University of Florida Student Tasered At Political Rally 1819
An anonymous reader writes "During a political rally at the University of Florida, an annoying student was tasered while attempting to ask Senator Kerry (D-MA) some questions regarding the 2004 election. Police are looking into whether excessive force was used to prevent the student from going over his alloted question period." There are also several YouTube videos available of the incident.
His name (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm sure that if it had been someone else speaking besides a presidential candidate, police would not have been there and Andrew would have been just politely asked to stop talking over and over. He probably deserved to be Tasered because he was resisting arrest, but he didn't deserve to be taken away from the mic.
Re:His name (Score:5, Interesting)
You're sure? Why? Because he's a dick? Maybe you haven't noticed that this isn't the first occurrence of this sort of thing, and not all of them are on youtube. A couple years ago at OSU (columbus, OH), the city finally settled with a student who had been shot in the head with a wooden bullet. She had been unfortunate enough to walk near a party that was too large. As she was walking by, the police shot her in the head with a wooden bullet, giving her brain damage. She wasn't even on the same side of the street as the party.
And this is no shocker. Friends of mine have been maced for the horrific crime of leaving a concert. That's right. There was no altercation, just a croud of people leaving a concert. Apperantly the croud was large enough and the music weird enough to warrant a riot force to be waiting outside the venue, mace at hand. This sort of thing happened on a weekly or monthly basis in columbus.
Wake up. Just because this guy was an annoying prick doesn't mean that the cops don't taser these fucks for shits and giggles. Please don't tell me that the 4 of them didn't have his ass under control.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:His name (Score:4, Insightful)
With someone who physically fights them, they physically restrain or subdue them. Absent things like tasers, that comes down to much less politically correct methods sometimes. And that results in everything from bruises to dislocated shoulders, and worse. And then people complain about THAT. What you're really asking is whether or not police should ever be able or be obligided to physically control someone's actions or presence. If the answer to that is yes, then we're just splitting hairs over the method... unless, of course, you're a cop, and perhaps you don't actually WANT to have to have a wrestling match with someone who might have an unsheathed knife in their pocket, or who might have open wounds, or who might be shockingly strong, etc.
Re:His name (Score:5, Informative)
I didn't see any torture. I saw someone who KNEW what he was doing going to great lengths to make sure he screamed like a school girl at exactly the moment needed to maximize the theatrics. A hit with a taser isn't torture.
stab gear is light weight and worn under the shirt so you can not see it
Which does nothing for your arms, groin, face, or legs. As you obviously know.
sadism
You're confusing this kid's deliberately putting himself into that scenario and launching the physical part of the conflict with someone ELSE looking for some chance to inflict pain. Sadism: BS, and you know it. Not wanting to have to deal with someone acting increasingly loopy, is more like it. And, you're still talking like they just walked up and tasered him, which you know is BS. They TOLD him they were going to, half a dozen times. All he had to do was quit being physical, problem solved.
I would have put one of the kids arms behind his back grabbed a handful of hair with the other
Just what a guy like this would be hoping for, if he could talk you into tasering him. An officer dragging a political protester by the hair is a nice second place - he'd LOVE you for that. It would also go right up on his home page.
Hell bouncers in most bars would have done a better job then those clowns did.
I've bounced, subdued, and disarmed plenty of large, drunk people. I'm not a cop, so of course no arrests personally. But I've dealt with people three times that kid's size that turned out to be big pushovers, and some very small, very scrappy people that I've watched dislocate an officer's arm, break a jaw, and nearly blind someone else while resisting being tossed out of a venue. And I HAVE watched someone get a bad guy's dislodged, hidden belt knife rammed right into their thigh, followed by some life-threatening bleeding in the middle of the fight. His vest likely would have stopped it, but... he wasn't wearing his vest on his damn leg, as you ALSO know.
Re:His name (Score:4, Insightful)
Nightsticks and guns, I'd guess.
Or maybe they just saw a chance to try out their new toy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And that's a good thing?
Where did I write that is was?
My point is that ff this same kid acted a fool when a senator wasn't around, or if he was just some broke guy who didn't want to get up off the park bench he was sleeping on, no one here would ever know he ended up tased and arrested. It happens every day and the whole of Slashdot doesn't start faoming at the mouth about it. We're on to more important things like the human rights violations committed by toolbars that rate web sites.
Fine by me, though, actually. This is a geek
Re:His name (Score:4, Informative)
I am not saying that police do not abuse their authority. I am not going to debate you on your previous statements, but only on the one I italicized.
This guy seemed (video is shaky) like he was putting up quite a fight.
Have you ever tried to restrain someone who really really does not want to be restrained? Have you ever been kicked, slapped, pushed shoved by someone trying to get away? Someone you cannot hit in the head? I have --and I'm only a paramedic who can only use soft restraints and wait 'till NYPD gets to the scene with handcuffs. And remember: you have to try and restrain them without hurting them or occluding their airway, which makes the task even more difficult!
This guy was resisting arrest. I'm not debating whether it was right to arrest him in the first place. The penal law here (and in most states) in New York State states that it's illegal to resist arrest even when you think that the arrest is unauthorized.
How did they manage police work before they had tasers?
I have seen scrawny seventeen year olds give six hulky NYPD ESU cops a helluva a hard time before he was restrained. And also keep in mid that it would only take one lucky kick to the face for one of these cops to lose an eye --seen it happen before.
Put on my uniform (the one where you are not allowed to carry ANY weapons) and come back to us in a couple of years, or in my case, ten
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I saw the whole video as well. The video is not good evidence.
Where are his hands??? You can't see 'em!! So what if he is on the ground? He is still a threat if his hands are not cuffed! Were the officers able to pat him down for a weapon thoroughly? Did the officers believe -- because of his behavior-- that this person is and EDP (emotionally disturbed person) who needs psychiatric and possibly medical help?
Torture? Ha!
Re:His name (Score:4, Informative)
Your post implies that Kerry demanded that this kid be removed/silenced/tasered/etc. This is far from the truth. Watch the video again and you'll see.
Re:His name (Score:4, Insightful)
Not at that point they weren't. Free speech doesn't mean freedom to hijack someone else's audience or freedom to use their sound equipment. He was perfectly free to stand outside that building (assuming it's public property that he stands on) and say what he wanted to say.
When someone is being an ass, don't drag them out (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if that's the case, there are far better ways to handle a questioner who hogs the stage. Whoever was in charge of that event should have politely interrupted, loudly say "Sorry, we have no time for further questions," and cut the mic off. This was totally uncalled for. The University, a state institution, should get their asses sued off.
Re:When someone is being an ass, don't drag them o (Score:5, Funny)
I just had the perfect idea for future debates. Ask a question within 30 seconds. If it isn't a valid question, you get shot with a taser. If the person debating evades the question or doesn't actually answer the question, that person gets hit. It would bring life and ratings back to US political debates.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You can't just call a 'do over' once the police have you on the ground. My advice is to do your best to avoid being placed on the ground by the police. And if you are on the ground, you are
Re:When someone is being an ass, don't drag them o (Score:4, Insightful)
He was at worst a heckler... he should have been dealt with by turning the mic off and a funny response from Kerry... nothing more unless he attempted to endanger or harm someone else. The first amendment specifically states that all peaceful gatherings are covered under it and until the cops started getting physical there was NOTHING endangering or "unpeaceful" about this meeting.
The whole point of nonviolent protest (Score:5, Insightful)
I watched the videos and heard this dude screaming like a kid having a tantrum. I HIGHLY doubt the cops were completely mute. Even people close to the camera got drowned out at times. It's highly probable that the cops were speaking in less hysterical voices and it just wasn't picked up by the camera.
As for the rest of it, I saw him clearly resist the officers attempts to remove him. He was kicking and screaming and thrashing about. That is undeniably resisting arrest, which is illegal even if you are being arrested for a crime you didn't commit. The place to fight it is in the courts, and if it is truly unjust the ACLU will probably jump up to defend you.
Nonetheless, if a cop puts his hand on you and you start trashing about like a spaz, they are going to take you down. If you continue to struggle once they have you subdued, they can't just let go of you until you are "cooperative".
This dick was trying to cause a violent confrontation. Gandhi would be ashamed of this tool.
Re:When someone is being an ass, don't drag them o (Score:4, Insightful)
Here is my reply to that:
The TRAFFIC law specifically states that you must follow the guidance of an officer of the law when you are in a vehicle on public roadways. That is part of TRAFFIC law. An officer of the law can not come up to you at any moment that you are just standing in a public sitatuation and tell you to "Get on the ground" without first having a warrant for your arrest or stating that you are under arrest for "probable cause of committing a crime". When a cop pulls your over they have probable cause and can investigate they sitatation. If the cop feels at any time during an "investigation" that you are endangering him/herself or the public they can also put you under restraint and use necessary force.
There was no probably cause of a crime, no investigation of a crime, there was no public endangerment, the cops were just heavy handed and STUPID!
Tasers != Non-lethal (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Tasers != Non-lethal (Score:5, Insightful)
What knife, and what baby??? Hyperbole (Score:5, Insightful)
Inapproprate use of force? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Inapproprate use of force? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Inapproprate use of force? (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps I overreacted, but that's the sort of appositive that serves to illustrate the passive form of racism found in whites (generally American). It's not conscious, nor is it particularly malignant, but it serves to keep some measure of "us versus them" in play. I'm not calling you a bigot; it's not like you were trashing him for being black. It's just that we have a long way to go before blacks (and other minorities, but mostly blacks due to our history) are regarded as "people" rather than "those people." My apologies for jumping down your throat; I could have been a bit more gracious. In recent months I've become much more aware of this sort of thing, and the fact that it's so widespread is depressing and angering, which leads me to take an aggressive stance when I encounter it.
You know what's prejudiced? Assuming that mentioning what he looks like has a lot of "these people" attached to it. Someone else mentioned that a female officer was talking to him before he got tasered, maybe you'd like to go tell them off about sexism? YOU have issues towards race, stop projecting them onto others.
Pigs. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: idiot (Score:3, Insightful)
A thumb to the eye will quickly blind you. A flailing arm can easily break your nose. A bite from a human is very likely to cause a severe infection. Knuckles can crush bones in your face, or break a tooth.
Would you risk these injuries?
How would you subdue a person to prevent this harm from happening to you? Or them? The chance of injury for either the detainee or the police is greatly reduced when you have enough bodies. One per limb seems to make sense to me.
Physical intimidation without going batshit (Score:3, Interesting)
Now I'm *not* talking about insane, Rodney King style beatings where baton blows are delivered windmill style, but directed physical blows designed to inflict
Hog at the mic (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have ever participated in any town hall style meeting, you generally get one or two questions, then you sit your butt down and let another person have the podium. While I respect this kid's right to expressing his views, there is a whole room full of people who also would like the chance to ask their questions. He was offered the chance to step down several times, and got riled up after they cut the mic.
Now as for the tasering, I didn't see the part between where the mic got cut and he got tased, but given his demeanor around the time his mic got cut, I don't think it was fair for him to force them to pull him off the stage. If you are going to complain about being tasered, make sure that you don't start out by giving them a good reason to be physically pulling you away from the podium in the first place.
As a disclaimer, I generally find the use of tasers to be too rampant. Some crazy guy with a sword in a mall and no pants? Sure taser him (been there, done that. On the safe side of the taser thankfully) Some 12 yr old girl who took a swing at you? Take the hit and cuff her, no taser necessary. I was punched by some 14 yr old kid who flipped out over a breakup with his girlfriend. Even then I didn't need a taser.
The kid in this video? I need to see more of the video.
If you ever want to 'resist' then I highly suggest you just go limp, don't fight back. A limp body is still damned hard to move and makes it much easier for your lawyer to defend you in court than if you run, swing, bite, yell.
Going limp not recommended (Score:3, Informative)
A past slashdot article [slashdot.org] would disagree with that advise. Also see, for example, information about the UCLA taser policy [blakeross.com].
Re:Going limp not recommended (Score:5, Informative)
And it will allow your lawyer to say things like, "And here we see a completely passive person being needlessly tasered by over-aggressive police."
Instead of this: "Well, you can see from the angle that my client wasn't actually trying to punch the cop in the face, but was just waving to some friends behind the cop."
Re:Hog at the mic (Score:5, Informative)
this is also considered resisting arrest and in situations officers will repeatedly tazer a limp person to torture them or pay them back for making them work. This happens a lot with protesters who make 2 or more cops carry them off, One who chained himself to a fence was tazered enough times that the cop had to get a second tazer as he emptied his. The man refused to unlock himself, the cop was too pig headed to get a set of bolt cutters and drag him off and was intent in teaching the protester a lesson.
http://www.ourmedia.org/node/55217 [ourmedia.org]
http://digg.com/world_news/Police_attack_PEACEFUL_Anti_War_Protestors_with_tasers_dogs_pepper_spray [digg.com]
http://youtube.com/watch?v=U9hL9Hy00pI [youtube.com]
the internet is FULL of corrupt cops doing this to peaceful people because they are lazy.
Cops should be required to write a 12 page report for every time they pull the trigger on a tazer. If an offier tazers a person more than 3 times without good cause needs to be fired and blackballed from ever being in law enforcement ever again and possibly serve jail time, preferrably in with open prison population and let the prisoners know he is a cop.
as a cop you are public protectors, you are to PROTECT AND SERVE even the guy you are arresting based on your interpretation of the law. If any force is exerted you need to be punished HARD if it was inappropriate.
Re:Hog at the mic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hog at the mic (Score:4, Insightful)
a) care what others think.
and
b) be semi-sane.
In this case, it's quite clear that neither of those categories apply to this particular lunatic.
Moreover, in "the good old days", one of the audience members would probably have slugged him. Our grandfathers had a lot less patience for rudeness and stupidity.
Use of tazer. (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, I can see many times where use of a taser is more than justified.
"The argument over which is better, VI or Emacs, is perfectly val*ZZZZAP!!*GUAAAHHHHHGH!*"
I concur... (Score:4, Insightful)
I couldn't watch the video with sound up, so I don't know when the Tazing occurred, but it is safe to say people have been Tazed by police with much less justification than this guy.
Taser-happy cops (Score:5, Insightful)
Cops will taser anyone these days.
A little bit of writing you should read (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:A little bit of writing you should read (Score:4, Insightful)
He was very agitated (Score:3, Insightful)
Wants His 15 Minutes (Score:4, Interesting)
Being a UF student, I have heard plenty about Mr. Meyer before this. He causes problems and does things to get attention. Meyer knew he could cause a scene and once the police got involved he saw an opportunity. He took that opportunity and has now achieved the national attention he sought.
First, this was an event open to the public, but not a public forum. Rules were in place for questioners. He was being led out because he would not relinquish the microphone after being politely asked. He started going peacefully, then began struggling with the campus police which caused them to treat him as hostile. He tried to run back to the microphone and that's when they pinned him down. He started screaming and writhing because the police were holding him down, but he started the tussle. They used the TASER to subdue him without twisting arms other more forceful methods.
The police probably overreacted, but Meyer was at fault. Kerry did ask the police to let him ask the question and he answered it even as they took Meyer away.
Amazing (Score:4, Insightful)
What utter bullshit! You guys seem to forget, this was a political rally in a university! What the heck do you think academic freedom is supposed to be about anyway? I remember pretty well when they had that killer Meir Kahane get invited to Cornell U. when I was there, I wish there had been more people like this kid. Maybe he's immature, and a hundred other things but he has balls and he is a presumably a student paying for an education, paying to have Kerry come and to have the privilege to talk back to the Senator. If there is one place that kids MUST NOT BE TAZED it is at political rallies in universities. The idea that a kid has to be educated by corporal and potentially lethal punishment as to where the neocon-sensitized line is in public discourse, is utterly repellent. You expect undergrads to be immature. They are growing their minds. Kids are shown video of how political disobedience and political rallies are often done by people who are getting frog walked away by cops. It is assumed rubber and metal bullets are the province of Myanmar or past South American regimes. Tazers do not feature in the media they are pseudo-educated with, as far as I know they are only on-campus. I think there can be worse things than an unruly but passionate and basically harmless kid talking long. I doubt that is illegal either. And I senators expect this sort of thing. Unless you see someone rushing at the Senator with a knife there is no reason to taze. I'm sorry, I am almost entirely nonpolitical and never was on campus either but there has to be a line drawn. I cannot agree at all with the jerks who say the kid got what he asked for. Imagine what the scene would have been like 10 years ago when tazers were not the fad. This is BAD. It is educating people to be mice. Or if you still don't get it, it is educating people to buy Microsoft, they can't go wrong and what's good for them is good for you. Need I go on? The idea that there needs even to be an investigation is utterly bizarre. This country has gone quite insane, I'm sure.
Re:Amazing (Score:5, Insightful)
And your last point: yes, there is an insanity that is spreading through the population. I don't know where it will end but it won't be good. Sooner or later people will be saying 2+2=5 and 'loving it'.
Re:Amazing (Score:5, Interesting)
It has been that way for awhile. Back during the Republican convention for Bush Sr in Houston, the police marched a peaceful AIDS protest into a dead end alley and blocked it off. Then after keeping the protesters trapped (My ex-wife remembers a 60 year old mother of an AIDS victim being prevented from leaving)the police charged in on horseback...right over a die-in (a form of protest where you lay on the ground.) Needless to say people got stepped on...
Ultimately nothing came of it...my ex-wife was the most credible witness because she wrote everything down immediately afterwards and sought medical treatment for where the police baton hit her. She had bone bruises which took months to heal. Oh and btw, she had taken some training on what to say if such an event happened...namely getting hit by police...she was told that she had to verbally say that she was being hurt to the person doing the hitting...guess what...he hit her again...knocked her glasses off making her blind as a bat...
The reason nothing came of it... it was at night and the badge number on the riot gear is in reflective tape....You need a good light source and not really be stressed to see it...
Other people that were more seriously hurt didn't want to testify because they were from out of state....
I was impressed with Sheila Jackson-Lee, who at the time was on Houston City Council. She was one of a few that wanted an inquiry and more details.
Another interesting bit, a couple of Republican friends of my ex-wife were at the convention as attendees and over heard some police officers talking about beating up some queers that night. They didn't think any of their friends would be there, so they didn't tell anyone until afterwards.
To quote Reverend Martin Niemoeller:
Help! I'm being oppressed! (Score:5, Funny)
"Did you see him repressing me? You saw him, didn't you?"
Cuffed and then tasered... (Score:5, Insightful)
He wasn't even totally acting outrageous when the mic was turned off. He was somewhat forcefully escorted out of the room and then being arrested. We need to know, what was his crime for the Arrest to take place. Why, when there were approximately 3 to 5 officers holding this young man on the ground did they then feel there was a need to Taser him.
Where was his aggressive crime that threatened the life of another that would warrant the need for a Taser? According to the limited video, there was none visible.
This appears to be a gross abuse of police force. Many more people should be outraged.
Why is this country so great? It is because men and women before us stepped up to the podiums throughout history to cry out against government, and political individuals. This is why this country is great. But now it appears that to speak out is a crime by the very act of opening your mouth. This is just wrong.
People focusing on wrong thing here (Score:5, Insightful)
The question is not weather or not it is justified to taser someone who is resisting arrest. It is not even is it justified to taser this guy who was obviously already subdued.
The question is **why the hell is this guy being considered resisting arrest inthe first place**. What justification was the original arrest under? The police are not supposed to be able to arrest you for speaking out of place in a public forum!
I don't care how annoying the guy was being, or what he was doing that was out of line (storming the mic, etc). Campus security could get involved and escort the guy off the premises, but he shouldn't be arrested for speaking his mind! The police who were there (likely for Kerry security) should not have even been involved in the entire incident.
Cowards can never be safe enough (Score:5, Insightful)
No matter how many speakers you taze, no matter how many KB&R detention facilities you build, no matter how many radio trackers and bugs you put on your kids and employees, no matter how many strip searches and drug tests you all inflict on each other, the basic problem, the one creating these new police states, is that you are all conditioning yourselves to be cowards, and cowards are never safe enough. The level of security you are demanding not only for your persons, but to keep your tender ears from hearing things be said you do not wish to hear, is infinite. The number of people you need to kill overseas to feel safe is impossible to limit. And the more you squeeze those you fear, the more they will hate you and rise up against you, thus making you more afraid and more demanding of more police and more locks and more cameras. I understand Miami cops are now carrying military weaponry. Yet no one feels any safer.
Cowards die a thousand deaths. True cowards kill a thousand people to not die those thousand deaths, and yet still die those thousand times. Stupid people are always afraid, and you can't cure stupid.
What are you guys watching? He was not deserving. (Score:5, Insightful)
I must've watched a different video, because the video I watched had this chain of events:
1. He's standing at the microphone waiting patiently for Kerry to finish his speech.
2. Kerry finishes and calls on him to speak. The guy thanks him for his time in addressing the students.
3. He holds up a book and recommends Kerry read it, because it states that he actually won the 2004 election.
(Kerry states he 'has' read the book)
3. Question #1: (after a statement leading into the question... he's a journalism student after all) How could you concede the election with so many unknowns in relation to disenfranchisement of voters and improper vote counts?
4. He gets a bit upset at a security officer trying to cut him off before he even gets to the question stated in point 3.
5. Question #2: Why not impeach Bush before he invades Iran, since Bill Clinton was impeached over a blowjob?
6. Question #3: Is Kerry a member of the Skull and Bones society, along with Bush?
7. The officer then shuts the microphone off halfway through his last question/statement. (by this time it's been 1 minute and 30 seconds of him at the mic).
8. Then he gets upset that they shut off the mic before he was completely finished, but not combative at all, then they grab him and attempt to eject him from the proceeding.
9. He pulls himself away from the guards once Kerry states that everything's OK and that he'll answer the question(s), but he still shows no signs of combativeness.
10. It pretty much devolves into a melee from here.
I really see nothing here that warrants his treatment, nor justification for the tazering. The fact that some people feel it was justified makes me glad that they're not police officers. Even the cops replying to this thread are saying that the guards were out of line... that should say something.
Here's a video of the whole thing (Score:4, Informative)
More importantly, once they wrestle this guy to the ground (after about a minute of his resisting arrest) they tell him numerous times that if he doesn't place his hands behind his back and comply with the officers' requests that he's going to be tased. So only after the guy refuses to leave the microphone, after he resists arrest, and after he refuses to comply with directives given to him while he's on the ground do the officers taser him. From the officers' standpoint it very much looks like, absent tasing, this guy just isn't going to comply at all - even in handcuffs. I'm sorry, but what's the story here?
As a side note, it's pretty clear this guy was not in full posession of his faculties. At the end of the video, he starts ranting about how the other students need to be sure to "ask about the guy who was arrested at the Kerry rally" because he fears that he's going to be killed. He also refuses to give his name to the police (and as we all learned in Hibel v. Nevada, you may not have to show ID, but you do have to identify yourself to police officers).
Anyway, this is a non-story. Watch the video. Crazy guy resists arrest; Crazy guy gets tased.
a Taser is a weapon (Score:4, Insightful)
Resisting and being loud and annoying are not threats. Police had the guy outnumbered 5-1, he had no weapons and dude....that one big cop could have picked him up and tossed him out the door by himself.
Police today are using the Taser as a work saver. Has the world really gotten to the point where its ok as long as they don't kill him.
By the way have you noticed in all these incidents its allways the little cop with the Napoleon complex thats using the taser
Try this... (Score:5, Insightful)
Get 5 of your friends, choose a reasonably healthy male of about the
same size as the guy in the video and try to politely put cuffs on him
with him resisting:
The rules,
you cannot bruise him or hurt him in any way.
and he can do whatever he wants short of throwing a punch.
I think if you do this you'll find a new found respect for the
police officers.
John Kerry's Response (Score:5, Informative)
From Kerry's Blog: http://www.johnkerry.com/blog [johnkerry.com]
JK: "A good healthy discussion was interrupted"
by Rick Albertson on September 18th, 2007
Senator Kerry made the following statement in response to the arrest of a student at the University of Florida:
In 37 years of public appearances, through wars, protests and highly emotional events, I have never had a dialogue end this way.
I believe I could have handled the situation without interruption, but again I do not know what warnings or other exchanges transpired between the young man and the police prior to his barging to the front of the line and their intervention.
I asked the police to allow me to answer the question and was in the process of answering him when he was taken into custody.
I was not aware that a taser was used until after I left the building. I hope that neither the student nor any of the police were injured.
I regret enormously that a good healthy discussion was interrupted.
Re:Move over Geraldo. (Score:5, Funny)
> force was used to prevent the student from
> going over his alloted question period
Perhaps they should bring in a similar policy for Oscars acceptance speeches.
Re:Move over Geraldo. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Strike Three (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Strike Three (Score:5, Insightful)
It's horrifying though to see everyone sit there cooly watching the guy get tasered over and over. If they had all rushed the police the crowd could have helped him.. regardless of whether the police were doing the right thing, the crowd should have tried to save the guy.. this is frighteningly close to people being too afraid to do anything when their neighbors are dragged away by the gestapo, and the threat is clear in the video "stay in your seats or you'll be tasered and arrested too."
Re:Strike Three (Score:4, Insightful)
People stayed in their seats because the police were trying to remove a raving lunatic.
They were told to stay in their seats to maintain order. They weren't threatened. If they started to rush the police, it would have seemed like he not only was a loon, but had conspirators.
The crowd had no real incentive to help the guy. He came in with the intent to cause a disturbance. He proceeded to cause a disturbance by breaking the rules of the forum, so no one questioed him being escorterd out. Once he started causing a significant disturbance to the police and people around him, they had no reason to intervene, because he was acting like a criminal.
The people did what they should have. The police did what they should have.
This is nothing like the Gestapo pulling people out of their homes at night because of who their mother was. This is nothing like someone being arrested in the middle of the night from publishing a disenting opinion in a paper the day before.
You are terribly incorrect to have even likened it to real suppresion. It gives people that actually worry about such suppresion less credibility. You having said that, and it getting modded up will give credence to people that allow said travesties to happen, saying easily "Must have been another loon..."
Stop modding people up when they lie! (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaiWCS10C5s [youtube.com]
Kerry finishes a question, points to him, and says "Sir?".
During his question, the guy is interrupted, and at the end of his question, his mic is cut, and police immediately grab him and proceed to forcibly remove him from the premises. At that time, Kerry is asking the police to let the guy be while he answers his question. The police PREVENT KERRY FROM ANSWERING with their actions, and when the kid starts to fight them off THEN the crowd applauds him.
The Kid waited his turn, politely asked a question when he was invited to do so by Kerry, his question was interrupted as soon as he said something controversial, his microphone is then cut and he's immediately removed from the microphone area, and Kerry cannot answer the question because the officer's action are causing a disturbance in the proceeding.
THAT is what the videos show. That is what Kerry's official statement says happened.
Re:Strike Three (Score:5, Insightful)
The audience did not rush to his aid because it's apparent many were applauding the police, which implied they perceived the student to be a disruption. They were right not to rush to his aid because doing so would have disrupted a legal arrest, which is also a crime. He was charged with disrupting a public event, which appears to be the case if you watch the video.
Had it been on a public sidewalk, I think the guy would have a civil right's case, but since it was on campus, the campus police acted within their rights. Acting like an idiot and not liking the response is not a civil right's violation.
You are right about the public's fear of gestapo-like police, but I didn't see it in the video. It's really too late to be concerned about that though. Police have the power, you don't. We as a nation gave it to them a long time ago. We all just have to live with it... or work toward changing it.
Re:Strike Three (Score:4, Insightful)
If you overlook the fact that he was an invited attendee to a public event that featured an open microphone to ask questions to a senator who works for and on behalf of the public. Also the event was held on property owned by the public within the state of Florida in trusted to a public educational institution for which he was a paid student. Sure I can see where your argument makes sense.
Anyway, I don't think people are questioning the fact that the student may have been disruptive. I am alarmed in the manner the situation was handled and am hesitant to send my child to that college, which is a shame since I reside close enough to University of Florida to give them consideration. I think the level of violence that was reached by the police deserves investigating and steps should be taken to prevent this from happening again.
Throw the book at Kerry (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Move over Geraldo. (Score:3, Informative)
Once they're near the exit he tries to break through them towards the podium so they wrestle him to the ground. Once there he keeps trying to get loose and keeps screaming.
Then they tell him repetedly.
"Stop resisting or you will get tased"
After he keeps resisting for a while they just give up and tase him.
he
Re:Move over Geraldo. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:That's what they tried at first! WTFV! (Score:4, Insightful)
Since when police men mediate college debates in the U.S. telling people their time is up? Since 9-11? This is fucking laughable...My God, people, you are really confortable with a police state, aren't you? I'm actually used to a civilian with a microphone saying somebody's time is up.
Fortunately, the US institutional design was the work of enlightened men and such an abuse typically will have its right unfolding in terms of consequences (like the guy suing whoever is reponsible for a hefty sum). But, oh my, how confortable the US police is about arresting the ordinary citizen.
Re:Move over Geraldo. (Score:4, Interesting)
So, if you are a young woman, and the nice officer tells you to take off your pants, lie down and spread your legs in his back seat, you should just do it, right?
This whole, "THE LEO IS ALWAYS RIGHT" bullshit is, well, bullshit. Face it folks, the cops are out of control. And it is only getting worse and going to continue getting worse.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I have a right to protest, but I don't have a right to shit on the President's rug during afternoon tea.
There are restrictions to free speech (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:5, Insightful)
Additionally, the senator attempted to answer the student's questions, all the while the police were bent on arresting this guy. If you can make it out in the video, you can see an aid in the background signaling for the police to intervene, something that should NEVER have happened.
At what point has the police become a protector of the elected, nearing gestapo practices, instead of being a protector of the people. If anything, the police should have recognized that they should be protecting the student so that his voice could be heard. Believing contrary to the state is no cause for being silenced.
How does the saying go?
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:5, Informative)
Now you've been arrested for resisting arrest. Half the time the orig. charges don't stick, are dropped, or just didn't exist to begin with. Brilliant.
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:5, Insightful)
In the case of the article above, I was half expecting the person to be a right wing wacko that Kerry was trying to dodge, but it turns out the guy was a left wing wacko on Kerry's side. The story makes even less sense now. I think one of the other posters got it right
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:4, Informative)
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:4, Funny)
Arrest would probably be too extreme. A good tasering might do the trick, though.
Watch the videos (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:5, Funny)
I think it's actually "I may not agree with what you're saying, but I'll defend to the death your right to be tasered for saying it". Some guy name Voltaire said it, appropriately enough.
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:4, Informative)
In his actions, there was a justifiable use of force against him. He resisted several officers, and was making an effort to resist their instructions (leave).
When they had him on the ground, handcuffed, he was now in control. Up until this point, they could have used the taser with justified force. Now that he was on the ground, in control, he was just being loud.
I didn't hear any zapping. I didn't see the convulsions, although the video I watched (first link) did not have a clear shot of the student. He was only screaming "OW! OW! OW!".
I typical use of force would be to control the resisting person with pressure points and positive control. Every law enforcement officer is taught them. When I went through law enforcement school in Florida, it was a long, required part of the training.
Florida has an escalation of force matrix. It's really very simple. You are allowed to use one step above what the other person is using. If they are resisting, you may use hand-to-hand tactics. If they are resisting with force, you may escalate to non-lethal weapons (tazer, or pepper spray)
From what I could see, it appeared they were using pressure points and positive control, which yes, would have made him say "Ow!"
Now, if he had a weapon, and rushed the stage, they could have escalated the force to lethal force immediately. i.e., shot him before he got to the stage.
He got hurt (Ow!), but he was being an ass. He was pushing the issue ("Are you a members of Skull and Bones?!?"), and wasn't leaving the speaker a chance to answer. Someone mentioned that he was a journalism student. A good journalist needs to ask questions, and receive answers. If he was a journalist, he would likely be fired for his actions, which I hope his teacher told him.
When he was asked to leave the mic, he could have simply said "Thank you for your time.", and walked away, even if they did escort him from the building.
You are right, if he had stated his question, and waited for an answer, he may have still been asked to leave, but the speaker should have simply laughed, and said "oh no, I'm not.". Diffused situation. That's up to a good speaker to know how to control his audience, but sometimes you'll have an audience member who doesn't play well (like this student).
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:5, Insightful)
And you miss point 5. :
5. Being pinned to the ground by at least 3 officers he kept on yelling, so they threatend to taze him and finally did so.
You're right, the first 4 Steps he was escalating the situation and the police acted appropriately. If the reaction to 5. had been carry the guy out of the room, it would have never made it to slashdot.
But that's not what happend. They decided to inflict great pain to a person which was in their custody. That's the scandal!
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:4, Insightful)
What I find abhorrent is the idea that physically removing someone from a microphone is somehow a reasonable response in a civilised country. What's so bad about refusing to proceed until he yields the floor? Is "fairness" to other speakers really a justification for the application of force?
This was a complete over-reaction, and my viewing of the video did not make evident any tangible threat to the speaker or audience that would justify an escalation to force. And, unlike most of the people posting to this topic, I say that as a person with real-world law enforcement experience.
Shameful.
Quote from the article for clarity (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not the way I see this at all. At every step, he made choices that escalated the encounter.
1. He wasn't asking questions. He was making rhetorical statements. He was preaching. He was robbing other people of the chance to actually ask Kerry questions. What is the punishment for that? Simple, they take the mic away from you and give it to someone with something constructive to say.
As two officers take Meyer by the arms, Kerry, D-Mass., can be heard saying, "That's alright, let me answer his question." Audience members applaud, and Meyer struggles for several seconds as up to four officers try to remove him from the room.
So when you ask a question, and the person to whom you asked the question wants to answer, you should submit to the uniformed thugs who have decided that they didn't like your question and they want you out of the public forum?
In Soviet Russia, or 21st century USA?
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:4, Insightful)
And so did everyone else. At what point does someone have to intervene to make sure those rights are observed equally?
See, that's the part you're leaving out in your fairy tale recounting of this incident. He certainly has the right to be heard, for his allotted time, with repercussions being that he'll be cut off if he goes over. But then what happens to all those patient, well behaved people who would like to respect the rules but are not allowed their rightfully granted access? Oh right you don't give two fucks about them, they're not throwing a tantrum.
You keep talking about what could have happened, or what he might have done, but that's bullshit. What he did do was monopolize the mic, and resist those trying to enforce fair access.
So pretending he might have gone quietly when he was given the opportunity to do so and refused is bullshit too.
He didn't get tasered because he was exercising free speech, he got tasered because he actively resisted arrest. Stop trying to turn this into something it's not.
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:4, Informative)
This guy was creating a public disturbance. He deserved what he got, IMO. He'll also be charged and probably fined for it.
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:5, Insightful)
This student's behavior / attitude is what got him into trouble. It wasn't just making a comment and asking a question, it was HOW he did so, asking questions in a loud fast-paced run-on without giving Kerry a chance to respond, cutting him off when Kerry tried. It was the tone of the voice, manor of speech, body language, etc. Disruptive style behavior indicative of mental instability / hostility.
That said, it was handled POORLY. At most, he should have been simply ejected, not arrested. He got tasered for resisting arrest, which was understandable given the behavior I saw on the video.
In a very timely parallel, I went to my local city council meeting last night. During "Open Forum," we had someone who behaved EXACTLY the same. Same body language, same speech patterns, etc. He was obviously mentally disturbed by the content of his comments. How did the city council handle it? Perfectly. They listened to him with respect, let him finish his 5 minute long rant (including references to Timothy McViegh,) thanked him, and the guy left.
Re:There are restrictions to free speech (Score:5, Interesting)
At what point exactly did they tell him he was under arrest?
Re:Obligatory ShieldW0lf post (Score:4, Insightful)
So because you say that "shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater" doesn't amount to free speech, suddenly it follows that there must be limits to protest in terms of how or where it is conducted? The 'fire' example is meant to exclude 'physical speech and action' with no corresponding content and that has other unambiguous meanings--shouting fire, waving a plastic gun around in order to promote gun safety, sending out press releases that there is cyanide in the water in order to promote water safety.
the hemming in of the how and where of protest has been more aligned pragmatically with the rise of television than with any detatched legal scholarship.
And, "shitting on the presidents afternoon tea" violates a dozen other laws unrelated to 1st ammnd. rights. Of course I can't come into Nancy Peloisi's living room in order to convince her to impeach Bush, that would be breaking and entering. Here we are talking about public figures in public roles in areas open to the same.
Re:Motive? Attention, period. (Score:5, Funny)
So what??? (Score:3, Insightful)
But so what?
Should he have been shot? That would have also solved the problem. In the head, or knees?
Luckily this is not for you (and sadly also not for me) to decide. There are rules as to when to use tasers. And "highly annoying guy shouting loudly" doesn't cover it. He was of no danger to anyone, and was on the floor.
You don't "deserve" being tasered. A taser is not a punishment, and you ca
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is simple: no danger - don't taser.
Re:So what??? (Score:5, Informative)
Taser S.O.P.:C.Authorization to use:
C.1 To control a dangerous or violent subject when deadly force does not appear to be justified and/or necessary;
C.2If attempts to subdue the subject by other conventional tactics have been, or will likely be, ineffective in the situation at hand; or
C.3If there is reasonable expectation that it will be unsafe for officers to approach within contact range of the subject, see also the Use of Force continuum,
Attachment A.. D. Prohibitions:
D.1The TASER may not be used on individuals who can be controlled by voice command or direction.
D.2The TASER may not be used as punishment or retaliation.
D.3 TASERs will not be used in conjunction with O.C. Spray.
D.4Handcuffed prisoners should not be tased without extenuating circumstances.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Motive? Attention, period. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Motive? Attention, period. (Score:4, Informative)
Tear gas, nightsticks, and rubber bullets have caused death before. In fact, people have even died after just being handcuffed. I guess we should get rid of those, too?
Re:So, did Kerry ever actually answer the question (Score:5, Informative)
The story isn't about a kid, it's about the police (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The story isn't about a kid, it's about the pol (Score:5, Funny)
Re:keyword: annoying! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:keyword: annoying! (Score:4, Insightful)
Did anyone actually watch the video? This moron was hopped up on drugs, if you ask me. I think the cops had the exact same read on him. He was belligerent and refused to cooperate when he was asked, REPEATEDLY, to leave. He seemed to think that because he was at a mic to ask a question of Kerry, that gave him carte blanche to spew random garbage for as long as he wanted. He was wrong. When he was asked to step aside, he started making a scene. When security tried to move him aside, he acted like he was being arrested and made a GREATER scene. HE escalated the scene, not the police.
I do think the use of the taser was unnecessary. He had probably six cops on him by the time that happened. If he was actively resisting their attempts to be put in cuffs, why does it take more than six cops to force him to comply? Tasering only made him scream like a little bitch and get other students to feel sorry for him. Not the smartest move.
Taze Them All! (Score:5, Insightful)
Ugh, these people are drama queens! It's not like there's a fine line between police brutality and rights to free speech and demonstrating. Just always favor the police and get the thing fucking over with. Who cares, it's never going to be me there.
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
He was handcuffed, on the ground, with six cops kneeling on him when he was tasered. How was that appropriate?
Re:Ugh... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not really clear, here, on how you arrive at that conclusion. The whole point is that we have the freedom to assemble. You know, the freedom to hold an event where people get to do things like take turns talking, if that's the sort of event you want to hold. And someone else decides that your freedom of speech and assembly isn't important, and that he can shout you down and take over the event for his own aggrandizement and 15 minutes of annoying notoriety. It's a "police state" action when law enforcement officers actually act to enforce the laws that are written to prevent people from interfering with your events and rights? If there were no statutes covering things like disturbing the peace, then the officers wouldn't have had the grounds to ask the guy to leave, or to arrest him when he decided to ignore their obligation to uphold those statutes. But there ARE such laws, and this twit clearly knew that he went in there to provoke exactly such a reaction, and he clearly considered the rights of the people gathered there to be secondary to his own need for political theater.
History is full of loudmouths, drunks, disturbed people of all sorts. That's why disturbing the peace is a notion we all understand. But the law works FOR this clown, too. This guy can have his OWN assembly where he DOES get to talk non-stop the whole time if he wants, and if someone decides to stand there trying to shout him down, then HE gets the benefit of the police working for HIM, if that becomes necessary. If he wants to run an event where non-stop interruptions by everyone there is the actual framework of the event, then someone being a blathering jerk, in that context, wouldn't BE disturbing the peace, and there's no need for the officers to act. Save the "police state" hyperbole for when it matters, because trotting it out when someone like this deliberately seeks this sort of action and attention completely cheapens the meaning of that phrase.
Re:Watch it yourself (Score:5, Insightful)
And the crowd? A bunch of little proto-nazis as far as I'm concerned. This is UF after all.