Things to note from the video. He's getting shot with the barbs (not the drive-stun like at UCLA), and from my knowledge, getting shot with the barbs is a far more aggressive experience than the drive-stun as it removes the electrical resistance of your skin from the process. Although the video does a time cut so we can't tell how long he was sitting there, HE'S FINE AND HAS A FREAKING SMILE ON HIS FACE.
And the very fact that you can go to a police station and ask to be tazed reinforces my opinion that their use in the thread video doesn't qualify as brutality.
We need more input from actual police here. Especially from those that make their rounds near UCLA. Of all the people who would know what would have happened without the usage of tazers, it's other cops in the area with street experience.
And to anyone still defending people's rights to give an officer crap from grabbing your arm, you're just being naive. The effectiveness of law enforcement depends as much on the sense of invisible authority as it does on physical police presence. You show me a community where people regularly give officers crap and I'll show you a community with a high crime rate.
EDIT: found a more useful video pertaining to mobility immediately after get tazed. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR3Fa4yZ-G4&NR" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR3Fa4yZ-G4&NR</a> . After watching the video, I don't believe it would be difficult to get back up after a tazing.
EDIT2: And another <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEPSOlhHS4Q&NR" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEPSOlhHS4Q&NR</a> . Notice the laughter on the part of the tazee.
tankefuglOne Script To Rule Them All...Trondheim, NorwayJoin Date: 2002-11-14Member: 8641Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
Anecdotal videos demonstrating the tasers being used on people does not qualify as proof that it's safe. Please see the links I've posted in my post further up.
<!--quoteo(post=1579577:date=Nov 22 2006, 02:41 AM:name=T_h_e_m)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(T_h_e_m @ Nov 22 2006, 02:41 AM) [snapback]1579577[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> And to anyone still defending people's rights to give an officer crap from grabbing your arm, you're just being naive. The effectiveness of law enforcement depends as much on the sense of invisible authority as it does on physical police presence. You show me a community where people regularly give officers crap and I'll show you a community with a high crime rate. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I doubt there is such a connection. Can you support this claim with any evidence?
<!--quoteo(post=1579683:date=Nov 22 2006, 04:00 PM:name=tjosan)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tjosan @ Nov 22 2006, 04:00 PM) [snapback]1579683[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I doubt there is such a connection. Can you support this claim with any evidence? <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you look at the UK I'd imagine statistics for areas with high council housing would back it up.
puzlThe Old FirmJoin Date: 2003-02-26Member: 14029Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
No it wouldn't Thaldarin. The correlation is this:
You show me a community where people regularly give officers crap and I'll show you a community with a high crime rate.
So, the logical progression is that communities that give officers crap are more likely to produce criminals.
Thaldarin, your example would, at best, show that criminals are more likely to give officers crap.
This is just a correlation right now, and a contested correlation at that, and one I personally don't buy.
Even if it were demonstrated that areas with high criminality produce more crap for police, I can't see how one could jump to the conclusion that people who give officers crap are more likely to be criminals. ( and therefore deserving of harsh treatment ).
The justifaction for this brutality is that the person was a threat to the police officer, not that the person offended the police officer.
tankefuglOne Script To Rule Them All...Trondheim, NorwayJoin Date: 2002-11-14Member: 8641Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
edited November 2006
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The justifaction for this brutality is that the person was a threat to the police officer, not that the person offended the police officer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
After some thinking on the subject and reading through the thread, it appears to me that this is the core issue here.
Stand up or you get tased again? Where is the lack of brutality in that? Where is the student a threat there? All you have to do is pick him up and carry him out to the car and throw him in the back.
In line with <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The justifaction for this brutality is that the person was a threat to the police officer, not that the person offended the police officer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> it seem as though it is because the police a) can't be bothered to get their hands dirty and carry him out by his arms and legs and b) they are generally offended by his lack of respect and cursing.
I think if they knew they were being filmed they would never have acted in that way and would never have got the taser out.
tankefuglOne Script To Rule Them All...Trondheim, NorwayJoin Date: 2002-11-14Member: 8641Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
It might be that it would be relevant to expand the question, since police officers usually cannot only regard themselves in such situations: - Was the student a sufficient threat to the police officers to warrant the use of a taser? - Was the student a sufficient threat to the environment (other students, materials, etc.) the police officers were set to protect to warrant the use of a taser?
These are the kinds of a questions a court must answer. I don't think these guys are going to get off lightly, even if at least a few of them were as much victims of the circumstances as the student was. What I mean is, we do need more information about how the community around UCLA works. For example, if the students and citizens are usually well behaved and docile creatures, this was no doubt way, way over the top.
However, if, like on many college campuses, the students have a history of bucking authority and making scenes, then this incident may have been a breaking point that has been coming for quite awhile. Unfortunately for those involved, they happened to be in the wrong place and the wrong time. That's the story of history though; the story of conflict.
We could also use some reliable input on the role of tasers in American police forces, otherwise we'll all just look even more pompus that we already do by making more wild assumptions. :/
=== As a side note, I recommend we stop titling threads so aggressively. It immediately puts the opposition on the defensive, and that's never a good way to start a discussion, one side at the other's throat. I think we should make them instead a proposition. To use this thread as example, it might better be phrased "Student tazed 5 times at UCLA, is this Brutality?" or some such.
I could very well say, "Kerry is the antichrist" in an attempt to start a discussion, but I won't get nearly as effective of a reply as if I would have said, "I'm not sure of Kerry's intentions." I'll mull over adding this as a rule, if anyone has input.
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
If this student has followed officer's directions, he wouldn't have been doing the dolphin flop on the floor. That simple. Rather hilarious given I've been tasered before, I can't imagine not listening to someone after that unless I wanted to make a scene by being shocked senseless.
tankefuglOne Script To Rule Them All...Trondheim, NorwayJoin Date: 2002-11-14Member: 8641Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
Of course he wouldn't have been tasered if he'd followed their directions; the question is, did he (by not following the directions) pose a threat to the officers or anyone around him, and did he pose a sufficient threat to justify incapacitation by taser?
The taser shouldnt have been used so often, but the kid should have followed some directions; theres faults on both sides of the conflict here. Once you resist authority its up to the authority to measure how much force to administer to stop the resistance... and some people just arent good at measuring.
As the thread slowly seems to be figuring out, the main question is not whether this is brutality or not, it's whether the tasered *needed* to be used so many times here. I'm going to ignore the visible minority facts, how the situation first started out, and if a taser is lethal or not.
In the end, the guy may have deserved the first tasering, but I can't say for sure without knowing how it all began. At that point, he went limp in protest. Again, maybe not the best idea, but all the cops had to do was put 2 guys on him to drag him out. Repeated tasering was not needed, there was nothing there to justify the tasering. All that did was make him stay limp. The guy was handcuffed and not fighting back, he was no threat whatsoever to anyone. He may have been a moron, a drama queen, whatever but he still was no threat. Not gonna fix the problem, and totally not needed.
On top of that, the refusal to give badge numbers, to stop and even threatening to taser people trying to help this highly questionable act. Corrupted by power. It can happen to anyone (just Google the Stanford Prison Experiment for proof), but it *needs* to be dealt with. The offending officer(s) need some kind of reprimand, training, etc. Not to be put back on the job the next week. That just lets them know they can get away with it.
The tape NEVER tells the whole tale. There's ALWAYS more to meet the eye than what the public sees. Remember, better to taser than to use a gun, that's why they're so popular now in schools.
And Talesin, you don't attack policemen when they're doing their job ... think about it.
tankefuglOne Script To Rule Them All...Trondheim, NorwayJoin Date: 2002-11-14Member: 8641Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
Better give a hug than use a taser aswell, so with that logic they should be hugging <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
<!--quoteo(post=1580321:date=Nov 24 2006, 07:39 AM:name=tankefugl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tankefugl @ Nov 24 2006, 07:39 AM) [snapback]1580321[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Better give a hug than use a taser aswell, so with that logic they should be hugging <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
(I doubt that'd sparked a debate, though.) <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not so sure. Something tells me that if they'd repateded hugged him, there would be alot more people worried about this, and alot more people calling for the officer's dismissal. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
Haha.. "Stand up or you're gonna get hugged again! Stand up!"
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
Depot, in this case the tape and eyewitness accounts coincide. They also conflict with the officers' statements that he was inciting a riot. At this point it's pretty plain that the officers are lying out their respective orifices, in an attempt to avoid losing their jobs for repeatedly tasering a compliant subject.
And yes, using a taser is better than using a gun. But neither was needed in this instance, and a taser is still more than a little extreme for the situation.
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
If you've ever been in a position of authority in a bad situation, trust me when I say you don't give a damn about trivial things like "giving out badge numbers" when you've got some kid making a huge scene. You want to gain control of the situation and eliminate the threat using graduated force. They told the guy to leave, he refused (Step 1: verbal confrontation). They showed the ability to use force if necessary (Step 2: Show). They attempted to remove him physically without using a weapon (Step 3: Shove). He refused to cooperate, so they used force (Step 4: Shoot). The steps I just laid out are actually the US Army's graduated steps for using lethal force, and notice how this is pretty much how it went down with a couple changes. Once somebody requires force, you use it until they are no longer a threat.
If at any point this guy had said "ok ok enough I'll leave", his pain would have ended immediately. Should the cops have stopped shocking him? No, because he wouldn't leave, and he obviously gave them issues when they tried to take him out. In a situation like that, you do <b>not</b> want people in the crowd jumping in the way asking for badge numbers. Telling them to get back or they'll be doing the funky chicken on the floor like the other guy is well within bounds. Keep context in mind when talking about these things, they matter a lot.
EpidemicDark Force GorgeJoin Date: 2003-06-29Member: 17781Members
edited November 2006
Context is a key, I grant you that Adj, however we have a severely different interprention of the context of this situation. First off, This wasnt the US army, they are trained to operate in another country, usually under war. We have here a guy who fail to produce a ID card in a semi-public library, he (according to eyewitness reports) agreed to go out while making abit of a scene. The cops sees fit to use a taser because he tells the cop to get off him. Yeah great, they couldn't just have restrained him or something? No, let's break some civil rights because some redneck cop couldn't be arsed. That the officer continued to use the taser while the target was not acting threatening (but disobedient) just goes to show the sadistic side of the cop, and tasering while handcuffed and threatening to taser a bystanding asking for the cop's badge is just a clearcut violation of any civilized country's bounds.
I repeat, the taser's use <i>should</i> be governed the same way as a gun, you should first threaten to see if the target will cooperate, then fire to disable (read: no boom headshot) or taser shock to take advantage of the window of opportunity to restrain him.
Yes, keep context in mind Ajd, you seem to think this was Al-Quada's headquarter or a ravaging riot. Y
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
No I gave an example of graduated force (one I happen to know well) and this is exactly what the cops did. The guy refused to follow directions given to him by a person with the authority to give him lawful directions. He resisted, and the cops used force to make him comply. The only question that needs to be asked here is did he continue attempting to resist being physically removed? If he did so, the police were well within limits to shock him a couple more times to get compliance.
EpidemicDark Force GorgeJoin Date: 2003-06-29Member: 17781Members
edited November 2006
Ok, let's make a few distinctions, what degree of force can police offs use in the circumstances you outlined? According to your definition, they seem to be entitled to anything. Also, what's your view on police officers being able to do this if the guy couldn't just say "ok ok, I'll cooperate"? and lastly, do you agree with the thesis that cops should use the least amount of force possible? (can be difficult in some cases, however cases like this it seems that you need to have a severely impaired jugdement to percieve the threat situation as calling for this amount of force)
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
edited November 2006
Actually, if you watch the tape he had screamed 'I'm not fighting you' and 'I'll leave' several times. The officers continued tasing him for not standing up, which in many instances, is impossible within three to five minutes after a full-cycle tasing. And they were administering several full cycles as 'punishment'.
Every officer and security guard I have shown this to (so far, four) have said that the officers were most definitely NOT justified in their use of force, and by all rights should be looking for new jobs at the very least.
Most of them went on to say that the officers were idiots. They placed themselves at risk, and were provoking the crowd, who were verbally unhappy and beginning to get very angry at their repeated abuse of a handcuffed individual. A single tasing cycle to provide an opportunity for handcuffing and restraint would have been borderline justified. At that point, carry the individual out bodily. Don't continue tasing and then THREATEN the crowd, when they demand your badge number; which, incidentally, you are REQUIRED to provide to any civilian who asks.
Threatening to utilize a taser on an unarmed non-physically-aggressive civilian who is simply requesting that information is assault. The fact that it described the use of a potentially-lethal weapon bumps it up from a simple misdemeanor to a full felony in the state of California. Even for a law enforcement officer.
[WHO]ThemYou can call me DaveJoin Date: 2002-12-11Member: 10593Members, Constellation
<!--quoteo(post=1580328:date=Nov 24 2006, 05:48 AM:name=Talesin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Talesin @ Nov 24 2006, 05:48 AM) [snapback]1580328[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Depot, in this case the tape and eyewitness accounts coincide. They also conflict with the officers' statements that he was inciting a riot. At this point it's pretty plain that the officers are lying out their respective orifices, in an attempt to avoid losing their jobs for repeatedly tasering a compliant subject.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Shaking free of an officers grip, yelling at them, and then going limp and refusing to move eliminates any qualification for the guy to be "a compliant subject".
2. His drama speeches while on the ground combined with the worked up students pacing around ready to let fists fly makes me believe that from an officer's point of view, he was indeed trying to incite a riot.
<!--quoteo(post=1580430:date=Nov 24 2006, 01:10 PM:name=Talesin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Talesin @ Nov 24 2006, 01:10 PM) [snapback]1580430[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> The officers continued tasing him for not standing up, which in many instances, is impossible within three to five minutes after a full-cycle tasing. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's a flat out lie. Did you even look at the videos I posted?
<!--quoteo(post=1580430:date=Nov 24 2006, 01:10 PM:name=Talesin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Talesin @ Nov 24 2006, 01:10 PM) [snapback]1580430[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Threatening to utilize a taser on an unarmed non-physically-aggressive civilian who is simply requesting that information is assault.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He's pacing back and forth in an aggressive manner. Did the officers leave the scene without handing out badge numbers? No.
TheAdjHe demanded a cool forum title of some type.Join Date: 2004-05-03Member: 28436Members, NS1 Playtester, Constellation
edited November 2006
<!--quoteo(post=1580429:date=Nov 24 2006, 03:52 PM:name=Epidemic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Epidemic @ Nov 24 2006, 03:52 PM) [snapback]1580429[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Ok, let's make a few distinctions, what degree of force can police offs use in the circumstances you outlined? According to your definition, they seem to be entitled to anything. Also, what's your view on police officers being able to do this if the guy couldn't just say "ok ok, I'll cooperate"? and lastly, do you agree with the thesis that cops should use the least amount of force possible? <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You seem to be confusing the least amount of force possible and what's reasonable. If the guy is physically resisting when officers try and remove him, they're not required to endanger themselves by going in fists swinging with this person. If they felt trying to physically remove the student even after he resisted would put them in a vulnerable position with all those students around them (they said they felt the student was inciting a riot), tasering him is an effective means of subduing him and not putting themselves in said vulnerable position.
EpidemicDark Force GorgeJoin Date: 2003-06-29Member: 17781Members
edited November 2006
<!--quoteo(post=1580440:date=Nov 24 2006, 10:35 AM:name=TheAdj)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheAdj @ Nov 24 2006, 10:35 AM) [snapback]1580440[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> You seem to be confusing the least amount of force possible and what's reasonable. If the guy is physically resisting when officers try and remove him, they're not required to endanger themselves by going in fists swinging with this person. If they felt trying to physically remove the student even after he resisted would put them in a vulnerable position with all those students around them (they said they felt the student was inciting a riot), tasering him is an effective means of subduing him and not putting themselves in said vulnerable position. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I outlined several proposals for different methods of subduction that would not involve around tasering multiple times. It could involve threatening with the use of tasering, which you may not think would be so effective since he still violently resisted after getting tasered the first time. But he might have gotten relatively ###### at being dealt violence when he didn't think that it was warranted. Percieved injustices can sometimes piss off the most goody-two-shoes. They could've also only tasered him once and then proceed to restrain him. Honestly, I can't see the risk in that, if they are 2 cops present, he wouldn't even be able to headbutt them. The man isnt even buff from looking at the footage. In the video, I see around 4-5 cops, and they have a relatively clear perimeter. The student might seem concerned, but it doesnt look like they're getting into a riot. It seems infact that the constant tasering would only elevate the atmosphere.
No, I think it's more likely that these cops couldn't stand being ###### with, and thus they wanted to teach him a lesson.
<!--quoteo(post=1579877:date=Nov 22 2006, 04:35 PM:name=TheAdj)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheAdj @ Nov 22 2006, 04:35 PM) [snapback]1579877[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If this student has followed officer's directions, he wouldn't have been doing the dolphin flop on the floor. That simple. Rather hilarious given I've been tasered before, I can't imagine not listening to someone after that unless I wanted to make a scene by being shocked senseless.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
At the heart of the matter, I 100% agree, however I think it's no excuse to deliberate overexercise physical authourity in general, whether or not this is the case here.
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
edited November 2006
Them, yes, I did watch the videos. The only one that did not cut immediately after the tasing, with the subject still on the ground showed no evidence of barbs in use, nor were either of the individuals holding him carrying a taser. It's quite possible that he simply tensed up while someone was using the 'display arc' function of the taser device. True, many in the second video did not fall immediately. All but one did end up lying down fully though, and he had been tased numerous times, with prior experience. In fact, all of the subjects were lain down specifically to recover.
A student would be unlikely to even be expecting to be tased (according to the UCLA campus police taser use rules, they are required to display the arc or laser before utilization), much less have any experience with the experience. It is not unbelievable that someone in that circumstance would be unable to stand, especially after being tased while in the midst of recovering from the initial shock. (no pun intended)
Also, the badge numbers were requested numerous times while the officers were abusing their detainee, all of which requests were ignored. And no badge numbers were neccessarily given, by the way, though the identities of those involved are unlikely to be mistaken, due to shift, assignment, and dispatch logs.
It's amusing to note that the officer responsible for tasing the victim both has a history of violence (shooting and wounding a homeless man), and was specifically FIRED from the long beach police department. He didn't quit, they booted him. And with the LEO-crunch going on down here, you've got to screw up in a <b>big</b> way to get kicked out.
Actually what the officer did seemed quite appropriate. You try to handle a disruptive college student. What you all fail to see is the fact City police officers don't come until AFTER campus security asks you to leave. Please note.
Campus security cannot do anything to you. In California unless your carrying a badge you cannot make a arrest. So it makes sense that it was probably campus security who phoned in the police help. The correct action made in my opinion.
"Anyone here been arrested by a Mall Cop?"
Also. Part of the reason police officers carry tazers is because they work. Every department who has them issued have less occurances of violence, uses of lethal force, and most importantly officer injury.
The fact the kid was in cuffs before they tazed him is all I have to see.
Also that same police officer could just of easily beat him, OCed (pepper spray) him. The tazer was the suited choice because there was a crowd.
TalesinOur own little well of hateJoin Date: 2002-11-08Member: 7710NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators
edited November 2006
Uh, no. Those were Campus Police, not 'city'. Colleges out here have 'police' departments on-site. They can't carry firearms without a civilian-grade permit, though they can much more easily be certified for pepper spray or taser permits during the course of duty. They can also make arrests. These aren't your 'mall cops', they hover somewhere between rent-a-pigs and actual police officers, and have worse ego problems than a sheriff in a truckstop town frequented by the highway patrol.
Again. This was an outright overreaction and blatant abuse of power/authority. I can only hope that the officers responsible will be on the chopping block ASAP, as they rightly should.
Talesin covered most of it, so let me just comment on two remarks that stood out to me:
<!--quoteo(post=1580830:date=Nov 26 2006, 08:12 AM:name=Revlic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Revlic @ Nov 26 2006, 08:12 AM) [snapback]1580830[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> [...]The fact the kid was in cuffs before they tazed him is all I have to see.[...]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> He wasn't. They tased him first, then proceeded to handcuff him.
<!--quoteo(post=1580830:date=Nov 26 2006, 08:12 AM:name=Revlic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Revlic @ Nov 26 2006, 08:12 AM) [snapback]1580830[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> [...]Also that same police officer could just of easily beat him, OCed (pepper spray) him. The tazer was the suited choice because there was a crowd. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Wait, that is commendable? He chose not to batter the victim because there were wittnesses? What a hero! Please tell me I misunderstood that. I'm not trying to twist your words against you, but that is how I read them. Please clarify.
<!--quoteo(post=1580878:date=Nov 26 2006, 08:05 AM:name=lolfighter)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(lolfighter @ Nov 26 2006, 08:05 AM) [snapback]1580878[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Wait, that is commendable? He chose not to batter the victim because there were wittnesses? What a hero! Please tell me I misunderstood that. I'm not trying to twist your words against you, but that is how I read them. Please clarify. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think he meant that beatings more often that not lead to permanent or prolonged physical damage, and pepper spray would make everyone in the room choke. Probably a bad idea to use pepper spray indoors.
Comments
Things to note from the video. He's getting shot with the barbs (not the drive-stun like at UCLA), and from my knowledge, getting shot with the barbs is a far more aggressive experience than the drive-stun as it removes the electrical resistance of your skin from the process. Although the video does a time cut so we can't tell how long he was sitting there, HE'S FINE AND HAS A FREAKING SMILE ON HIS FACE.
And the very fact that you can go to a police station and ask to be tazed reinforces my opinion that their use in the thread video doesn't qualify as brutality.
We need more input from actual police here. Especially from those that make their rounds near UCLA. Of all the people who would know what would have happened without the usage of tazers, it's other cops in the area with street experience.
And to anyone still defending people's rights to give an officer crap from grabbing your arm, you're just being naive. The effectiveness of law enforcement depends as much on the sense of invisible authority as it does on physical police presence. You show me a community where people regularly give officers crap and I'll show you a community with a high crime rate.
EDIT: found a more useful video pertaining to mobility immediately after get tazed. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR3Fa4yZ-G4&NR" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RR3Fa4yZ-G4&NR</a> . After watching the video, I don't believe it would be difficult to get back up after a tazing.
EDIT2: And another <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEPSOlhHS4Q&NR" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEPSOlhHS4Q&NR</a> . Notice the laughter on the part of the tazee.
And to anyone still defending people's rights to give an officer crap from grabbing your arm, you're just being naive. The effectiveness of law enforcement depends as much on the sense of invisible authority as it does on physical police presence. You show me a community where people regularly give officers crap and I'll show you a community with a high crime rate.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I doubt there is such a connection. Can you support this claim with any evidence?
I doubt there is such a connection. Can you support this claim with any evidence?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you look at the UK I'd imagine statistics for areas with high council housing would back it up.
You show me a community where people regularly give officers crap and I'll show you a community with a high crime rate.
So, the logical progression is that communities that give officers crap are more likely to produce criminals.
Thaldarin, your example would, at best, show that criminals are more likely to give officers crap.
This is just a correlation right now, and a contested correlation at that, and one I personally don't buy.
Even if it were demonstrated that areas with high criminality produce more crap for police, I can't see how one could jump to the conclusion that people who give officers crap are more likely to be criminals. ( and therefore deserving of harsh treatment ).
The justifaction for this brutality is that the person was a threat to the police officer, not that the person offended the police officer.
After some thinking on the subject and reading through the thread, it appears to me that this is the core issue here.
Stand up or you get tased again? Where is the lack of brutality in that? Where is the student a threat there? All you have to do is pick him up and carry him out to the car and throw him in the back.
In line with <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->The justifaction for this brutality is that the person was a threat to the police officer, not that the person offended the police officer.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> it seem as though it is because the police a) can't be bothered to get their hands dirty and carry him out by his arms and legs and b) they are generally offended by his lack of respect and cursing.
I think if they knew they were being filmed they would never have acted in that way and would never have got the taser out.
- Was the student a sufficient threat to the police officers to warrant the use of a taser?
- Was the student a sufficient threat to the environment (other students, materials, etc.) the police officers were set to protect to warrant the use of a taser?
However, if, like on many college campuses, the students have a history of bucking authority and making scenes, then this incident may have been a breaking point that has been coming for quite awhile. Unfortunately for those involved, they happened to be in the wrong place and the wrong time. That's the story of history though; the story of conflict.
We could also use some reliable input on the role of tasers in American police forces, otherwise we'll all just look even more pompus that we already do by making more wild assumptions. :/
===
As a side note, I recommend we stop titling threads so aggressively. It immediately puts the opposition on the defensive, and that's never a good way to start a discussion, one side at the other's throat. I think we should make them instead a proposition. To use this thread as example, it might better be phrased "Student tazed 5 times at UCLA, is this Brutality?" or some such.
I could very well say, "Kerry is the antichrist" in an attempt to start a discussion, but I won't get nearly as effective of a reply as if I would have said, "I'm not sure of Kerry's intentions." I'll mull over adding this as a rule, if anyone has input.
In the end, the guy may have deserved the first tasering, but I can't say for sure without knowing how it all began. At that point, he went limp in protest. Again, maybe not the best idea, but all the cops had to do was put 2 guys on him to drag him out. Repeated tasering was not needed, there was nothing there to justify the tasering. All that did was make him stay limp. The guy was handcuffed and not fighting back, he was no threat whatsoever to anyone. He may have been a moron, a drama queen, whatever but he still was no threat. Not gonna fix the problem, and totally not needed.
On top of that, the refusal to give badge numbers, to stop and even threatening to taser people trying to help this highly questionable act. Corrupted by power. It can happen to anyone (just Google the Stanford Prison Experiment for proof), but it *needs* to be dealt with. The offending officer(s) need some kind of reprimand, training, etc. Not to be put back on the job the next week. That just lets them know they can get away with it.
And Talesin, you don't attack policemen when they're doing their job ... think about it.
(I doubt that'd sparked a debate, though.)
Better give a hug than use a taser aswell, so with that logic they should be hugging <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
(I doubt that'd sparked a debate, though.)
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'm not so sure. Something tells me that if they'd repateded hugged him, there would be alot more people worried about this, and alot more people calling for the officer's dismissal. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
Haha.. "Stand up or you're gonna get hugged again! Stand up!"
Good stuff.
And yes, using a taser is better than using a gun. But neither was needed in this instance, and a taser is still more than a little extreme for the situation.
If at any point this guy had said "ok ok enough I'll leave", his pain would have ended immediately. Should the cops have stopped shocking him? No, because he wouldn't leave, and he obviously gave them issues when they tried to take him out. In a situation like that, you do <b>not</b> want people in the crowd jumping in the way asking for badge numbers. Telling them to get back or they'll be doing the funky chicken on the floor like the other guy is well within bounds. Keep context in mind when talking about these things, they matter a lot.
I repeat, the taser's use <i>should</i> be governed the same way as a gun, you should first threaten to see if the target will cooperate, then fire to disable (read: no boom headshot) or taser shock to take advantage of the window of opportunity to restrain him.
Yes, keep context in mind Ajd, you seem to think this was Al-Quada's headquarter or a ravaging riot. Y
Every officer and security guard I have shown this to (so far, four) have said that the officers were most definitely NOT justified in their use of force, and by all rights should be looking for new jobs at the very least.
Most of them went on to say that the officers were idiots. They placed themselves at risk, and were provoking the crowd, who were verbally unhappy and beginning to get very angry at their repeated abuse of a handcuffed individual. A single tasing cycle to provide an opportunity for handcuffing and restraint would have been borderline justified. At that point, carry the individual out bodily. Don't continue tasing and then THREATEN the crowd, when they demand your badge number; which, incidentally, you are REQUIRED to provide to any civilian who asks.
Threatening to utilize a taser on an unarmed non-physically-aggressive civilian who is simply requesting that information is assault. The fact that it described the use of a potentially-lethal weapon bumps it up from a simple misdemeanor to a full felony in the state of California. Even for a law enforcement officer.
Depot, in this case the tape and eyewitness accounts coincide. They also conflict with the officers' statements that he was inciting a riot. At this point it's pretty plain that the officers are lying out their respective orifices, in an attempt to avoid losing their jobs for repeatedly tasering a compliant subject.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Shaking free of an officers grip, yelling at them, and then going limp and refusing to move eliminates any qualification for the guy to be "a compliant subject".
2. His drama speeches while on the ground combined with the worked up students pacing around ready to let fists fly makes me believe that from an officer's point of view, he was indeed trying to incite a riot.
<!--quoteo(post=1580430:date=Nov 24 2006, 01:10 PM:name=Talesin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Talesin @ Nov 24 2006, 01:10 PM) [snapback]1580430[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
The officers continued tasing him for not standing up, which in many instances, is impossible within three to five minutes after a full-cycle tasing.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's a flat out lie. Did you even look at the videos I posted?
<!--quoteo(post=1580430:date=Nov 24 2006, 01:10 PM:name=Talesin)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Talesin @ Nov 24 2006, 01:10 PM) [snapback]1580430[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Threatening to utilize a taser on an unarmed non-physically-aggressive civilian who is simply requesting that information is assault.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He's pacing back and forth in an aggressive manner. Did the officers leave the scene without handing out badge numbers? No.
Ok, let's make a few distinctions, what degree of force can police offs use in the circumstances you outlined? According to your definition, they seem to be entitled to anything. Also, what's your view on police officers being able to do this if the guy couldn't just say "ok ok, I'll cooperate"? and lastly, do you agree with the thesis that cops should use the least amount of force possible?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You seem to be confusing the least amount of force possible and what's reasonable. If the guy is physically resisting when officers try and remove him, they're not required to endanger themselves by going in fists swinging with this person. If they felt trying to physically remove the student even after he resisted would put them in a vulnerable position with all those students around them (they said they felt the student was inciting a riot), tasering him is an effective means of subduing him and not putting themselves in said vulnerable position.
You seem to be confusing the least amount of force possible and what's reasonable. If the guy is physically resisting when officers try and remove him, they're not required to endanger themselves by going in fists swinging with this person. If they felt trying to physically remove the student even after he resisted would put them in a vulnerable position with all those students around them (they said they felt the student was inciting a riot), tasering him is an effective means of subduing him and not putting themselves in said vulnerable position.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I outlined several proposals for different methods of subduction that would not involve around tasering multiple times. It could involve threatening with the use of tasering, which you may not think would be so effective since he still violently resisted after getting tasered the first time. But he might have gotten relatively ###### at being dealt violence when he didn't think that it was warranted. Percieved injustices can sometimes piss off the most goody-two-shoes.
They could've also only tasered him once and then proceed to restrain him. Honestly, I can't see the risk in that, if they are 2 cops present, he wouldn't even be able to headbutt them. The man isnt even buff from looking at the footage.
In the video, I see around 4-5 cops, and they have a relatively clear perimeter. The student might seem concerned, but it doesnt look like they're getting into a riot. It seems infact that the constant tasering would only elevate the atmosphere.
No, I think it's more likely that these cops couldn't stand being ###### with, and thus they wanted to teach him a lesson.
<!--quoteo(post=1579877:date=Nov 22 2006, 04:35 PM:name=TheAdj)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheAdj @ Nov 22 2006, 04:35 PM) [snapback]1579877[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If this student has followed officer's directions, he wouldn't have been doing the dolphin flop on the floor. That simple. Rather hilarious given I've been tasered before, I can't imagine not listening to someone after that unless I wanted to make a scene by being shocked senseless.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
At the heart of the matter, I 100% agree, however I think it's no excuse to deliberate overexercise physical authourity in general, whether or not this is the case here.
Edit: Lousy lousy grammar.
A student would be unlikely to even be expecting to be tased (according to the UCLA campus police taser use rules, they are required to display the arc or laser before utilization), much less have any experience with the experience. It is not unbelievable that someone in that circumstance would be unable to stand, especially after being tased while in the midst of recovering from the initial shock. (no pun intended)
Also, the badge numbers were requested numerous times while the officers were abusing their detainee, all of which requests were ignored. And no badge numbers were neccessarily given, by the way, though the identities of those involved are unlikely to be mistaken, due to shift, assignment, and dispatch logs.
It's amusing to note that the officer responsible for tasing the victim both has a history of violence (shooting and wounding a homeless man), and was specifically FIRED from the long beach police department. He didn't quit, they booted him. And with the LEO-crunch going on down here, you've got to screw up in a <b>big</b> way to get kicked out.
Campus security cannot do anything to you. In California unless your carrying a badge you cannot make a arrest. So it makes sense that it was probably campus security who phoned in the police help. The correct action made in my opinion.
"Anyone here been arrested by a Mall Cop?"
Also. Part of the reason police officers carry tazers is because they work. Every department who has them issued have less occurances of violence, uses of lethal force, and most importantly officer injury.
The fact the kid was in cuffs before they tazed him is all I have to see.
Also that same police officer could just of easily beat him, OCed (pepper spray) him. The tazer was the suited choice because there was a crowd.
Again. This was an outright overreaction and blatant abuse of power/authority. I can only hope that the officers responsible will be on the chopping block ASAP, as they rightly should.
<!--quoteo(post=1580830:date=Nov 26 2006, 08:12 AM:name=Revlic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Revlic @ Nov 26 2006, 08:12 AM) [snapback]1580830[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
[...]The fact the kid was in cuffs before they tazed him is all I have to see.[...]<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
He wasn't. They tased him first, then proceeded to handcuff him.
<!--quoteo(post=1580830:date=Nov 26 2006, 08:12 AM:name=Revlic)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Revlic @ Nov 26 2006, 08:12 AM) [snapback]1580830[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
[...]Also that same police officer could just of easily beat him, OCed (pepper spray) him. The tazer was the suited choice because there was a crowd.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wait, that is commendable? He chose not to batter the victim because there were wittnesses? What a hero!
Please tell me I misunderstood that. I'm not trying to twist your words against you, but that is how I read them. Please clarify.
Wait, that is commendable? He chose not to batter the victim because there were wittnesses? What a hero!
Please tell me I misunderstood that. I'm not trying to twist your words against you, but that is how I read them. Please clarify.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think he meant that beatings more often that not lead to permanent or prolonged physical damage, and pepper spray would make everyone in the room choke. Probably a bad idea to use pepper spray indoors.