Facetious
Moderated
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE
Police State USA !! :eek:
All opinions / viewpoints should be welcome. IMO.
Police State USA !! :eek:
All opinions / viewpoints should be welcome. IMO.
"Don't Tase Me . . BRO !!!" (Faces of Intolerance)
- Thread starter Facetious
- Start date
That video was two minutes and three seconds too long.
How do we know he got trigger happy? Do you know everything that happened there? Do you know how big of a fucking knob this guy was being? It has nothing to do with being "police state". Research the whole incident before spewing parroted things like "police state" and "trigger happy"
I somehow doubt this guy was peacefully studying for a philosophy quiz before he got tazed.
H
I somehow doubt this guy was peacefully studying for a philosophy quiz before he got tazed.
H
Facetious
Moderated
These politicians aren't the supremes.
The idea that they can't (or won't) tolerate a lone, passionate, left or right wing opinion, is wrong, IMO.
I wonder why the audience didn't object until Security, PD etc. came after him ?
Then they cheered. This kind of makes the point that the tased guys' colleagues, were, in fact, tolerant of his viewpoints.
"The Officials" were not, AFAICS.
Just 'nuther opine
.
The idea that they can't (or won't) tolerate a lone, passionate, left or right wing opinion, is wrong, IMO.
I wonder why the audience didn't object until Security, PD etc. came after him ?
Then they cheered. This kind of makes the point that the tased guys' colleagues, were, in fact, tolerant of his viewpoints."The Officials" were not, AFAICS.
Just 'nuther opine
.
Maybe his rant was negative and offensive towards both their national championship teams. You don't go onto a campus and start talking smack, you know. I think they might be within their legal rights if thats the case. :dunno: I guess we'll never know.
they had the guy on the ground, handcuffed, with 3 officers on top of him, and they tazed him........... as I said, trigger freakin happy.
Freedom of speech... interesting. So the fact that what I was saying was "gather all your facts" means I'm against freedom of speech. How long did this guy rant BEFORE the section of video that we saw? How many times was he asked to hand back the mic and step away BEFORE the clip that was shown. He was asked to leave by the security, and he kept on running his mouth. I don't care what he was saying. He had a right to say it. Of course he did, but there are no doubt rules for that place, that forum, and for that meeting, and he obviously broke them.
So what did he do when he was asked to leave? He refused, resisted, threw a fit, made a scene, and above all else- BROKE THE LAW. Now, once the time had come to pay the piper, and the multiple security guards were trying to get him under control and out of there, did he comply? Apologize? Say it was cool and just leave? No, he continued to thrash about, yelling and throwing a fit. I don't care where you are in the US or in the world- you act like that in a public place, and act that way toward security or police, you're breaking the law.
So they get him to the ground, where ON FUCKING VIDEO they are trying to get him under control and in handcuffs(he was NOT in the cuffs when they tazed him). I gather neither of you two has ever had to do this with someone who is fighting and resisting. It's great fun, but at the end of the day, it's going to get done. Would it have been better to have used the old technique, and beat him like a pinata until he gave up? Or how about those lovely pepper sprays, so that the crowd around him could all burn for an hour or so? The taser is not permanent damage, and it's designed to do one thing- gain compliance.
From what I saw of the video, this guy had plenty of chances to calm down, shut up, and just leave peacefully. Instead, he continued to escalate. It's not about quelling freedom of speech- he had a chance to talk from what it looks like. Obviously, he didn't get an answer he liked. It's also not being trigger happy- it's called enforcement. Don't want to get tazed? Don't fight with security officers.
My main point, gentlemen, was know all the facts. From that clip, there's no way to do that, so what I was saying was to try not to just throw stuff out there like "police state" and "trigger happy". How does subduing a hostile, violent subject using a tazer equate to either of those?
security guards are not cops, they are civilians. they have exactly the same rules of conduct to follow (read:laws) as everyone else. everyone has the right to be and say whatever they want to (with the exception of expressing intent to commit a crime) in a public place. In a private place, the owner has the right to refuse anyone admitance for any reason, including because someone said something that they did not like. If a person is asked to leave and refuses or enters without permission, then the owner (or anyone such as a security personal acting under orders of the owner) can call the police and the police will take the person away and possibley charge them with a crime such as trespassing, public disturbance, etc. anyone has the right to defend themselves if they are attacked. different states have different laws about what kind of weapons security personel can have. I know here that security personel are not allowed to carry a firearm without special documents while performing thier job duties, even though they are allowed to have them as a civilian off-duty without such documents.
security guards are just that, they guard an area to keep it secure. their job is to monitor to see if crimes may be commited. they are not law enforcement officers. they don't have the right to enforce the law. they can't arrest people or seize them. if a security guard uses physical force against a suspect to do these things, they are commiting assault. it is against the law for people that aren't law enforcement officers to do the duties of the police and it is against the law for people to inflict or attempt to inflict damages on other people unless they are attacked.
this case will be dismissed, and especially because of the media attention it has attracted, all sorts of lawyers will be jumping at the chance of representing the guy in a law suit, and when the school will lose a lot of money.
security guards are just that, they guard an area to keep it secure. their job is to monitor to see if crimes may be commited. they are not law enforcement officers. they don't have the right to enforce the law. they can't arrest people or seize them. if a security guard uses physical force against a suspect to do these things, they are commiting assault. it is against the law for people that aren't law enforcement officers to do the duties of the police and it is against the law for people to inflict or attempt to inflict damages on other people unless they are attacked.
this case will be dismissed, and especially because of the media attention it has attracted, all sorts of lawyers will be jumping at the chance of representing the guy in a law suit, and when the school will lose a lot of money.
on the subject of law enforcement officers... well it's kind of a grey area. It's pretty routine for them to use pain compliance techniques to seize and arrest suspects, such as tazors, pepper spray, rubber bullets, tactical batons, etc. however, the constitution says that they may not use "cruel and unusual punishment." many people have cited this and used it as the basis of filing suit agaisnt officers for using such techniques. some cases they won, some they didn't. it depends on the circumstances and how the courts interpet the enforcement of the law. On the whole even if they figure that many of these incidents aren't entirely legitmate, they are more than likely going to do them anyway because it's better than shooting people, which they will almost be gauranteed to get scrutinized and penalized for.
Facetious
Moderated
University P.D. . . prolly not th' cream - o - th' - crop, relative to - remove the guy swiftly and quietly !:1orglaugh Ha ha.
Their technique, if you ask me, had only escalated "the problem" and the guy got all wound up in the process.
I have two LEO type friends . . . I'll see what their take is on it.
Their technique, if you ask me, had only escalated "the problem" and the guy got all wound up in the process.
I have two LEO type friends . . . I'll see what their take is on it.
Totally agree. What's more is on the morning shows, students from the school are saying that word around the campus is that the student had a plan and intended for this to happen and planned to resist in order to make a scene. In fact, one of the cell-phone videos is actually from his own phone, since he knew this would happen.
WRONG. Most universities in the US have certified campus police departments. This means that these guards are certified police officers, with their jurisdiction being campus property only. I worked for Iowa State University's department of Public Safety for five years- and we all went through the full police academy, had arrest powers, the whole nine. This case probably won't make it to trial, you're right, because this clown is probably going to plead guilty to disorderly conduct.
AFA- the reason he got zapped was because one they had him on the ground, it looked like they were having a hell of a time getting him to comply and give up his hands to get them in cuffs.
Understand, a tazer is not a weapon where the guy is going to be crippled or scarred or a drooling vegetable. He got zapped, he got arrested. He was probably sore for five or six hours, then maybe had a tiny red mark on him for a day or two.
H
Facetious
Moderated
Aye ! Also - IIRC - Tasers are generally used at approx 15' ranges . . . . Truth or Trash (?) ________________________________
Also Also - Truth or Trash - You'd get the hell shocked out of yourself if you were physically touching said subject at the time of TAZE (?) _________________________________________________________
Best wear linemans' gloves . . . :1orglaugh Ha ha !!
WaRm ReGaRdz
dave_rhino
Closed Account
They could of easily controlled him without tasering him. Fuck it's just one guy. These cops, in my opinion, can't do there job properly and just relied on a weapon to take him out.
However the guy should of calmed down. He was only there as a stunt, he's done things like it before if you look at his websites.
However the guy should of calmed down. He was only there as a stunt, he's done things like it before if you look at his websites.
21 feet. And they are used at whatever range is safe and necessary. They are able to be used without the darts having to be fired, which is no doubt what happened here. It's called a "Dry stun", and it's basically using the taser like an old school stun gun.
You wouldn't necessarily get shocked unless you were in the area of current. That one's more difficult to explain.
Again, how can *we* know if they could have easily controlled him? I've fought with many a jerkwad like that, and when they're face down, hiding their arms from you and struggling while you're trying to cuff them, it can get hard. In years past, they would have been punching and striking him to get compliance. Here, they zapped him once with the taser, and he got put in cuffs, then taken away. In 1977? He'd have some broken parts.
And the fact that he went there looking to start a ruckus doesn't much matter to me. It's just that he didn't know when to shut the ruckus off, and then when it went south for him, all of a sudden the other folks are the bad guy.
Here's a thought for that guy- stop being an asshat.
H
Similar threads
