Author Topic: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum  (Read 16808 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Hang on a sec. If tasers are not used as defensive weapons then the description you've just given is not of a weapon to be used for the protection of the police officer but of a weapon of torture. You can get compliance by twisting a suspects fingers back or pulling his hair and then slamming him into a wall too. Would those be alright too? Or is it simply the fact that the taser leaves no lasting mark that makes it okay?

 If you're claiming that a taser is NOT a weapon to be used for protecting an officer under threat but is in fact solely for the purpose of causing pain in a subject so that he'll do what you tell him to then you've forced me to revise my position on tasers and call for a ban on them.

Deliberately inflicting pain on someone so that they'll do what you tell them to is not how police should be acting in a civilised society. 
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
The more I think about the video, the more it seems simply like inexperienced police officers doing the stuff that was taught them in the academy. Unfortunately, this was not even close to a drunken brawler who resists arrest, but a student who simply freaked out when officers came by him when he was asking a question - in a University!

For me it seems like an excessive use of force, and also totally unnecessary. I'd like to know what Kerry himself thought of the situation, it is not too nice public image for him either. Free Speech applies to everyone, and you have to tolerate people talking about the things the student addressed - even though against the rules, but not against the law. Otherwise remember that in some circumstances that person who will not be tolerated by the group can be you! Besides, it was not the job of the police to note the student that he had crossed the line - that is reserved to the chair of the panel.  I have seen similar politically minded types here, they are mostly simply ignored and grow up to be good parents (excuse me my cynicism).

Besides, after reading through some comments in the web and talking with people coming from USA, not all are happy with the election results and some (albeit a small percentage) suspect a rig, so I see the question justified, maybe against the rules of the panel, but still justified. If you cannot ask difficult questions with hundreds of people witnessing, what can you learn about the politician? Had he not been tasered and the stuff he had said had been ridiculous, this might still be a youtube clip with a title "Crazy conspiracy nut" or something like that, i.e. the guy would have made a fool out of himself and nobody would care about the stuff he said.

Mika
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.

 

Offline Nuke

  • Ka-Boom!
  • 212
  • Mutants Worship Me
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
well they needed practice. when one of those cops faces a suicidal 6 year old he should be all the more wiser :D
I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

Nuke's Scripting SVN

 

Offline TrashMan

  • T-tower Avenger. srsly.
  • 213
  • God-Emperor of your kind!
    • FLAMES OF WAR
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Meh ...tazers incapacitate shortly but they don't hurt half as much as you'd think. They're not a brutal tool at all.
Nobody dies as a virgin - the life ****s us all!

You're a wrongularity from which no right can escape!

 
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Deliberately inflicting pain on someone so that they'll do what you tell them to is not how police should be acting in a civilised society. 

Yeah!  We should just ask them politely (verbal abuse is abuse too!) to stop committing a crime until they grudgingly agree and tell the police "Ok ok, I was a jerk.  You can cuff me now."  Then everybody drives down to the pub, buys each other drinks, laughs it off, and then go dancing hand in hand in a field of beautiful flowers.

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Or you could arrest them and put them on trial all the while obeying the cruel and unusual clause that is in the constitution.
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

  
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Or you could arrest them and put them on trial all the while obeying the cruel and unusual clause that is in the constitution.

I think I would rather go running in a field of flowers.  But that's just me.  Being arrested just seems a bit too cruel and unusual.

Hahahha ok ok I'll stop trolling.  But seriously - you've got a point.  It really just comes down to what your view of "cruel and unusual" is.  My opinion - tasering is a much better and more humane option than ripping somebody's arm out of their socket to try to cuff them when they're resisting arrest.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2007, 05:48:35 pm by Hazaanko »

 

Offline Nuke

  • Ka-Boom!
  • 212
  • Mutants Worship Me
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
the sad thing is theyre gonna go through this debate each and every time they come out with a better non-leathal weapon. such as a sonic or optical hypnotic system that will render the suspect in a trance within a second of having the device pointed at em with no pain and no ill effects then they will still call the device cruel and unusual. non leathal weapons are a major field of study theese days and there are more meathods and aproaches out there than you can imagine. this kind of debate will simply slow down the development of those ideas by burying them in controversy and bull**** debate. bottom line non-leathal weapons arent perfect, but how can they be when somone files a lawsuit every time a tazer gets used. or we can do it the old fashoned way and use an axe.
I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.

Nuke's Scripting SVN

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Hang on a sec. If tasers are not used as defensive weapons then the description you've just given is not of a weapon to be used for the protection of the police officer but of a weapon of torture. You can get compliance by twisting a suspects fingers back or pulling his hair and then slamming him into a wall too. Would those be alright too? Or is it simply the fact that the taser leaves no lasting mark that makes it okay?

 If you're claiming that a taser is NOT a weapon to be used for protecting an officer under threat but is in fact solely for the purpose of causing pain in a subject so that he'll do what you tell him to then you've forced me to revise my position on tasers and call for a ban on them.

Considering that tazers usually don't cause damage....ok fine you're right, a defensive weapon, and works good in the offense too. As far as tazers being torture? Naah...torture would be considered several spray of pepper spray in the face, now you're getting closer to torture. And if not torture then it's the person getting arrested receiving a beat down when he resists, and don't forget the guns, don't forget the guns. The more you go down the list of things for cops to use the worse it gets.

Deliberately inflicting pain on someone so that they'll do what you tell them to is not how police should be acting in a civilised society. 

YES IT IS! How civilized are ****ing criminals these days (they aren't)? I mean ****, the nastiest criminals are animals, from the ones who shoot cops, mollesting your kids, to robbing your grandma. There's no ****ing way you're going to get a cop killer to obey the law without pulling out justices rod of correction. Criminals would completely take advantage of the fact that cops wouldn't be allowed to inflict pain. More criminals would be able to escape, gets cops in more dangerous situations, and there would especially be a whole bunch of lawsuits coming from those arrested because the cop had to inflict some pain to get them into the police car. The cops would be a big group of panzies, and if anyone had a vengence agains't them, that'd also be a good time to gang up on them.

So no tazers = get more and more and more traquilizer guns :nod: i see how you're thinking now man, replace every tazer in the world that a cop has with a tranq. gun ;)

I think I would rather go running in a field of flowers.  But that's just me.  Being arrested just seems a bit too cruel and unusual.

Hahahha ok ok I'll stop trolling.  But seriously - you've got a point.  It really just comes down to what your view of "cruel and unusual" is.  My opinion - tasering is a much better and more humane option than ripping somebody's arm out of their socket to try to cuff them when they're resisting arrest.

I'd love to do that when arrested :nod: I mean, you're just sooo right, being arrested is a violation of ones freedom and rights ;7 And the pigs need to be hated for taking away people's freedom and rights when the criminal will never figure this out at all the he revoked his rights and freedom the moment he committed a crime :lol:

The more I think about the video, the more it seems simply like inexperienced police officers doing the stuff that was taught them in the academy. Unfortunately, this was not even close to a drunken brawler who resists arrest, but a student who simply freaked out when officers came by him when he was asking a question - in a University!

For me it seems like an excessive use of force, and also totally unnecessary. I'd like to know what Kerry himself thought of the situation, it is not too nice public image for him either. Free Speech applies to everyone, and you have to tolerate people talking about the things the student addressed - even though against the rules, but not against the law. Otherwise remember that in some circumstances that person who will not be tolerated by the group can be you! Besides, it was not the job of the police to note the student that he had crossed the line - that is reserved to the chair of the panel.  I have seen similar politically minded types here, they are mostly simply ignored and grow up to be good parents (excuse me my cynicism).

Besides, after reading through some comments in the web and talking with people coming from USA, not all are happy with the election results and some (albeit a small percentage) suspect a rig, so I see the question justified, maybe against the rules of the panel, but still justified. If you cannot ask difficult questions with hundreds of people witnessing, what can you learn about the politician? Had he not been tasered and the stuff he had said had been ridiculous, this might still be a youtube clip with a title "Crazy conspiracy nut" or something like that, i.e. the guy would have made a fool out of himself and nobody would care about the stuff he said.

Mika

That guy didn't get taken away for asking the wrong questions. WTF, these weren't secret undercover Kerry escort police, these were just campus cops and **** if they're going to know when someone is or isn't going to ask Kerry the right questions. They're there to keep the order and escort those who break the rules. Kerry did start answering his questions when they were holding down andrew meyers. Watch more footage of the incident and compare it to the news reports. You'll learn some stuff that way, you'll learn what happened, versus what didn't happen a lot better. This guy got taken out for a very different reason. That's why i think the whole misconstruing is retarded because now people are using this as saying freedom of speech of his was violated. It wasn't, he ran to the front of the line and stole the microphone, he was going to get escorted out, but then he freaked. In fact he freaked out so much, it was like a big indicator that he definitely knew that he did something wrong on purpose. Otherwise he would have shut the **** up and get escorted peacefully.

This was not about violation of freedom of speech.
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline Agent_Koopa

  • 28
  • These words make the page load that much slower.
Interestingly enough, this signature is none of the following:
A witty remark on whatever sad state of affairs the world may or may not be in
A series of localized forum in-jokes
A clever and self-referential comment on the nature of signatures themselves.

Hobo Queens are Crowned, but Hobo Kings are Found.

 

Offline BloodEagle

  • 210
  • Bleeding Paradox!
    • Steam
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Police officers in a civilized society.

Start at 2:18 if you're lazy.

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Steam
    • Something

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Those ytmnd's are priceless. :lol:
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Considering that tazers usually don't cause damage....ok fine you're right, a defensive weapon, and works good in the offense too. As far as tazers being torture? Naah...torture would be considered several spray of pepper spray in the face, now you're getting closer to torture.

There have been lots of cases where the suspect has been repeatedly tasered. Now if that was done because the suspect continued to be a threat after the first application then I have no problem with its use but if as you now claim the taser is only there to get the suspect to do what the police want then how is that different from using the taser back in the police station to get a confession? Surely the police want that too?

Quote
And if not torture then it's the person getting arrested receiving a beat down when he resists, and don't forget the guns, don't forget the guns. The more you go down the list of things for cops to use the worse it gets.

But guns are for the defence of the police. If a suspect has a gun and is an imminent danger to you, your fellow officers or the general public, you need to be able to take him down as quickly as possible. You're the one claiming that the taser isn't for the defence of any of those people. You're the one saying it's basically a human version of a cattle prod. In which case it shouldn't be allowed.

Criminals would completely take advantage of the fact that cops wouldn't be allowed to inflict pain. More criminals would be able to escape, gets cops in more dangerous situations, and there would especially be a whole bunch of lawsuits coming from those arrested because the cop had to inflict some pain to get them into the police car. The cops would be a big group of panzies, and if anyone had a vengence agains't them, that'd also be a good time to gang up on them.

I'm not saying you should panzify the police. If a suspect bangs his head on the cop car struggling against the police then that's his own fault. Tough luck. If however the police smack his head against the car first so that he won't stuggle when they put him in the car then it's not same thing. Can you not see the difference between these two senarios? Police are allowed to use force in apprehending criminals. What they shouldn't be allowed to do is to deliberately inflict pain in order to get compliance.

You're saying that the main use of the taser is not to stop the criminal from getting away, not to apprehend the criminal but to intentionally inflict pain on him so that he won't cause the police any further problems. How is that different from slamming his face into the door to shut him up?

Or is it that you want to live in a world where the police are allowed to beat up suspects if they are causing them trouble?
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline S-99

  • MC Hammer
  • 210
  • A one hit wonder, you still want to touch this.
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Lol, cattle prod, i only mentioned that the "don't tazer me bro" guy should have gotten that. Sometimes suspects need to be repeatedly tazered. Drunk people who want to get away is one example, and a whole bunch of others (some people can withstand being tazered more than once so being tazered more than once can be necessary). And the only kind of situations i was mentioning tazers was when people get arrested and resist. Not for confessions, that's going over the top.

Police will use guns when they needs to use guns, police will use mace when they  need to use mace, police will use batons when they need to use batons, police will use tazers when they need to use tazers.

Really the only thing criminals respond to if they don't go quietly when being arrested is pain. Tazers are also used for keeping criminals from getting away. What do you think tazers do really? They cause pain, and when someone uses one, that means they are intentionally causing someone pain. Apply this to people who are going to get away and resisting arrest, those types of people will only submit to the cops through the use of pain. So when a cop whips out a tazer they intend to cause the criminal pain...now here's the ringer, it's really great. They intend to cause the criminal pain for a purpose called apprehension. Whether its stopping someone from getting away or making someone stop resisting.

Police are allowed to use force in apprehending criminals. What they shouldn't be allowed to do is to deliberately inflict pain in order to get compliance.

This is just wierd. Police are allowed to use force, but they can't deliberately cause pain while using force? Write up a new definition of force to make yourself happier in your dreamland. Force is a pretty broad term.
Every pilot's goal is to rise up in the ranks and go beyond their purpose to a place of command on a very big ship. Like the colossus; to baseball bat everyone.

SMBFD

I won't use google for you.

An0n sucks my Jesus ring.

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
If a police man slams a suspects head into the floor as he tackles him to the ground to arrest him that's valid. If 5 fellow officers hold the suspect while he slams the suspects head into the floor to stop him resisting arrest that's not valid.

Why are you having trouble with such a simple premise?
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
I'm not saying you should panzify the police. If a suspect bangs his head on the cop car struggling against the police then that's his own fault. Tough luck. If however the police smack his head against the car first so that he won't stuggle when they put him in the car then it's not same thing. Can you not see the difference between these two senarios? Police are allowed to use force in apprehending criminals. What they shouldn't be allowed to do is to deliberately inflict pain in order to get compliance.

You're saying that the main use of the taser is not to stop the criminal from getting away, not to apprehend the criminal but to intentionally inflict pain on him so that he won't cause the police any further problems. How is that different from slamming his face into the door to shut him up?

Or is it that you want to live in a world where the police are allowed to beat up suspects if they are causing them trouble?

The lack of understanding that people have about these things astounds me sometimes.  I'm not sure if I get it because I've been in a few fights of my own, been in wrestling/karate etc... or because I have a few friends in the police that have told me how and why they do the things that they do.

In a physical 'exchange of force,' from an onlooker's perspective, there is -literally- no difference between a suspect inflicting an injury upon themselves or a cop doing it for them.  Cops are not superhuman.  This isn't the movies.  This isn't Katie "Just Shoot His Hands" Couric.  In hand to hand combat, things just happen.  Intent has nothing to do with it.  I could throw my arm trying to block somebody from grabbing me and end up cracking their skull by complete accident.

Now... somebody is physically resisting arrest.  He/she is a potential danger to #1: himself/herself, #2: the police, and #3: others around him.  The police are in just as much danger, if not more, than the offender.  So in short, yes that is a world that I would want to live in "where the police are allowed to beat up suspects if they are causing them trouble."  Because if I had to choose between a law-abiding police officer getting injured vs. a law-breaker getting injured.... I think the choice would be obvious.  Now, thank God/Allah/StephenColbert/Gandalf/Whoever that we have something like the taser where there is virtually no risk of injury to either sides.

P.S> Now, if we were talking about improper use of force (when an officer uses force FAR above what is necessary to subdue a criminal): I can see where you're coming from, in which case I completely apologize for my rant.  :P :yes:


edit - edited for religious neutrality   :nervous:

 

Offline karajorma

  • King Louie - Jungle VIP
  • Administrator
  • 214
    • Karajorma's Freespace FAQ
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
P.S> Now, if we were talking about improper use of force (when an officer uses force FAR above what is necessary to subdue a criminal): I can see where you're coming from, in which case I completely apologize for my rant.  :P :yes:

Of course I'm talking about improper use of force. :rolleyes:

This entire discussion is about whether the use of a taser when you have 6 officers holding a man down is improper use of force.

Only a moron would say that the police should apprehend all suspects by tapping them on the shoulder and saying "Would you accompany me to the station please". So your entire rant was directed at a strawman.
Karajorma's Freespace FAQ. It's almost like asking me yourself.

[ Diaspora ] - [ Seeds Of Rebellion ] - [ Mind Games ]

 

Offline Mika

  • 28
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
Ah, didn't notice the other link in the first post. That definetely gives a different idea of the events that took place. No it is not a free speech issue, he is at least partially acting up the stuff and thinks that people will support him. Still, escorting someone out for that? What did he do before the video took place?

Mika
Relaxed movement is always more effective than forced movement.

 

Offline TrashMan

  • T-tower Avenger. srsly.
  • 213
  • God-Emperor of your kind!
    • FLAMES OF WAR
Re: Student Tasered at a Speech Forum
There have been lots of cases where the suspect has been repeatedly tasered. Now if that was done because the suspect continued to be a threat after the first application then I have no problem with its use but if as you now claim the taser is only there to get the suspect to do what the police want then how is that different from using the taser back in the police station to get a confession? Surely the police want that too?

You're comparing torture to get a confession with aresting a uncompliant criminal? :wtf:



Quote
I'm not saying you should panzify the police. If a suspect bangs his head on the cop car struggling against the police then that's his own fault. Tough luck. If however the police smack his head against the car first so that he won't stuggle when they put him in the car then it's not same thing. Can you not see the difference between these two senarios? Police are allowed to use force in apprehending criminals. What they shouldn't be allowed to do is to deliberately inflict pain in order to get compliance.

Rubbish. If he won't comply than bang some sense into his head. If he's not resisting - well, thats a whole nother ball of beezwax.


Quote
You're saying that the main use of the taser is not to stop the criminal from getting away, not to apprehend the criminal but to intentionally inflict pain on him so that he won't cause the police any further problems. How is that different from slamming his face into the door to shut him up?
Or is it that you want to live in a world where the police are allowed to beat up suspects if they are causing them trouble?

Tazering  DOES NOT EQUAL beating up. And if somone is giving police trouble, then yes...tazer away.

You ARE trying to panzify the police.. :rolleyes:


Quote
This entire discussion is about whether the use of a taser when you have 6 officers holding a man down is improper use of force.

Not if he's still resisting... and b.t.w. - whouldn't being held by 6 people count as MORE force than a tazer zap????

Nobody dies as a virgin - the life ****s us all!

You're a wrongularity from which no right can escape!