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
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
I mean, you're just sooo right, being arrested is a violation of ones freedom and rights
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
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.
