UF kid tasered at Kerry speech

[Charla]

Blah blah blah Do you not fucking understand the nature of this? Why it's considered a slippery-slope? Where does it fucking stop? Today tazering some loud-mouth is okay, next year maybe we can classify them as enemy combatenets and remove them from their homes and detain them indefinetly without a lawyer or criminal trial? Oh wait the Patriot Act lets the U.S. do that right now, nevermind. Keep sleeping and paying your income taxes, America land of the living-dead.

Don't worry about slippery slopes. If there's one thing I've learned from things like speed limits and copyright laws, it's that the government probably has enough justification to break down anyone's door, at any time. Who needs the Patriot Act when you can just point at the 50 gigs of copyrighted music and/or video of girls that may or may not be 18?

Slippery slope doesn't count when the only thing keeping any of us free in the first place is the cops' own laziness.

[Tricen]

Cop warned him they were going to tazer him. How is it brutality? It's the quickest way to subdue someone.

[RakEx]

Brutality is the use of excessive force. When there are 5 cops, 1 of them which is vastly larger than the perpetrator and there is no iminent danger to any of the 5 police on the scene, the use of a taser is not warranted.

5 cops against 1 average sized human without a weapon should be easily detained. He was and then they decided to throw him on the ground and taser him for no apparent reason.

[XxSlusherxx]

Kid was being a tottal bitch, I hope he gets nothing out of this.

[Demosthenes11]

You sad, deranged people. Most of you hold an opinion against what this guy did, and it makes sense why you hold these views. Fuck this is an online video-game message board, it should be clear that the people who would be okay with tazering the most are geeks infatuated with mindless entertainment. You motherfuckers would sell every single fucking liberty you have as long as it doesn't interrupt your 14.95 monthly billing cycle.

This kid was obviosuly an asshole, but the QUESTIONS he was trying to bring up have a serious point. These were issues I had with Kerry in 04 and Ive never seen him publicly answer them. Its funny that one of the first posts of reason in this entire thread was from someone who doesn't even live in this retarted country.

And then there is a deuche bag suggesting he was trying to invoke a riot? Suggesting he is instigating violence on police with the words, "help me"? Ive seen big, violent 250LB+ men get taken down in public places here in PHX with 2 guys, and they can stabilize the situatuion without having to resort to unneccessary violence. Do you not fucking understand the nature of this? Why it's considered a slippery-slope? Where does it fucking stop? Today tazering some loud-mouth is okay, next year maybe we can classify them as enemy combatenets and remove them from their homes and detain them indefinetly without a lawyer or criminal trial? Oh wait the Patriot Act lets the U.S. do that right now, nevermind. Keep sleeping and paying your income taxes, America land of the living-dead.

oh gawd. Way to hurdle everything pointed out in the thread first of all. Second, lolbleedingheartliberalism

[Grievear]

You sad, deranged people. Most of you hold an opinion against what this guy did, and it makes sense why you hold these views. Fuck this is an online video-game message board, it should be clear that the people who would be okay with tazering the most are geeks infatuated with mindless entertainment. You motherfuckers would sell every single fucking liberty you have as long as it doesn't interrupt your 14.95 monthly billing cycle.

This kid was obviosuly an asshole, but the QUESTIONS he was trying to bring up have a serious point. These were issues I had with Kerry in 04 and Ive never seen him publicly answer them. Its funny that one of the first posts of reason in this entire thread was from someone who doesn't even live in this retarted country.

And then there is a deuche bag suggesting he was trying to invoke a riot? Suggesting he is instigating violence on police with the words, "help me"? Ive seen big, violent 250LB+ men get taken down in public places here in PHX with 2 guys, and they can stabilize the situatuion without having to resort to unneccessary violence. Do you not fucking understand the nature of this? Why it's considered a slippery-slope? Where does it fucking stop? Today tazering some loud-mouth is okay, next year maybe we can classify them as enemy combatenets and remove them from their homes and detain them indefinetly without a lawyer or criminal trial? Oh wait the Patriot Act lets the U.S. do that right now, nevermind. Keep sleeping and paying your income taxes, America land of the living-dead.

Everything you just brought up has been talked about in this thread already. Learn to read or at least spell. I find it ironic you can't even spell retarded correctly.

[Charla]

It isn't so much bleedingheart guy as conspiracy theory guy. He's not just complaining about some guy getting hurt, he's worried that we're all going to get hurt next. Which brings me to what I said last post.

[Daahan]

Another thing. They couldn't remove him with 4 people without tazering him? Ok 1 person on each end and the other 2 making sure he doesn't hurt people. Unless hes hulk, then you'd need a lot more people!

I don't see what the number of officers present has to do with anything. He only has one pair of hands to cuff but when he's flailing around it becomes an issue of officer safety.

Are you suggesting that one cop incapacitate him with a Stone Cold Stunner,

What?

i Agree, a RKO would be more effective.

I'd personally use a either some Sweet Chin Music or a Clothesline From Hell.

[MisterBob]

Cop warned him they were going to tazer him. How is it brutality? It's the quickest way to subdue someone.

So if I get pulled over for a speeding ticket, and the cop says "If you don't dance right now, I'm going to use a tazer", its ok because he warned you?
Yeah, its a retarded metaphor, but just because they warned him does not mean it is right.
That kid had no capability of hurting them, they are trained officers, and they should be able to subdue him without doing something inhumane like using a tazer.
I hope they all lose their jobs for that bullshit.

And for fuck's sake, yelling "Help me!" is not going to get him an "Inciting a Riot" charge. Yelling that is a typical human response to being in danger.

[Correction]

So if I get pulled over for a speeding ticket, and the cop says "If you don't dance right now, I'm going to use a tazer", its ok because he warned you?
Yeah, its a retarded metaphor, but just because they warned him does not mean it is right.
That kid had no capability of hurting them, they are trained officers, and they should be able to subdue him without doing something inhumane like using a tazer.
I hope they all lose their jobs for that bullshit.

So the cops have no right to enforce the law? He was trespassing, was asked to leave, refused, warned of the consequences and received them. Your 'dancing' analogy is exaggerated horseshit.

[RakEx]

So if I get pulled over for a speeding ticket, and the cop says "If you don't dance right now, I'm going to use a tazer", its ok because he warned you?
Yeah, its a retarded metaphor, but just because they warned him does not mean it is right.
That kid had no capability of hurting them, they are trained officers, and they should be able to subdue him without doing something inhumane like using a tazer.
I hope they all lose their jobs for that bullshit.

So the cops have no right to enforce the law? He was trespassing, was asked to leave, refused, warned of the consequences and received them. Your 'dancing' analogy is exaggerated horseshit.

Exaggerated horseshit is exactly how I would describe the cops use of force. When there are 5 cops that could and should have easily removed him from the area. That one black cop could have removed him and detained him by himself.

[Correction]

Exaggerated horseshit is exactly how I would describe the cops use of force. When there are 5 cops that could and should have easily removed him from the area. That one black cop could have removed him and detained him by himself.

So because the cops worked as a team and used department-approved procedures, they should lose their jobs?

[RakEx]

I dont really think the department approves of 5 cops using a tazer on 1 person that has no malicious intent. Infact I'm pretty sure they dont or they wouldnt have suspended 2 of the officers.

[aurik]

It's SOP to suspend officers (w/pay) when there is an internal investigation of their actions. You can't use that as evidence that they were wrong or right.

That said, the Taser is not a device to enforce compliance. You can't taser someone because they are non-compliant. Refusing to leave is not justification for tasering, especially when you have the manpower to simply pin his noncompliant ass down, restrain him, and carry him out.

[Norelco]

That said, the Taser is not a device to enforce compliance. You can't taser someone because they are non-compliant. Refusing to leave is not justification for tasering, especially when you have the manpower to simply pin his noncompliant ass down, restrain him, and carry him out.

Are you sure about that? I was watching an episode of World's Wildest Police Videos. An officer pulled over a black woman. He walks up to the side of the vehicle, asks for her license and registration. The woman ignores him, gets on her cell phone (I think she calls her husband or boyfriend), and tells the person on the other line she has been pulled over.

At this point the officer calmly asks the woman to get off the phone and step out of the vehicle. She refuses. He opens the passenger side door and instructs her again to get out. She refuses. She is non-compliant, in your words. He gives her at least 3 warnings, and then says if she doesn't comply he will tase her on the count of 3. He counts down slowly, and calmly, and she refuses to get out. ZAP! He nails her and you see the woman FLY out of the car horizontally and screaming. Funniest shit I've ever seen.

So, what else would you suggest the officer do? Waste his time and our tax-payer dollars when he gave the woman more than 3 chances to step out of the vehicle?

[Vedder]

Being obnoxious is not a tazerable offense. Maybe his goal was to stir shit up and make a scene, but after watching the video I definitely don't see reason for them to use a tazer.

Pretty sure tazering an obnoxious person produces lulz. Isn't that enough of a reason?

No, but yeah... you are right, no reason to use a tazer when you can just use manpower. Lazy fkin police.

[aurik]

That said, the Taser is not a device to enforce compliance. You can't taser someone because they are non-compliant. Refusing to leave is not justification for tasering, especially when you have the manpower to simply pin his noncompliant ass down, restrain him, and carry him out.

Are you sure about that?

Yes I am.
http://www.laaw.com/howmuchforce.htm

15. The "Reasonableness" Inquiry - The reasonableness of an officer's use of force is, in part, based upon the totality of the circumstances as known by the officer at the moment the force is used. The following five (5) questions are the basic reasonableness determining factors. However, keep in mind that since the standard is the "totality of the circumstances," the five (5) questions are not the ONLY questions (other aspects of the incident could be considered). Also, the following question have been placed in a specific order of priority.

1. Imminent Threat to Officers and/or Others - Is the person an imminent threat of injury to the officer and/or others? The greater the level of the threat the greater the level of the force that may be used. [13]

1. PPCT's [14] Force Continuum - assists the officer's decision making and after-incident report articulation with the relationship between the threat level presented by the person and the use-of-force response level performed by the officer.

2. Remember - the Officer may NOT assume the negative - if time and circumstances permit.

2. Actively Resisting Seizure - If the person is actively resisting seizure then the officer may escalate his (the officer's) justified (reasonable) level of force response.

3. Circumstances are Tense, Uncertain, and Rapidly Evolving - ("Officer's legitimate anxiety factor") - Some incidents take hours to resolve, while others start and are over in seconds. The more tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving the incident the higher level of force that will be judged to be reasonable.

4. Severity of the Crime at Issue - The more severe the crime committed the more force that an officer may justify. Remember, an officer cannot assume the negative if time and circumstances permit.

5. Attempting to Evade Seizure by Flight - Is the person attempting to evade seizure by flight? If yes, then this will assist the officer in justifying an escalating level of force.

[Khamsin]

I thought he did have malicious intent. Didn't he make a mad dash at Kerry or something?

[Odon]

I thought he did have malicious intent. Didn't he make a mad dash at Kerry or something?

No... he was trying to get away form the cops.

[Khamsin]

I thought he did have malicious intent. Didn't he make a mad dash at Kerry or something?

No... he was trying to get away form the cops.

Away from or toward Kerry?