Originally posted by eagl
I watched the *whole* vid and think he got what he deserved.
He wasn't asking a question, he was making a speech.
He violated the known structure of the forum and was asked to leave.
When he was asked to leave (not being arrested, just leave) he started hollering about being arrested.
When security attempted to escort him out, he actively and physically resisted. CNN's video cut out over a minute of video where he is jumping and flailing around, requiring more than 3 security officers to control his violent resistance.
So basically he got tasered for intentionally disrupting an event, refusing to leave, and very actively and physically resisting attempts to get him out the door. They weren't going to arrest him, they just wanted him out because he was being very disruptive. He fought back, so they zapped him.
What the hell did he THINK was going to happen? What a retard. 10-20 years ago, they would have started whacking him with sticks and then he'd really have something to cry about.
I have no sympathy for him. I'd like to taser him again just because it would help the cosmic karma balance.
First amendment rights do not include the obligation of the government or private organizations to provide a forum for your expression of speech. Quite the opposite, his disruption was a violation of the first amendment rights of the event organizers who had set up the event. They set up an event, and he crashed it with the express intent of disrupting it. He got off easy.
Oh yea, and Kerry is a wimp. He's too weak to really stand up for the tasered guy, and too much a politician to stand up for the event organizers who are the ones who really got screwed. He doesn't have a position on the whole thing, and that's the real reason why he didn't get elected last time he ran. People are pretty sure he has no backbone beyond the rubber band necessary for a politician to twist reality into washingtonspeak.
Here are two different videos of the same event.
I encourage to watch both as they both tell a slightly different story
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/09/18/student.tasered.ap/index.html?iref=mpstoryview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE&mode=related&search= Ok Ill agree he was making a speech, But Kerry did call on him
And later, you can hear him say in the video that the kid raised a valid question.
So to me it appears that it wasn't Kerry who had the objections to what the kid was saying. But rather the organizers who didn't like what he had to say.
Thus he didn't violate the organizers anything. You cant invite people to come up and speak in an unrehearsed forum and then not let them do so because you do not like what they are saying.
Or not expect that someone might do what this kid did. Particularly at a college.
Yes the kid was acting like a jerk spouting off. But the best move would have been to let him sputter out then answer the comments point for point when he was done.
All that aside. As you can see in the second video. and to answer someone else's comment. The cops weren't organizing for anything.
They let him talk until the mic was cut
Then yes he was resisting.
But with 4 cops on top of him at the end. There was no need for Tazing.
Particularly when it is obious that each cop including the female. Easily outweighed the kid.
I've already mentioned I am against cops having Tazers.
I've discussed this in another thread sometime back. In having that discussion. I've looked into the safety of tazers considerably.
Fact of the matter is. Regardless of what they tell you. regardless of what the trainers tell you. Tazers are NOT safe.
People have been and are dying as a direct result of tazing.
I personally do not believe in the so called "official studies" for as the last time I had looked into it. Not one single study was done. Even the "official government" studies" that could be considered even remotely independent.
These studies were done either by or were funded directly and with direct supervision by "Tazer International" The makers of tazers.
Which is kinda like expecting the mafia to investigate itself for criminal activity and actually expecting them to be honest with the results.
Fact of the matter is. Any time you introduce an electrical current to the body you are placing that body at lethal risk.
Tazers are not as advertised "Less Then Lethal Force" but instead should be redesignated more accurately as "Potentially Lethal Force"
In this case. As in the case where I originally argued against Tazers. Its use even if I did agree with cops having them to begin with (which I don't)was unwarranted at the time it was given.
The kid was wrong for resisting and in the end deserrved to be arrested.
o that point I will agree.
But The cops were equally as wrong for using the tazer at the point that they did. It was exessive.
IMO. since Pandoras box has already been opened with reguards to cops having tazers.
I would suggest and push for revising and much better training in their useage. As since there has been a rash of these types of stories. It is painfully obvious that the current training is inadequit.
On Another note.
It is pointed out int he second CNN Video on that page that two of the offecers involced have been placed on paid leave pending the investigation.
What exactly is the point of placing someone on paid leave?
Paid leave isnt a diciplinary action but rather a vacation.
I mean if your going to pay them. Whats the point in not having them work untill the invastigation is complete?
I can understand if there was a shooting involved where the officer in question might have some phsycological issues to deal with. Thereby you might not want him on the job untill it is resolved.
But in this case it just seems silly.
"You might have been a bad boy. Here take a few days off with pay till we decide."
Just seems rediculous to me.
In this case I'd keep the cops working untill the investigation is complete.
THEN if it is shown some wrongdoing was involved. Then and not before you suspend without pay.
And if it shown no wrong doing was done. You just go on.
