Guy at UCLA computer lab gets tasered (now with youtube video!!)

[her209]

I didn't read through the thread but apparently the guy was an Arab.

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mill
I think the difference is he was leaving when they grabbed his arm (at least according to the paper). That was probably unnecessary and inflamed the situation. Part of being an authority figure is knowing how to peacefully resolve situations and not flanning the flames of a fire.

I think it was very necessary. I'm curious what somebody would be doing with unauthorized access to the Internet and why what he was doing was so important that he defied requests to leave. I'm sure the cops were curious too and may have asked him a couple quick questions before walking him outside. Cops also usually run your ID whenever they stop you for anything down to jaywalking just to check.

He wasn't unauthorized. He was a student at the University. He simply didn't have his ID.

Go drive a car without your license and/or insurance....then tell the cop that you are authorized and he can't take action against you...see what happens

Apples to Oranges. Driving a car requires a license. Accessing those computers only requires a Bruin Login (which he obvious had). He simply didn't have his BruinCard. There is a policy not a law which states you are supposed to have your BruinCard after 11. He didn't. He should have left and gotten his card. However, there's no reason to tazer him 5 times because he didn't have his BruinCard with him.

I never have said I agree with his "punishment" beyond maybe the initial first taze...I agree that it was probably excessive. All I have said is that there are a million ways he could have avoided all this for himself and I don't think the police were necessarily out of lines for what they are entailed to do.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mill
I think the difference is he was leaving when they grabbed his arm (at least according to the paper). That was probably unnecessary and inflamed the situation. Part of being an authority figure is knowing how to peacefully resolve situations and not flanning the flames of a fire.

I think it was very necessary. I'm curious what somebody would be doing with unauthorized access to the Internet and why what he was doing was so important that he defied requests to leave. I'm sure the cops were curious too and may have asked him a couple quick questions before walking him outside. Cops also usually run your ID whenever they stop you for anything down to jaywalking just to check.

He wasn't unauthorized. He was a student at the University. He simply didn't have his ID.

How were the authorities supposed to know that he was a student without an ID?

Shocking as it may seem, they could have asked him to go get it and until then leave the lab.

I still don't understand why UCLA doesn't have a login system. We do, and it prevents a non-Uni student from using the labs. There are even labs segregated by major, so that only people of a certain major can use a specific lab. Most of the labs aren't segregated, but some are.

Um...they asked him to leave the lab...isn't that what started the whole thing?

I don't know why people refuse to read the thread or posted articles, but no. They grabbed him arm when he was LEAVING. That is what started the problem.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mill
I think the difference is he was leaving when they grabbed his arm (at least according to the paper). That was probably unnecessary and inflamed the situation. Part of being an authority figure is knowing how to peacefully resolve situations and not flanning the flames of a fire.

I think it was very necessary. I'm curious what somebody would be doing with unauthorized access to the Internet and why what he was doing was so important that he defied requests to leave. I'm sure the cops were curious too and may have asked him a couple quick questions before walking him outside. Cops also usually run your ID whenever they stop you for anything down to jaywalking just to check.

He wasn't unauthorized. He was a student at the University. He simply didn't have his ID.

How were the authorities supposed to know that he was a student without an ID?

Shocking as it may seem, they could have asked him to go get it and until then leave the lab.

I still don't understand why UCLA doesn't have a login system. We do, and it prevents a non-Uni student from using the labs. There are even labs segregated by major, so that only people of a certain major can use a specific lab. Most of the labs aren't segregated, but some are.

It wasnt about using the computers in the lab. It was about creepy dudes being in there after 11pm, why there are random checks in the first place.

And he was walking out when they grabbed his arm.

 

[cessna152]

It just occured to me that the cops were herding him like a cow towards the exit with a prod. Maybe they shoulda put a leash on him too.

*zap*

"Stand up!" - move him a few feet towards the door.

*zap*

"Stand up! Stand up!" - move him a few more feet towards the door

-- repeat a few more times.

*** FYI, I'm being slightly facetious. But it did feel like they were using the tazer incorrectly. Why not just completely taze the guy and haul him off?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mill
I think the difference is he was leaving when they grabbed his arm (at least according to the paper). That was probably unnecessary and inflamed the situation. Part of being an authority figure is knowing how to peacefully resolve situations and not flanning the flames of a fire.

I think it was very necessary. I'm curious what somebody would be doing with unauthorized access to the Internet and why what he was doing was so important that he defied requests to leave. I'm sure the cops were curious too and may have asked him a couple quick questions before walking him outside. Cops also usually run your ID whenever they stop you for anything down to jaywalking just to check.

He wasn't unauthorized. He was a student at the University. He simply didn't have his ID.

Go drive a car without your license and/or insurance....then tell the cop that you are authorized and he can't take action against you...see what happens

Apples to Oranges. Driving a car requires a license. Accessing those computers only requires a Bruin Login (which he obvious had). He simply didn't have his BruinCard. There is a policy not a law which states you are supposed to have your BruinCard after 11. He didn't. He should have left and gotten his card. However, there's no reason to tazer him 5 times because he didn't have his BruinCard with him.

I never have said I agree with his "punishment" beyond maybe the initial first taze...I agree that it was probably excessive. All I have said is that there are a million ways he could have avoided all this for himself and I don't think the police were necessarily out of lines for what they are entailed to do.

I didn't realize they are there to enforce policies on someone who was walking out. Sounds like he simply didn't leave "quick" enough for them. Which, again, comes down to discretion, and that's something these officers woefully misused.

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mill
I think the difference is he was leaving when they grabbed his arm (at least according to the paper). That was probably unnecessary and inflamed the situation. Part of being an authority figure is knowing how to peacefully resolve situations and not flanning the flames of a fire.

I think it was very necessary. I'm curious what somebody would be doing with unauthorized access to the Internet and why what he was doing was so important that he defied requests to leave. I'm sure the cops were curious too and may have asked him a couple quick questions before walking him outside. Cops also usually run your ID whenever they stop you for anything down to jaywalking just to check.

He wasn't unauthorized. He was a student at the University. He simply didn't have his ID.

How were the authorities supposed to know that he was a student without an ID?

Shocking as it may seem, they could have asked him to go get it and until then leave the lab.

I still don't understand why UCLA doesn't have a login system. We do, and it prevents a non-Uni student from using the labs. There are even labs segregated by major, so that only people of a certain major can use a specific lab. Most of the labs aren't segregated, but some are.

Um...they asked him to leave the lab...isn't that what started the whole thing?

I don't know why people refuse to read the thread or posted articles, but no. They grabbed him arm when he was LEAVING. That is what started the problem.

I will agree that not doing that would probably have been better. But I see nothing wrong with doing what they did(grabbing his arm). He is the one that was out of line for flipping out over such a trivial thing as being escorted out of the room.

Just because a cop grabs my arm as I am complying with their instructions does not give me the right to all of a sudden ignore what they want me to do.

EDIT: for clarification

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mill
I think the difference is he was leaving when they grabbed his arm (at least according to the paper). That was probably unnecessary and inflamed the situation. Part of being an authority figure is knowing how to peacefully resolve situations and not flanning the flames of a fire.

I think it was very necessary. I'm curious what somebody would be doing with unauthorized access to the Internet and why what he was doing was so important that he defied requests to leave. I'm sure the cops were curious too and may have asked him a couple quick questions before walking him outside. Cops also usually run your ID whenever they stop you for anything down to jaywalking just to check.

He wasn't unauthorized. He was a student at the University. He simply didn't have his ID.

How were the authorities supposed to know that he was a student without an ID?

Shocking as it may seem, they could have asked him to go get it and until then leave the lab.

I still don't understand why UCLA doesn't have a login system. We do, and it prevents a non-Uni student from using the labs. There are even labs segregated by major, so that only people of a certain major can use a specific lab. Most of the labs aren't segregated, but some are.

Um...they asked him to leave the lab...isn't that what started the whole thing?

I don't know why people refuse to read the thread or posted articles, but no. They grabbed him arm when he was LEAVING. That is what started the problem.

I will agree that not doing that would probably have been better. But I see nothing wrong with doing what they did(grabbing his arm). He is the one that was out of line for flipping out over such a trivial thing as being escorted out of the room.

Just because a cop grabs my arm as I am complying with their instructions does not give me the right to all of a sudden ignore what they want me to do.

EDIT: for clarification

I might be crazy, but I think once you get tazed about 5 times every minute or so you have a hard time walking.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MisterJackson


In real life dude, if a cop tells you to do something, just do it, whether you like it or not. If you feel the need to argue your point with them then you simply deserve what you get because common sense dictates that even IF, and a big IF here, even if you are right once you argue with a cop he has more power and authority than you and will excercise it.

That is an idiotic suggestion. As a citizen, you have rights that the police cannot abridge. If they use force to abridge your rights, they're going to be in a world of hurt because they abused their authority and violated your civil rights.

They have to play by the rules, too. If they don't, they're just a thug with a badge and a gun.

Regurgitation of so-called pro-rights FTL.
If you feel it was unjust take it up in court.
Dumbass.

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mill
I think the difference is he was leaving when they grabbed his arm (at least according to the paper). That was probably unnecessary and inflamed the situation. Part of being an authority figure is knowing how to peacefully resolve situations and not flanning the flames of a fire.

I think it was very necessary. I'm curious what somebody would be doing with unauthorized access to the Internet and why what he was doing was so important that he defied requests to leave. I'm sure the cops were curious too and may have asked him a couple quick questions before walking him outside. Cops also usually run your ID whenever they stop you for anything down to jaywalking just to check.

He wasn't unauthorized. He was a student at the University. He simply didn't have his ID.

Go drive a car without your license and/or insurance....then tell the cop that you are authorized and he can't take action against you...see what happens

Apples to Oranges. Driving a car requires a license. Accessing those computers only requires a Bruin Login (which he obvious had). He simply didn't have his BruinCard. There is a policy not a law which states you are supposed to have your BruinCard after 11. He didn't. He should have left and gotten his card. However, there's no reason to tazer him 5 times because he didn't have his BruinCard with him.

Failing to cooperate with the Police is what got him tazered. He was hurling abuse and being an idiot and paid for it.

 

[Thraxen]

Those cops, like many (sadly), are just fvcking stupid. Dozens and dozens of witnesses standing around and they taze the guy over and over when all he was doing was laying limp. All they had to do was drag him out and this wouldn't even be on the news.

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

I will agree that not doing that would probably have been better. But I see nothing wrong with doing what they did(grabbing his arm). He is the one that was out of line for flipping out over such a trivial thing as being escorted out of the room.

Just because a cop grabs my arm as I am complying with their instructions does not give me the right to all of a sudden ignore what they want me to do.

EDIT: for clarification

I might be crazy, but I think once you get tazed about 5 times every minute or so you have a hard time walking.

wait....why did we just got from talking about grabbing his arm to walking after being tazed 5 times? When the officer grabbed this kids arm did he have full capability of continuing to walk? Yes? Then he should have. The point was that he shouldn't have flipped out over a cop escorting him out(yes that means he might grab his arm as he leaves) and he had no right to stop complying with the officer just because he touched his arm.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MisterJackson


In real life dude, if a cop tells you to do something, just do it, whether you like it or not. If you feel the need to argue your point with them then you simply deserve what you get because common sense dictates that even IF, and a big IF here, even if you are right once you argue with a cop he has more power and authority than you and will excercise it.

That is an idiotic suggestion. As a citizen, you have rights that the police cannot abridge. If they use force to abridge your rights, they're going to be in a world of hurt because they abused their authority and violated your civil rights.

They have to play by the rules, too. If they don't, they're just a thug with a badge and a gun.

Regurgitation of so-called pro-rights FTL.
If you feel it was unjust take it up in court.
Dumbass.

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mill
I think the difference is he was leaving when they grabbed his arm (at least according to the paper). That was probably unnecessary and inflamed the situation. Part of being an authority figure is knowing how to peacefully resolve situations and not flanning the flames of a fire.

I think it was very necessary. I'm curious what somebody would be doing with unauthorized access to the Internet and why what he was doing was so important that he defied requests to leave. I'm sure the cops were curious too and may have asked him a couple quick questions before walking him outside. Cops also usually run your ID whenever they stop you for anything down to jaywalking just to check.

He wasn't unauthorized. He was a student at the University. He simply didn't have his ID.

Go drive a car without your license and/or insurance....then tell the cop that you are authorized and he can't take action against you...see what happens

Apples to Oranges. Driving a car requires a license. Accessing those computers only requires a Bruin Login (which he obvious had). He simply didn't have his BruinCard. There is a policy not a law which states you are supposed to have your BruinCard after 11. He didn't. He should have left and gotten his card. However, there's no reason to tazer him 5 times because he didn't have his BruinCard with him.

Failing to cooperate with the Police is what got him tazered. He was hurling abuse and being an idiot and paid for it.

Actually, I believe he was on the ground with limp legs, and he continued to get tazed. But, hey, whatever makes it more hilarious for you.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Thraxen
Those cops, like many (sadly), are just fvcking stupid. Dozens and dozens of witnesses standing around and they taze the guy over and over when all he was doing was laying limp. All they had to do was drag him out and this wouldn't even be on the news.

No it'd be inflated on the news as a man got "raped" by the police who violated their rights and his and CNN would be all over it for 2 months, citing everything from the Patriot Act to everything else GOP related as to why Police are so unfriendly and why America really sucks now.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Thraxen
Those cops, like many (sadly), are just fvcking stupid. Dozens and dozens of witnesses standing around and they taze the guy over and over when all he was doing was laying limp. All they had to do was drag him out and this wouldn't even be on the news.

No it'd be inflated on the news as a man got "raped" by the police who violated their rights and his and CNN would be all over it for 2 months, citing everything from the Patriot Act to everything else GOP related as to why Police are so unfriendly and why America really sucks now.

Everyone's bias so easily comes out.

 

[Garet Jax]

Originally posted by: Mill
However, there's no reason to tazer him 5 times because he didn't have his BruinCard with him.

They didn't. They tased his ass because he refused to leave when asked.

They then tased his ass 4 more times because he was limp biscuit.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: MisterJackson


In real life dude, if a cop tells you to do something, just do it, whether you like it or not. If you feel the need to argue your point with them then you simply deserve what you get because common sense dictates that even IF, and a big IF here, even if you are right once you argue with a cop he has more power and authority than you and will excercise it.

That is an idiotic suggestion. As a citizen, you have rights that the police cannot abridge. If they use force to abridge your rights, they're going to be in a world of hurt because they abused their authority and violated your civil rights.

They have to play by the rules, too. If they don't, they're just a thug with a badge and a gun.

Regurgitation of so-called pro-rights FTL.
If you feel it was unjust take it up in court.
Dumbass.

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Mill
I think the difference is he was leaving when they grabbed his arm (at least according to the paper). That was probably unnecessary and inflamed the situation. Part of being an authority figure is knowing how to peacefully resolve situations and not flanning the flames of a fire.

I think it was very necessary. I'm curious what somebody would be doing with unauthorized access to the Internet and why what he was doing was so important that he defied requests to leave. I'm sure the cops were curious too and may have asked him a couple quick questions before walking him outside. Cops also usually run your ID whenever they stop you for anything down to jaywalking just to check.

He wasn't unauthorized. He was a student at the University. He simply didn't have his ID.

Go drive a car without your license and/or insurance....then tell the cop that you are authorized and he can't take action against you...see what happens

Apples to Oranges. Driving a car requires a license. Accessing those computers only requires a Bruin Login (which he obvious had). He simply didn't have his BruinCard. There is a policy not a law which states you are supposed to have your BruinCard after 11. He didn't. He should have left and gotten his card. However, there's no reason to tazer him 5 times because he didn't have his BruinCard with him.

Failing to cooperate with the Police is what got him tazered. He was hurling abuse and being an idiot and paid for it.

Actually, I believe he was on the ground with limp legs, and he continued to get tazed. But, hey, whatever makes it more hilarious for you.

That's not an excuse to fail to cooperate with authority. If he was polite and said "officer, I have limp legs, can you help me get up?" Instead of yelling and shouting and making a total ass out of himself, truly representing his political party in all likeliness.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: SampSon
The police are lucky they weren't the unwilling participants in a riot. Does Kent state ring a bell?

Tazers were not necessary by any stretch of the imagination. The police regularly take down full size men, who have violent intentions, without using a tazer.
In this case it was what, at least 3 fully dressed policemen? One of the officers threatened a bystander when asked for his badge information?
That officer was already starting to cover his ass. The officers weren't even trying to control the crowd. They didn't give their badge information when requested and threatened a citizen on top of that. Incompetence is abound.

On a side note, when did the population (the cross section I see here) become so complacent?

Here's my gripe about this. The taser has become the alternative to physical force. Where police used to just manhandle a person, now they taser. Tasers are used without thought of consequences.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Thraxen
Those cops, like many (sadly), are just fvcking stupid. Dozens and dozens of witnesses standing around and they taze the guy over and over when all he was doing was laying limp. All they had to do was drag him out and this wouldn't even be on the news.

No it'd be inflated on the news as a man got "raped" by the police who violated their rights and his and CNN would be all over it for 2 months, citing everything from the Patriot Act to everything else GOP related as to why Police are so unfriendly and why America really sucks now.

Everyone's bias so easily comes out.

Oh, I'm sorry my informed self had to crap on your anti-American party. Canada is that way ^

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: SampSon
The police are lucky they weren't the unwilling participants in a riot. Does Kent state ring a bell?

Tazers were not necessary by any stretch of the imagination. The police regularly take down full size men, who have violent intentions, without using a tazer.
In this case it was what, at least 3 fully dressed policemen? One of the officers threatened a bystander when asked for his badge information?
That officer was already starting to cover his ass. The officers weren't even trying to control the crowd. They didn't give their badge information when requested and threatened a citizen on top of that. Incompetence is abound.

On a side note, when did the population (the cross section I see here) become so complacent?

Please inform me of these serious consequences.

 

[Thraxen]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Thraxen
Those cops, like many (sadly), are just fvcking stupid. Dozens and dozens of witnesses standing around and they taze the guy over and over when all he was doing was laying limp. All they had to do was drag him out and this wouldn't even be on the news.

No it'd be inflated on the news as a man got "raped" by the police who violated their rights and his and CNN would be all over it for 2 months, citing everything from the Patriot Act to everything else GOP related as to why Police are so unfriendly and why America really sucks now.

Doubt it. Some crazy guy yelling things as he is dragged out of a library isn't national news. Tazing the guy multiple times when he isn't fighting back is national news. There is a video of it... no way it could have been inflated to "raped".

 

[BD2003]

That's not an excuse to fail to cooperate with authority. If he was polite and said "officer, I have limp legs, can you help me get up?" Instead of yelling and shouting and making a total ass out of himself, truly representing his political party in all likeliness.

Why can't you just call a douche a douche without dragging politics and generalizations into it?

 

[Mill]

That's not an excuse to fail to cooperate with authority. If he was polite and said "officer, I have limp legs, can you help me get up?" Instead of yelling and shouting and making a total ass out of himself, truly representing his political party in all likeliness.

Yes, someone in intense physical pain who is being humiliated always has such brilliant forethinking and diction.

 

[SampSon]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Originally posted by: SampSon
The police are lucky they weren't the unwilling participants in a riot. Does Kent state ring a bell?

Tazers were not necessary by any stretch of the imagination. The police regularly take down full size men, who have violent intentions, without using a tazer.
In this case it was what, at least 3 fully dressed policemen? One of the officers threatened a bystander when asked for his badge information?
That officer was already starting to cover his ass. The officers weren't even trying to control the crowd. They didn't give their badge information when requested and threatened a citizen on top of that. Incompetence is abound.

On a side note, when did the population (the cross section I see here) become so complacent?

Here's my gripe about this. The taser has become the alternative to physical force. Where police used to just manhandle a person, now they taser. Tasers are used without thought of consequences.

Definitely. Tasers are an extremely dangerous weapon. Everyone really thinks they are benign because of the "non-lethal" label attached to them. Reality is that tasers can kill you easily.

Please inform me of these serious consequences.

Brain damage, cardiac arrest, death.
Some light reading, if you can handle that much english

 

[Mill]

Oh, I'm sorry my informed self had to crap on your anti-American party. Canada is that way ^

Interesting. In the past week I've been called a liberal and a conservative nut. Hmm.

BTW, being conservative or liberal has nothing to do with standing idly by and watching an abuse of power take place. Nor should people defend poor training and logic that was used by these officers.

I've got over 32 credit hours in Criminal Justice, and a majority of my classes are 60%+ LEOs. Either Federal, State, or Local. Obviously I'm totally "against" the police and hate them.

There's a correct way to police and there's a wrong way. These guys did it the wrong way, and a way that will likely create mistrust in the community as well as possibly cost them their jobs, or at the very least subject them to discipline. All of that could have been avoided if they had taken a more genial approach.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
He already failed to present ID and was, therefore, there without authorization. They were trying to find out why this guy with no ID was on campus using the Internet at an anonymous terminal.

Pride. :roll: Guess what, pride has to take a back seat to obeying the law. Besides, I'm sure whatever pride he salvaged was lost when the taser caused him to lose control of his bowels.

Wait, so they tasered someone who didn't have ID for using an anonymous station? What's the point of having the anonymous station then?

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: BD2003

That's not an excuse to fail to cooperate with authority. If he was polite and said "officer, I have limp legs, can you help me get up?" Instead of yelling and shouting and making a total ass out of himself, truly representing his political party in all likeliness.

Why can't you just call a douche a douche without dragging politics and generalizations into it?

I'm very much a bitter douche myself, and I don't feel he comes close to my level.