We can vote people out of office, hold protests (yes these often have to be arranged to be constitutionally protected), and so on. That was the point of my statement. Apologizes if I offended.

Top
#302929 - 11/27/06 11:52 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
aoishi Offline
Member

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 123
Loc: Massachusetts
Thanks for helping to reduce the nastiness in this thread with your level tone. Much appreciated.

I think, for me, it comes down to the fact that I do not want police officers to behave in the manner I saw on the 6 min. long UCLA video. And to the extent that as a tax-paying citizen I have anything to say about it, I do not support that level of "use of Force" continuum. What I saw was an idealistic, bull-headed, petulant boy (probably angered over 3 years of muslim-bashing) who got in over his head, wasn't offered a reasonable out and then was unecessarily roughed up for the charge of "contempt of cop".

ON EDIT: Actually it was way worse than being "roughed up". If you have not watched the 6 minute video, I do not think it is fair to offer an opinion. I watched as much as I could stomach and had to stop actually. The boy screaming "I'll leave! I'll leave! I'm not resisting!" and still being zapped after that. The screams were truly horrific. I just don't think that's okay and I don't want that as a society. It meets my definition of torture, sorry. It was unecessary.


Edited by aoishi (11/27/06 11:58 AM)

Top
#302930 - 11/27/06 12:40 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

Thanks for helping to reduce the nastiness in this thread with your level tone. Much appreciated.




Unfortunately, issues such as this will always pull on our emotions, beliefs, ethics, and morals. It's human nature to defend one's self when threatened. This threat doesn't have to be physical. Often a strong disagreement can cause a stir in someone's emotion to the point of altering their mood. I myself have been guilty of letting my emtions come out on this thread from time to time. I try and cut out much emotion during the time I revise and reword portions of my text, but eventually then they do slip this, whether subconscious or not.

But for me, whether I agree with someone's point or not, in the end I respect them for standing up and saying "I don't agree with you and here's why". I love a good healthy debate, even when I wrong (yes it does happen. . .primarily just anytime I have a conversation with my wife).


Quote:

I think, for me, it comes down to the fact that I do not want police officers to behave in the manner I saw on the 6 min. long UCLA video. And to the extent that as a tax-paying citizen I have anything to say about it, I do not support that level of "use of Force" continuum. What I saw was an idealistic, bull-headed, petulant boy (probably angered over 3 years of muslim-bashing) who got in over his head, wasn't offered a reasonable out and then was unecessarily roughed up for the charge of "contempt of cop".




I would agree that your statement about the boy seems to be on point. And while I too do not wish to undergo what happened on the video, I do support the use of force by police as long as it's reasonable. As I've stated a couple times before, the tasing might have been out of order, but I was not there, I did not see the incident in it's entirity, nor do I know what happened leading up to the beginning of the taping. The tasing might have been out of line, but since it's well within the UCLA's policy and proceedures I support it as is because I was not there. I was not in the shoes of either the kid or the police officers on the scene.

When this goes to court (as I'm sure it eventually will ), if the legal field determines the police were over the line then I will be the first to say I was wrong. But until then, I have to rely on my morals, ethics, beliefs, and opinions. . .

Top
#302931 - 11/27/06 07:07 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
Chen Zen Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 02/09/03
Posts: 7043
Loc: Ms
Sure he screamed. He had a hundred and some odd thousand volts pulsing through him. So he said he would leave and offer no more resistance. Welol, its a little late for that when the cops have to show up and its a little late for that when they ask and you say no. If a man robs your house and you catch him, if he offers to put it back do you let him go unpunished? No. If you break the law you break the law. When they told him to produce papers or leave he could have. When the police told him to leave he could have. Any result of him not doing so is brought on upon himself.
_________________________
"When I let Go of who I am, I become who I might be."
Lao Tzu

Top
#302932 - 11/27/06 10:58 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
JoelM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 07/26/04
Posts: 6355
Loc: Georgia, USA
Quote:

Thanks for the straight response.

So should it be the policy that all protesters now be tasered as soon as they refuse to obey an order by the police to move?
That would seem consistent with your opinion.




No.

The moron was tased at 30 seconds into the video, nobody knows how long the confrontation happened before the video started rolling.

The time an officer should wait will be different with every situation. Setting a time limit or specific rule would be dangerous to the officers. They are trained to use their judgement under stress.
_________________________
We should all take ourselves seriously...and then crumple that image up and toss it out the window.

Top
#302933 - 11/28/06 01:12 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
crablord Offline
th3 t4sty sn4ck

Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 1530
Loc: Australia, QLD, GC
Quote:

They are trained to use their judgement under stress.


great judgement there. "shall we tase him? or just pick him up? - ....tase him"
_________________________
"They say the only way to kill a lion is with a rear naked choke, but I'd just kick it in the head"

Top
#302934 - 11/28/06 09:49 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: crablord]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
I have no problem with police acting like this. I like to think that my self and my family will be safe. I think that it is 1000 percent more likely that I, or a loved one, will get hurt by somebody who is breaking the law because he has no fear of getting cought or punished, rather than by a rogue cop.

while what we might see is an idiot boy in the library, as far as the polic eknew he was a criminal, a rapist or a thief, or maybe even a terrorist, who was mingling with students in a place he didn't belong.

I would not want strangers to have access to my childrens schools freely, and if their is a policy that people must show id, then I want it enforced. if soembody really objects to policies that are in place to protect my children, then I have no problem with him getting tased, or, better yet, taken out back and wached around with a night stick.

Top
#302935 - 11/28/06 10:20 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote by Aoishi -

Quote:

I think, for me, it comes down to the fact that I do not want police officers to behave in the manner I saw on the 6 min. long UCLA video.




Again, I personally think that tasering the kid was a bit over the top, from what I saw. HOWEVER, there are simply too many variables for us too judge. No one here knows for sure what that kids intentions were, and with many Columbine style attacks that have happened, I don't think the police were WAY over the line.

The important thing to remember is that the kid could have avoided all this before it happened. He is not a victim.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302936 - 11/28/06 11:45 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: globetrotter]
Fletch1 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 2218
Loc: Florida
I have deliberately stayed off this thread preferring to watch it's direction. Interesting to say the least. As I have a significant amount of experience in LE and am a Taser Instructor, I have a different perspective on al of the above points made.

Just a few points based on some of the comments made so far...

1. Taser is a non lethal weapon designed to incapacitate and facilitate control of physically resisting subjects. It is not a substitute for deadly force no matter what anyone tells you. A deadly force threat justifies a deadly force response. Use of a Taser in a lethal force situation is not a required step in the process, period.

2. Most agencies have the Taser as a response to a subject exhibiting "Active Physical Resistance" defined by "pushing, pulling, bracing or tensing to deliberately and actively defeat the control efforts of the officer". I know some agencies allow it's use at lower "Passive Physical Resistance" defined characterized by the stereotypical Passive Protester going limp and forcing officers to carry them. Fewer agencies still, have the Taser at a higher "Aggressive Physical Resistance" forcing the officers to wait until attacked physically before using the weapon. This should make sense as I mentioned in point #1 that the Taser is about "Control" more than "Self Defense".

3. Did the kid deserve to get Tasered? Let's look at the totality of the circumstances (without making blanket statements about society and roles of law enforcement please).

The guy is in a University Library which required the patrons to have ID for access. He caused a disturbance which prompted some other students to call the campus cops. He was asked to leave and the cops left him alone only to come back and still find him there in violation of the campus rules (read "Law"). They attempted to detain him to make an official record of his being evicted from the premises. To do so they needed to talk to him and get his personal information such as name, DOB, etc. The guy refuses and says he's leaving...("sorry buddy, too late." would have been my response.) A scuffle ensues when the the cops put hands on him to detain him and he attempts to make as loud a disturbance as he can to gain sympathy and support from the students. He is threatened with the Taser, continues to physically resist by refusing, though apparently fully able, to stand up and walk out with them. He is Tased by officers who have all likely been Tased themselves as part of their certification to carry the weapon. They know what he is experiencing and that he likely is fully capable of cooperating but is choosing instead to show his a$$ and act like a spoiled child hoping for sympathy and support. Whether or not he resisted to the point of being a Tased is not clear from the video especially without knowing theat agency's policy. It does seem plausible however, that he resisted initially and at some point he would have been justifiably Tasered.

4. The students came up to the officers in the middle of the situation while they were still dealing with the subject and demanded their badge numbers. As an officer, I can tell you that there is a time and a place for everything. You come up to me and demand my name and badge # while I am dealing with a physical confrontation, I might have a few choice words for you myself.

In closing, it is sometimes hard to explain what all goes into a decision by an officer to use force, Taser or otherwise. I am certainly not going to defend everyone as I know cops are human and they make mistakes. It is a unique position that they are in and a unique water that they have to swim in. They are generally required to do irrational things by most citizen's standards and required to take risks that most people would be happy to avoid. They are given rules and tools that are designed to make their jobs less difficult and more complex at the same time.


Edited by Fletch1 (11/28/06 11:51 PM)
_________________________
www.brazilianjiujitsunaples.com

Top
#302937 - 11/29/06 09:24 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Is it morally acceptable to inflict tremendous pain on a person to get them to comply with law enforcement orders?





Quote:

yes



Quote:

Is it acceptable to kill them?




Quote:

I would say no.




Why not?

If the continued inflicting of tremendous pain (commonly known as torture) is acceptable in order to force a free citizen in a free country to obey the dictates of the state, death is merely a natural extension of that same process. Why is this same principle fair, just and righteous up to the point of death but unacceptable if it causes death?

And if any logic can be assigned to that position, then surely officers around the nation would demand the banning of tasers because they've killed nearly two hundred people who defied the state's orders... i.e., they caused death, and you believe that death is not an acceptable way to force submission to the state. Where are the demands to abolish tasers?

edited to fix quotes


Edited by MattJ (11/29/06 10:33 AM)

Top
#302938 - 11/29/06 09:38 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: aoishi]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

You think the term "passive resistance" is meaningless.



Goodness no, its not meaningless. Its a pristine and tremendously successful example of government propaganda.

Consider what would happen without such backward, reversed, double-talk propaganda terms as "passive resistance" - if passiveness (i.e., the act of doing nothing) cannot be somehow redefined as "resistance" (to strain against, to take action against), then police officers who assault people for the act of doing nothing are revealed as the aggressors. This is not acceptable. The person who is doing nothing must be shown as the aggressive, evil criminal. Therefore, "resistance" can no longer simply include the obvious act of resisting... it must be broadened to include such things as doing nothing (sitting, lying down, closing one's eyes, not moving, taking no action, etc.). Only then can a passive, peaceful individual be assaulted for their "resistance" to the state.

So no, "passive resistance" is not a meaningless term. It is absolutely vital to state interests.
Quote:

Now, "violent resistance" (as I use it) would mean using physical violence AGAINST the arrester to prevent being moved.



That is more commonly known as self defense... the act of defending one's person against an aggressor (one who initiates force against the other).

Top
#302939 - 11/29/06 09:52 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: Fletch1]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Taser is a non lethal weapon



Nearly two hundred dead people beg to differ.
Quote:

You come up to me and demand my name and badge # while I am dealing with a physical confrontation, I might have a few choice words for you myself.



Would you violate the law by refusing, or would you obey the law and produce your badge number upon demand?

If you refused to obey the law, would the citizens be justified in tasing you, causing you physical pain, or violently assaulting you to force compliance with the law?

If not, how is the refusal of an officer to obey the law by producing his badge number any different in principle than a student's refusal to obey the law by producing his state papers for an officer?

Top
#302940 - 11/29/06 10:30 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
I think that what Fletch is saying is that you can't expect an officer to stop handling a resisting subject on the spot, because you want his badge number. You wait till the officer is done and THEN ask for number.

Quote by sopwith21 -

Quote:

That is more commonly known as self defense... the act of defending one's person against an aggressor (one who initiates force against the other).




Not quite. It is not self defense to resist officers of the law when you are being detained for breaking the law.


Edited by MattJ (11/29/06 10:37 AM)
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302941 - 11/29/06 11:26 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: Fletch1]
globetrotter Offline
does unto others before they do unto him

Registered: 01/10/05
Posts: 637
Loc: ny usa
Fletch, thanks, excellent post

Top
#302942 - 11/29/06 12:17 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

Quote:

Taser is a non lethal weapon



Nearly two hundred dead people beg to differ.




It appears to me, that you keep bringing up that approximately 200 people die during tasing incidents while failing to answer my question about banning cars (see page 6 of this thread).

If you're passionate about those 200 people who have died, what about the 42,000+ a year that have died in road related deaths here in the United States (see below link)? I'm sure each of those are just as preventable as each of the taser deaths you keep mentioning.

Now am I'm saying that your stance is wrong? No, because it's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But the bottom line is that there is an inherent danger in everything we as humans do. Driving a car can kill someone. Tasing can kill somoneone. Parachuting can kill someone. Smoking can kill someone. And so on.

Heck, even hitting someone hard with a pillow has a chance of temporarily blinding the eye. Should we outlaw pillows too?

No. The point is every action has risks associated with it--especially breaking the law. This is why lawsuits have been dismissed in court brought on by plaintiffs who have been injured at sporting events. Voluntarily attending sporting events implying a knowledge of the inherent dangers present. Voluntarily breaking the law and resisting arrest has inherent dangers as well.

*Edit--the link isn't working for me for some reason. Here's the link I'm referencing:
http://www.driveandstayalive.com/info%20section/statistics/stats-usa.htm

P.S.--Fletch--Nice post.


Edited by bearich (11/29/06 12:19 PM)

Top
#302943 - 11/29/06 12:20 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
Fletch1 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 2218
Loc: Florida
Incidental deaths related to the use of Taser notwithstanding, The Taser is a non lethal weapon. You may argue as many have, that Taser is dangerous to those who are either under the influence of significant amounts of cocaine or other narcotics or experiencing a state of "excited delirium". In those cases, I believe many physical responses by Law Enforcementwould be "dangerous" (we had a subject run himself into a coma trying to get away from us without being touched). The trade off is that under most known circumstances, the suspect needs to be taken into custody without delay. If a special circumstance is known (what he is on, medical considerations, etc.) then the Taser may be contraindicated the same as certain drugs would be in a medical procedure.

The problem is that the escalation in most police confrontations is driven by the resistance of the subject. The subject holds all the cards as his body will bear the effects, positive or negative, of the Taser. Under most normal known circumstances, the Taser is effective in it's intended use. I don't think the point you are making is specifically about Taser anyway. I believe that your point is about the role of police in society which...borders on politics, something that is not up for discussion here.

As for the aksing for a badge number while I am physically involved with detaining a subject? If you read what I said instead of trolling and spinning, you'll see that I said everything in it's time. Their getting my badge number does not take priority over my immediate concern of the resisting subject, and the safety of everyone.
_________________________
www.brazilianjiujitsunaples.com

Top
#302944 - 11/29/06 12:31 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: Fletch1]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote by Fletch -

Quote:

The problem is that the escalation in most police confrontations is driven by the resistance of the subject. The subject holds all the cards




Exactly.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302945 - 11/29/06 12:54 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

I think that what Fletch is saying is that you can't expect an officer to stop handling a resisting subject on the spot, because you want his badge number. You wait till the officer is done and THEN ask for number.



Thank you for fixing the quotes in my previous message... I'm lousy at those. And yes, I agree that this was Fletch's point. Still, it is a fair question that deserves a response. And if the police officer can wait until a more convenient time in their schedule to abide by the law, they have no moral authority to assault a citizen doing the same.
Quote:

It is not self defense to resist officers of the law when you are being detained for breaking the law.



Yes it is. The act of DEFENDING one's SELF against an aggressor is accurately termed "self defense."

Top
#302946 - 11/29/06 01:10 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

If you're passionate about those 200 people who have died, what about the 42,000+ a year that have died in road related deaths



In cases where someone deliberately pointed an automobile at a person who not harmed the life or property of another, and killed them as a result of their aggression, then yes, you have a good point. But we both know that's not what happened 42,000 times last year so let's not attempt to mix deliberate acts of aggression with accidents.
Quote:

every action has risks associated with it--especially breaking the law.



If the law requires that a person who has not harmed the life or property of another be violently assaulted, then the law is wrong and people of moral integrity have a responsibility and a duty to disobey it. Especially police officers. And police officers who lack the moral courage to disobey such wicked orders should bear in mind the warning you just gave... "every action has risks associated with it."

No matter who you are or how many badges you have, you can only initiate violence against so many people before someone, somewhere puts a stop to it. Every time aggression is initiated against another individual, you have added another person to the list. You can blame them, hide behind a badge, claim that some law somewhere is in your favor, or say anything you like but one simple fact remains - if you initiate violence against enough people for a long time, somewhere, somehow, someone WILL put a stop to it. I find it healthy to keep my list of enemies short (or non existent) so I try to never initiate violence for the very reasons you state above. Its good advice.

Top
#302947 - 11/29/06 01:15 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote:

And if the police officer can wait until a more convenient time in their schedule to abide by the law, they have no moral authority to assault a citizen doing the same.




I hope everyone else can see how ridiculous this point is. In the middle of arresting someone resisting, the officer is supposed to stop, and give you his/her badge number?

Same thing on your second point. I hope you don't plan on becoming a lawyer, bro.

_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302948 - 11/29/06 01:20 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote:

you can only initiate violence against so many people before someone, somewhere puts a stop to it. Every time aggression is initiated against another individual, you have added another person to the list.




Funny.....I thought that is why we had police in the first place.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302949 - 11/29/06 02:20 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
Fletch1 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 2218
Loc: Florida
sopwith21,

It seems that you are arguing simply to argue. In many places in the United States, there are laws against disorderly conduct as well as those that specifically injure people or property. In such cases, a person's actions might not be an immediate danger, however history has indicated that if those actions are not addressed that great harm can follow. Take for instance the act of inciting a riot...rebel rousing. Simply freedom of speech? Some think so.

That one should be easy....Let's make it more difficult. How about resisting arrest? What constitutes resistance? Simply refusing to comply? Going limp and forcing officers to carry you and thus distracting them and dividing their attention from another incident? What if another officer needs help and is getting beaten up while officer Joe and officer Bob are carrying someone who has decided to "passively resist"? What if officer Bob injures himself trying to carry a "passive resister" and cannot respond to help a fellow officer who has been badly injured himself?

This is all addressed fairly clearly in most "Obstruction of Justice" statutes. The fact that you so casually dismiss it indicates that you at best have a rather myopic view of what cops should and shouldn't do.

The ultimate decision is made by the person who chooses to resist (not comply) with officers. I would not be so naive to think that if I chose to resist (passively or actively) that I would not be harmed. Physical injury is always a possibility and an important factor to consider.

This is the assumption of risk clause taken to the next level.

"I certify and declare that I have been advised and duly considered the consequences of my actions. I understand that physically resisting the cops either actively or passively is a hazardous practice that will likely result in a great degree of physical discomfort on my part. I acknowledge that this physical discomfort can be experienced in the form of bending a twisting of my limbs and appendages, blunt force trauma from being taken down and/or struck with impact weapons, facial and eye irritation from OC Pepper spray, shocking from a Taser or being shot with a firearm. I do fully accept the risks listed here as the possible and likely consequences of my actions and take full responsibility holding noone liable but myself."



Edited by Fletch1 (11/29/06 02:33 PM)
_________________________
www.brazilianjiujitsunaples.com

Top
#302950 - 11/29/06 02:36 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

In cases where someone deliberately pointed an automobile at a person who not harmed the life or property of another, and killed them as a result of their aggression, then yes, you have a good point. But we both know that's not what happened 42,000 times last year so let's not attempt to mix deliberate acts of aggression with accidents.




Okay, just for my clarity you seem to believe that all 200 deaths were due to acts of aggression correct? And that because of that, they should be more-or-less outlawed correct?

Using the road related death statistics mentioned before, let's say 1% of those deaths were caused by aggression, whether intentional or the driver was merely caught up in a temporary case of road rage and didn't mean it (but it was still aggression that caused it)--that's still 420 deaths a year by aggressive driving.

Once again, do we outlaw driving? After all, it's more than likely to kill than tasers with only 1% of all road related deaths being caused by aggression. Or do we let the benefits outweigh the potential abuse?

Now bringing it back to tasers--do we outlaw tasers because of those deaths, or do we continue to allow them because of the benefits they bring society?

Remember, every time the police tase someone, substitute that with a more leathal/aggresive action, like shooting the law breaker, and tell me which you would perfer? Because after all, from what I gather, you seem to believe they fall under the same act of aggression.

How many times have tasers been used to subdue law breakers without the person losing their life? While I don't have that information, I can share this piece: In Phoenix, AZ, the number of police related shooting has practically been cut in half as the use of taser related incidents has increased (slightly over double the number of incidents). Phoenix Taser Report

Quote:

If the law requires that a person who has not harmed the life or property of another be violently assaulted, then the law is wrong and people of moral integrity have a responsibility and a duty to disobey it.




Correct, however this incident in question, the student harmed the property of UCLA by breaking their rules and causing a distrubance. I'm not going to address the portion about being violently assaulted as it is clear we both have different definitions of the word violence.


Quote:

No matter who you are or how many badges you have, you can only initiate violence against so many people before someone, somewhere puts a stop to it. Every time aggression is initiated against another individual, you have added another person to the list. You can blame them, hide behind a badge, claim that some law somewhere is in your favor, or say anything you like but one simple fact remains - if you initiate violence against enough people for a long time, somewhere, somehow, someone WILL put a stop to it.




Originally I was not going to comment on this because of the how absurd I think it is, but the more I think about it, the more I have to comment.

Let me get this straight--the police initiated the violence??? I'm sorry, but I thought it was the student who tresspassed on to the library property, the student who disobeyed police orders, and the student who refused to comply even after being warned that he would be tased multiple times before the tasing occured. You're right, the police are the ones to blame.

Top
#302951 - 11/29/06 04:12 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
I just stumbled upon a great article in TIME magazine that I think fits this debate well. The article, How We Confuse Real Risks with Exaggerated Ones, is about how we allow our emotions over rule certain threats as we grow more concerned with others.

Some quotes from it:

When our emotions overtake our reasoning we worry about sensational events which are statistically unlikely to harm us — such as airline disasters, shark attacks, or terrorism — rather than everyday dangers that kill thousands.

. . .Princeton professor Daniel Kahneman coined "the availability heuristic": the concept that if people can think of an incident in which a risk has come to fruition, they will exaggerate its likelihood.

&

Nassim Taleb, a probability expert at the University of Massachusetts, says the first step to better risk assessment is understanding that most dramatic news images represent the exception rather than the rule.


Link: Article

Top
#302952 - 11/29/06 04:56 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
crablord Offline
th3 t4sty sn4ck

Registered: 08/10/06
Posts: 1530
Loc: Australia, QLD, GC
Quote:

When our emotions overtake our reasoning we worry about sensational events which are statistically unlikely to harm us — such as airline disasters, shark attacks, or terrorism — rather than everyday dangers that kill thousands.


Might as well not wear a seatbelt
_________________________
"They say the only way to kill a lion is with a rear naked choke, but I'd just kick it in the head"

Top
#302953 - 11/29/06 06:24 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
Fletch1 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 2218
Loc: Florida
Quote:

I just stumbled upon a great article in TIME magazine that I think fits this debate well. The article, How We Confuse Real Risks with Exaggerated Ones, is about how we allow our emotions over rule certain threats as we grow more concerned with others.

Some quotes from it:

When our emotions overtake our reasoning we worry about sensational events which are statistically unlikely to harm us — such as airline disasters, shark attacks, or terrorism — rather than everyday dangers that kill thousands.

. . .Princeton professor Daniel Kahneman coined "the availability heuristic": the concept that if people can think of an incident in which a risk has come to fruition, they will exaggerate its likelihood.

&

Nassim Taleb, a probability expert at the University of Massachusetts, says the first step to better risk assessment is understanding that most dramatic news images represent the exception rather than the rule.


Link: Article




This fits well with my above comment about police perceiving things differently than ordinary citizens and doing things that might not seem "rational" based on the circumstances with which they must deal.

A few examples....

1. I had a citizen ride-along in my car a few years ago. I was driving and chatting, trying to give some insight to our job and what we might encounter during our shift. We got a call of shots fired in a local neighborhood and (of course) I hit the gas...hard . The lady riding with me grabs her door handle and braces herself as she has no idea what it was that we were responding to . I tell her we are going to someone shooting a gun. Her response? "Whyyy..are we going over there?" It was inconceivable to her that we would actually drive toward the gunshots when we were perfectly safe just driving around listening to the radio.

2. Another friend of mine in an unmarked patrol car (with red and blue lights) makes a traffic stop on a guy involved in a road rage incident where he got out and beat on someone else's car at a redlight. The guy refuses to stop and leads them on a short chase before stopping in a convenience store parking lot. He then gets out and runs around his car before crouching down and pulling something out of his waistline. My friend draws his gun thinking he is pulling out a weapon. The guy pulls out the object and points it at the officer. It was a cell phone. My buddy's reluctance to shoot saved the driver's life but could have cost him his own if he had gambled wrong. It would have been a riteous shoot.
_________________________
www.brazilianjiujitsunaples.com

Top
#302954 - 11/29/06 06:42 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: Fletch1]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Good lord, that idiot will never realize how lucky he was that the cop didn't shoot him dead right there.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302955 - 11/29/06 07:29 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
JoelM Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 07/26/04
Posts: 6355
Loc: Georgia, USA
Quote:


Why not?

If the continued inflicting of tremendous pain (commonly known as torture) is acceptable in order to force a free citizen in a free country to obey the dictates of the state, death is merely a natural extension of that same process.



Ummmm, no.

Quote:

Why is this same principle fair, just and righteous up to the point of death but unacceptable if it causes death?




Because in this country we have the right to live. Our right to be pain-free is given up when we begin resisting police officers.

Quote:

And if any logic can be assigned to that position,




You must be using a very loose definition of logic

Quote:

then surely officers around the nation would demand the banning of tasers because they've killed nearly two hundred people who defied the state's orders.



200 out of likely tens of thousands that have avoided being shot or otherwise permanently injured.
_________________________
We should all take ourselves seriously...and then crumple that image up and toss it out the window.

Top
#302956 - 11/30/06 11:45 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

In the middle of arresting someone resisting, the officer is supposed to stop, and give you his/her badge number?



If the law require an officer to produce his badge number upon request, are you suggesting that the officer break the law? And if he does break the law, what moral authority does one criminal have to arrest another?

Top
#302957 - 11/30/06 11:52 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote:

Quote:

In the middle of arresting someone resisting, the officer is supposed to stop, and give you his/her badge number?



If the law require an officer to produce his badge number upon request, are you suggesting that the officer break the law? And if he does break the law, what moral authority does one criminal have to arrest another?




Note AGAIN how you avoid answering my question. I gave a very reasonable answer to your question already. You keep repeating an obviously idiotic point. The officer is not breaking the law if he is in the middle of doing his duty, restraining a suspect. You can get the badge number when he's done.

How about answering my question now.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302958 - 11/30/06 11:55 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: Fletch1]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

It seems that you are arguing simply to argue.



I am opposing aggression regardless of who commits it. I wish you would, too.
Quote:

What if another officer needs help and is getting beaten up while officer Joe and officer Bob are carrying someone who has decided to "passively resist"? What if officer Bob injures himself trying to carry a "passive resister" and cannot respond to help a fellow officer who has been badly injured himself?



Why are Bob and his friends attacking someone who has not harmed the life or property of another in the first place? If they could manage to live in peace with the rest of us they wouldn't have to worry about getting beat up or injuring their backs while initiating force against a person who has not harmed anyone else.
Quote:

This is the assumption of risk clause taken to the next level.

"I certify and declare that I have been advised and duly considered the consequences of my actions. I understand that physically resisting the cops either actively or passively is a hazardous practice that will likely result in a great degree of physical discomfort on my part. I acknowledge that this physical discomfort can be experienced in the form of bending a twisting of my limbs and appendages, blunt force trauma from being taken down and/or struck with impact weapons, facial and eye irritation from OC Pepper spray, shocking from a Taser or being shot with a firearm. I do fully accept the risks listed here as the possible and likely consequences of my actions and take full responsibility holding noone liable but myself."





Here's another assumption of risk clause to consider:

I certify and declare that I have been advised and duly considered the consequences of my actions. I understand that initiating force against another human being is likely to get me shot, killed, injured or maimed. Such injury is strictly due to my own insistence in initiating violence against another human being and cannot be absolved by any badge or court or law, and I richly deserve any injury I receive during an attempt to initiate force against a person who has not harmed the life or property of another. As a mature adult I accept responsibility for my actions and will make no attempt to justify my violent nature and accept any injury that I receive during such actions as justice.

Top
#302959 - 11/30/06 12:08 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Okay, just for my clarity you seem to believe that all 200 deaths were due to acts of aggression correct?



Do police us tasers against subjects armed with deadly weapons? Of course not. They use firearms in such encounters. Tasers are used primarily against unarmed people. And yes, I consider an attack against an unarmed person as an act of aggression. Were police not involved in our analogy, I bet you would, too.
Quote:

do we outlaw tasers because of those deaths, or do we continue to allow them because of the benefits they bring society?



The Second Amendment prohibits outlawing weapons for private ownership. I am suggesting that they be banned from police use.
Quote:

Remember, every time the police tase someone, substitute that with a more leathal/aggresive action, like shooting



I'd prefer to substitute it with a less lethal action. Like leaving people alone unless they have harmed the life or property of another.
Quote:

we both have different definitions of the word violence.



I consider shooting someone with a projectile that delivers 50,000 volts of electricity causing immense pain, disability, possible death and a disruption of the central nervous system to be a violent act. Call me crazy.

Have you ever been shot with one... or perhaps three? Could the experience have any effect on your re-definition of "violence?"
Quote:

Let me get this straight--the police initiated the violence?



Did the student tase the police, or did the police tase the student? Did the student demand state papers from the police, or did the police demand state papers from the student? Did the student initiate a confrontation with police, or did police approach the student?

I can't wait to hear the verbal gymnastics on this one.

Top
#302960 - 11/30/06 12:12 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: JoelM]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Our right to be pain-free is given up when we begin resisting police officers.



"We're going to hurt you until you do as we say."

Let freedom ring.

BTW, do police officers give up their right to be pain-free when they resist a citizen?

Top
#302961 - 11/30/06 12:13 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote by sopwith21 -

Quote:

Did the student tase the police, or did the police tase the student? Did the student demand state papers from the police, or did the police demand state papers from the student? Did the student initiate a confrontation with police, or did police approach the student?

I can't wait to hear the verbal gymnastics on this one.




The only verbal gymnastics here are yours. These points have been answered several times already. You just keep repeating them as if it will change the fact that the student violated the rules, initiating the entire series of events himself.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302962 - 11/30/06 12:16 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

The officer is not breaking the law if he is in the middle of doing his duty, restraining a suspect.



So officers are not required to give produce their badge numbers upon demand? Yes or no? If they are, then yes. If they are not, then no. I don't understand what's so hard about this.

Top
#302963 - 11/30/06 12:19 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Answer my question first.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302964 - 11/30/06 12:29 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

the student violated the rules, initiating the entire series of events himself.



But that's not what you asked. You asked... "Let me get this straight--the police initiated the violence?"

The answer is yes, the police initiated the violence. And yes, the police initiated the confrontation (they drove to the library... the student didn't drive to the police station).

The student had done nothing to harm anyone else in any way. His "crime" was an abstention from performing a certain function demanded by the state... had he performed this function the attack would have been withheld (until his next "crime"). IOW, he was assaulted for the act of doing nothing.

Top
#302965 - 11/30/06 12:30 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
sopwith21 Offline
Member

Registered: 11/04/06
Posts: 49
Quote:

Answer my question first.



I'm tired of anwering it so this time I'll just cut and paste...

"If they are, then yes. If they are not, then no."

Top
#302966 - 11/30/06 12:35 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Nice try. But you can't even keep your facts straight here on the forum. The quote that you reference here:

Quote:

But that's not what you asked. You asked... "Let me get this straight--the police initiated the violence?"




Is not my quote at all. It was from bearich, not me.

And your logic is pathetic and pointless. For the millionth time, the student broke the rules, causing all the ensuing violence on himself.

Still waiting on my questions.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302967 - 11/30/06 12:37 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote:

Quote:

Answer my question first.



I'm tired of anwering it so this time I'll just cut and paste...

"If they are, then yes. If they are not, then no."




If yes what? This is not an answer. Answer my question.

In the middle of arresting someone resisting, the officer is supposed to stop, and give you his/her badge number?


Edited by MattJ (11/30/06 12:46 PM)
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302968 - 11/30/06 01:01 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

Do police us tasers against subjects armed with deadly weapons? Of course not. They use firearms in such encounters. Tasers are used primarily against unarmed people. And yes, I consider an attack against an unarmed person as an act of aggression. Were police not involved in our analogy, I bet you would, too.




Yes they do. They use it against people armed with knives, batons (which is considered a deadly weapon--just ask Snoop Dogg who was just arrested for possession of one), and so on.

And no I would not consider a taser a use of aggression by ordinary citizens. Can it be, sure? But it's not automatic. What about the women who carry them around for self-defense purposes? Because they defend themselves with tasers should they be arrested for causing aggression to their attacker?


Quote:

The Second Amendment prohibits outlawing weapons for private ownership. I am suggesting that they be banned from police use.




Really??? Then next time I go to sporting goods store I'll remember to ask them to order me a fully automatic M60, a shoulder mounted RPG, and a few claymore mines. Can't be too careful when it comes to home security.


Quote:

I'd prefer to substitute it with a less lethal action. Like leaving people alone unless they have harmed the life or property of another.




Okay, so next time you have a complete stranger just hanging out in your back yard refusing to leave are you are going to insist the police just let him be because he isn't being violent? After all, you can't do anything against him because it would be an act of aggression, which you have clearly stated you're opposed to. And before you bring up the point about it being your property, the library was the school's property--they were the ones who called the police.


Quote:

I consider shooting someone with a projectile that delivers 50,000 volts of electricity causing immense pain, disability, possible death and a disruption of the central nervous system to be a violent act. Call me crazy.

Have you ever been shot with one... or perhaps three? Could the experience have any effect on your re-definition of "violence?"




Have I been shot with a taser, no I've already stated that. However, when I was young, perhaps 9 or 10, I did touch an electrifed fence just to see what it was like. You know what, it did hurt, but I'm not dead and I've learned my lesson--I haven't touched an electrifed fence since.

Hopefully this student will learn not to disobey police orders.


Quote:

Did the student tase the police, or did the police tase the student? Did the student demand state papers from the police, or did the police demand state papers from the student? Did the student initiate a confrontation with police, or did police approach the student?




You missed one important question--Is the student an authority of the government?

And what would have happened had the student displayed his papers to the police or refused to resist arrest? Would he have followed police order--by golly he would have--thus negativing his tasing (even though he was warned about them prior--he had plenty of opportunity to comply). And the police approached the student because he broke the law--he was tresspassing.

Do you expect everyone who breaks the law to simply walk to the nearest police station and turn themselves in? I know I expect the police to actually come to my property should someone be tresspassing on it. Call me crazy.

Quote:

I can't wait to hear the verbal gymnastics on this one.




You can call it verbal gymnastics all you want, but the next time I want to argue the same point over and over, while presenting solid facts, documents, etc. again and again and get absolutely no where--I'll save myself the time of logging on and typing and just talk to the nearest wall next time.

I'll address your other "points" after I get back from my lunch meeting.

Top
#302969 - 11/30/06 01:27 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
cxt Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 09/11/03
Posts: 5823
Loc: USA
Mat

Not only that, but what "rights" does a university, in a "free" country, have to refuse to allow its resoucres and bldg be co-opted by someone that could not prove they paid for them??

Going back and reading thu the thread (ouch ) and it seems to me that several false premises have been extended.

The student in question, by failing to provide proof that he was in fact a student there--was "stealing" resoures that OTHER people had paid for.

Its like a host of other things--decent hard-working people have to pay MORE for goods and services to make up for what theives, chislers, and cheats steal.

If the kid could not prove he was a student there--then he should have left and come back with his ID.
Not a big deal, you go home, get your wallet, have buddy bring it down etc.

2nd by causeing such chaos, he made people frightened---and when people get scared they sometime take direct action.

Scare people with tasers and they are apt to use them--duh.

Another factor to consider is that the campus cops/LEO are there to protect other people--such as the OTHER students.

You got a guy going wild over a simple matter of showing a student ID and you have to wonder what else he might be capable of.

The LEO's are in a seriously bad spot--if they do nothing and someone gets hurt, then or later--then they get sued for failing to stop a clearly unhinged person.

What if people had been hurt in the riot the kid was trying to cause?

Whom would we be blaming about THAT?

I have to say that I weep for the loss of personal responsibilty these days.

To me this a a clear-cut case of "stupid" aggravated by a case of "spoiled rotten" with a side of "petulent youngster with a bad attitude."

Rather than lionizing the kid for being being some sort of protester, he should be admonished for wasteing everyones time with a non-problem.

Oh, and someone needs to slowly and precisely explain to some folks that "passive resistance" does NOT involve "inciteing a riot."


Edited by cxt (11/30/06 01:40 PM)
_________________________
I did battle with ignorance today.......and ignorance won. Huey.

Top
#302970 - 11/30/06 01:39 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: bearich]
MattJ Offline
Free Rhinoplasty!
Prolific

Registered: 11/25/04
Posts: 15634
Loc: York PA. USA
Quote by bearich -

Quote:

You can call it verbal gymnastics all you want, but the next time I want to argue the same point over and over, while presenting solid facts, documents, etc. again and again and get absolutely no where--I'll save myself the time of logging on and typing and just talk to the nearest wall next time.




Probably a good idea.
_________________________
"In case you ever wondered what it's like to be knocked out, it's like waking up from a nightmare only to discover it wasn't a dream." -Forrest Griffin

Top
#302971 - 11/30/06 02:37 PM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: MattJ]
bearich Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/06
Posts: 49
Loc: Dayton, OH
Quote:

Quote by bearich -

Quote:

You can call it verbal gymnastics all you want, but the next time I want to argue the same point over and over, while presenting solid facts, documents, etc. again and again and get absolutely no where--I'll save myself the time of logging on and typing and just talk to the nearest wall next time.




Probably a good idea.




Actually over lunch I decided to follow my own advice and end my "active" participation in this thread. I will still be "passively" reading it and only comment if questions are asked directly to me or if one of my pervious posts is addressed in an incorrect manner.

Top
#302972 - 12/01/06 04:12 AM Re: opinions on taser case [Re: sopwith21]
Fletch1 Offline
Professional Poster

Registered: 06/21/04
Posts: 2218
Loc: Florida
I think we have established that you have an issue with anyone with authority. Apparently, freedom to disrupt, trespass and antagonize with impunity is a God given right that should be held above any law that simply protects those who choose not to.

I disagree and as much fun as this is, I feel it has become a pointless political argument which as I said before, has no place here.

Thread locked.
_________________________
www.brazilianjiujitsunaples.com

Top
Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... 10 11 >


Moderator:  Cord, Fletch1, MattJ, Reiki 




Action Ads
1.5 Million Plus Page Views
Monthly
Only $89
Details

Fight Videos
Night club fight footage and street fights captured with the world's first bouncer spy cam

How to Matrix!
Learn ten times faster with new training method. Learn entire arts for as little as $10 per disk.

Self Defense
Stun guns, pepper spray, Mace and self defense products. Alarms for personal and home use.

TASER MC26C
Stop An Urban Gorilla: Get 2 FREE TASER M26C Replacement Air Cartridges With Each New TASER M26C!

 

Unbreakable Unbrella

krav maga