Student shot with Taser by UCPD officers (Multiple times)

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
I heard on the radio this morning high-profile civil rights lawyer, Stephen Yagman, has dropped this guy's case.

Of all the UC campuses in California, UCLA is the only campus that expressly permits their police to use a taser in situations of "passive resistance", which is presumably what this student was attempting to do by refusing to leave, refusing to show ID, and asking nearby students to "join him" in resisting arrest.

So much for his dreams of being the next civil rights posterboy lol.

:thumbsup:

Hahaha, what an idiotic policy. It just invites a ridiculous situation to escalate like this one did.

This was poor training, poor execution, and poor decision making on the part of the officers involved.

Step 1 : Moron kid causing problem in library (filled with bystanders, staff, etc)

Step 2 : Kid is generally uncooperative, and resists being detained by lawful officer demand.

Step 3 : Flip him, cuff him, take him out.

By sitting there like freaking morons themselves, repeating OBVIOUSLY ignored verbal commands, and uselessly tasering him over and over, they risked ALL manner of bad possible outcomes. Totally unacceptable and unprofessional.

I have zero qualms about the right of the officers to use reasonable force to detain an obviously agitated subject. But get the job done quickly. By not cuffing him pronto, he could possibly lunge at an officer, grab a gun, and either kill someone, get killed himself, or BOTH. Not to mention his braying, screaming, whining presence was working the other students into a (partially correct, in this stupid debacle) dangerous additional field of potential participants in this confrontation. I think you could charge this idiot with inciting a riot, if it is (and I think it was) proven that he was inciting others to resist as well.

That being said, I think these officers involved should be promptly fired. Combine this with a statement on proper procedure when confronted with these circumstances. By their idiotically continued abuse of an obviously failed method (verbal command, taser), they put everyone involved at a much higher risk of injury or death.

Every cop I've ever talked to has looked at the taser as a direct use to incapacitate someone, whereafter the subject is IMMEDIATELY subdued and cuffed. This is for the safety of everyone involved, starting with the officers, but also for the suspect as well.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
I heard on the radio this morning high-profile civil rights lawyer, Stephen Yagman, has dropped this guy's case.

Of all the UC campuses in California, UCLA is the only campus that expressly permits their police to use a taser in situations of "passive resistance", which is presumably what this student was attempting to do by refusing to leave, refusing to show ID, and asking nearby students to "join him" in resisting arrest.

So much for his dreams of being the next civil rights posterboy lol.

:thumbsup:

Hahaha, what an idiotic policy. It just invites a ridiculous situation to escalate like this one did.

This was poor training, poor execution, and poor decision making on the part of the officers involved.

Step 1 : Moron kid causing problem in library (filled with bystanders, staff, etc)

Step 2 : Kid is generally uncooperative, and resists being detained by lawful officer demand.

Step 3 : Flip him, cuff him, take him out.

Yea, its always that easy. Just flip him, cuff him, and take him out. You obviously have no law enforcement experience.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
I heard on the radio this morning high-profile civil rights lawyer, Stephen Yagman, has dropped this guy's case.

Of all the UC campuses in California, UCLA is the only campus that expressly permits their police to use a taser in situations of "passive resistance", which is presumably what this student was attempting to do by refusing to leave, refusing to show ID, and asking nearby students to "join him" in resisting arrest.

So much for his dreams of being the next civil rights posterboy lol.

:thumbsup:

Hahaha, what an idiotic policy. It just invites a ridiculous situation to escalate like this one did.

This was poor training, poor execution, and poor decision making on the part of the officers involved.

Step 1 : Moron kid causing problem in library (filled with bystanders, staff, etc)

Step 2 : Kid is generally uncooperative, and resists being detained by lawful officer demand.

Step 3 : Flip him, cuff him, take him out.

Yea, its always that easy. Just flip him, cuff him, and take him out. You obviously have no law enforcement experience.

Like you do???

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
I heard on the radio this morning high-profile civil rights lawyer, Stephen Yagman, has dropped this guy's case.

Of all the UC campuses in California, UCLA is the only campus that expressly permits their police to use a taser in situations of "passive resistance", which is presumably what this student was attempting to do by refusing to leave, refusing to show ID, and asking nearby students to "join him" in resisting arrest.

So much for his dreams of being the next civil rights posterboy lol.

:thumbsup:

Hahaha, what an idiotic policy. It just invites a ridiculous situation to escalate like this one did.

This was poor training, poor execution, and poor decision making on the part of the officers involved.

Step 1 : Moron kid causing problem in library (filled with bystanders, staff, etc)

Step 2 : Kid is generally uncooperative, and resists being detained by lawful officer demand.

Step 3 : Flip him, cuff him, take him out.

Yea, its always that easy. Just flip him, cuff him, and take him out. You obviously have no law enforcement experience.

Like you do???

Yes, 3 years as a Police Officer and one year prior to that catching shoplifters for The Home Depot.

You shouldn't assume so much about people.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
I heard on the radio this morning high-profile civil rights lawyer, Stephen Yagman, has dropped this guy's case.

Of all the UC campuses in California, UCLA is the only campus that expressly permits their police to use a taser in situations of "passive resistance", which is presumably what this student was attempting to do by refusing to leave, refusing to show ID, and asking nearby students to "join him" in resisting arrest.

So much for his dreams of being the next civil rights posterboy lol.

:thumbsup:

Hahaha, what an idiotic policy. It just invites a ridiculous situation to escalate like this one did.

This was poor training, poor execution, and poor decision making on the part of the officers involved.

Step 1 : Moron kid causing problem in library (filled with bystanders, staff, etc)

Step 2 : Kid is generally uncooperative, and resists being detained by lawful officer demand.

Step 3 : Flip him, cuff him, take him out.

Yea, its always that easy. Just flip him, cuff him, and take him out. You obviously have no law enforcement experience.

How many times have you seen someone arrested? I have spent a lot of time around the bars and downtown areas, and have seen this EXACT procedure repeated ad nauseum. I've seen angry drunk 6 foot tall jerks who were easily contained and shoved into the back of the cruiser without so much as a blink of an eye. This guy was what? 5'9"? A hundred and change? In any case, the longer you let someone flop around uncuffed, the longer you leave the door open for something truly stupid to happen. Btw, I have asked a local highway patrol officer about this case (he is a customer of mine), and after showing him the video, he called the officers a bunch of **ssies, and said that we would have had that kid in bracelets faster than he could finish 'patriot act'.

Besides, one of the primary focuses of police academy is the containment and detention of suspects, INCLUDING cuffing them. It's not rocket science. Quick, brute force is usually preferred, rather than letting situations remain unresolved.

Thank you for your insulting, knee-jerk, butthole response, just because I happened to point out the BLATANT errors in judgment by these officers.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
I heard on the radio this morning high-profile civil rights lawyer, Stephen Yagman, has dropped this guy's case.

Of all the UC campuses in California, UCLA is the only campus that expressly permits their police to use a taser in situations of "passive resistance", which is presumably what this student was attempting to do by refusing to leave, refusing to show ID, and asking nearby students to "join him" in resisting arrest.

So much for his dreams of being the next civil rights posterboy lol.

:thumbsup:

Hahaha, what an idiotic policy. It just invites a ridiculous situation to escalate like this one did.

This was poor training, poor execution, and poor decision making on the part of the officers involved.

Step 1 : Moron kid causing problem in library (filled with bystanders, staff, etc)

Step 2 : Kid is generally uncooperative, and resists being detained by lawful officer demand.

Step 3 : Flip him, cuff him, take him out.

Yea, its always that easy. Just flip him, cuff him, and take him out. You obviously have no law enforcement experience.

How many times have you seen someone arrested? I have spent a lot of time around the bars and downtown areas, and have seen this EXACT procedure repeated ad nauseum. I've seen angry drunk 6 foot tall jerks who were easily contained and shoved into the back of the cruiser without so much as a blink of an eye. This guy was what? 5'9"? A hundred and change? In any case, the longer you let someone flop around uncuffed, the longer you leave the door open for something truly stupid to happen. Btw, I have asked a local highway patrol officer about this case (he is a customer of mine), and after showing him the video, he called the officers a bunch of **ssies, and said that we would have had that kid in bracelets faster than he could finish 'patriot act'.

Besides, one of the primary focuses of police academy is the containment and detention of suspects, INCLUDING cuffing them. It's not rocket science. Quick, brute force is usually preferred, rather than letting situations remain unresolved.

Thank you for your insulting, knee-jerk, butthole response, just because I happened to point out the BLATANT errors in judgment by these officers.

WOW, you have seen this exact procedure?? I watch football every sunday, why do they let the quarterback get sacked, its so easy to block someone, I have seen it done hundreds of times, its not rocket science!!

Funny thing is, you may have seen this done and watched a documentary on PBS about a police academy, but I have actually been to a Police Academy and done this exact procedure up in real life. Do you know when the most dangerous time of an arrest is? It is when you have your handcuffs out and are going to physically cuff him. Do you realize that it is difficult to handcuff someone that does not want to be handcuffed, whether they are 5'9 or 6'10?

So you talked to one tough talking highway patrol officer, thats great. Using the taser makes it so that you can hand cuff someone without transitioning to your baton, or using other non lethal tactics. Would you rather get your ass beat with a baton and be black and blue for weeks, or would you rather get a jolt from a taser and be feeling fine in a few minutes?

My first response was not a "insulting, knee-jerk, butthole response", I was stating the obvious. Unless you do have some law enforcement experience, it was spot on. Now, if you have never "been there" and "done that" I would suggest you stop playing monday morning quarterback and saying how easy things are when you have no idea. Most arrests do end up being easy, but I'm not going to take a chance with some dumbass kid that wants to make a scene when I have a wife and child counting on me to come home at the end of my shift. It's that one time that you let your guard down because you think its going to be easy that some whacko pulls out a knife or a gun, uh oh, too late, my wife and kid now have to look after themselves but at least I didn't offend all these internet wannabe tough guy cops that know how easy it is.

 

[glutenberg]

If the police are fired then the kid needs to be expelled. You can't punish one group and not the other in this situation. Both were in the wrong and both parties need to have consequences.

To JD50: I think the issue at hand is that they tasered him 5 times. The initial taser should be enough for them to subdue and cuff the target from what I've read about the effects of tasers. But whatever the case, I would like to see this kid pull the same stunt at an airport or some other higher tension area and see what happens. He obviously has a chip on his shoulder and thought that being in a University he could perform this stunt without harm. There's a fine balance between fighting for rights and just being irrational and obnoxious.

 

[zylander]

Ill say the same thing I said in the other thread about this. BOTH parties were wrong. BOTH parties could have EASILY prevented this. BOTH parties were just ****** stupid.

-He was already walking out. It the cops showed up 10 seconds later this whole thing would never have happened. (Assuming that was true, the article says he was already walking out, and all this happened right at the front door.)
-Tazering him that many times was way unnecessary, one was enough at the most. From the video, you can see three cops in the library, and a not so large kid laying on the floor, the cops could have EASILY cuffed and dragged him out.
-Shouting "stand up" while they are tazering him? I dont think I need to say anything more about that.

Now onto the kid:

-If the person running the library asks to see your ID, ****** DO IT. They annonced that aftetr a certain time they would be randomly checking IDs.
-Oh, you think your ID was checked because of your race? GET OFF YOUR ****** HIGH HORSE!
-Later on when MSN released their statement with the kids lawyer. He pulled the race card, makes him look like even more of a jack ass.

Both parties, the cops and the kid were out of hand, and this whole thing could have easily been avoided many times over by both parties.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: gsaldivar
I heard on the radio this morning high-profile civil rights lawyer, Stephen Yagman, has dropped this guy's case.

Of all the UC campuses in California, UCLA is the only campus that expressly permits their police to use a taser in situations of "passive resistance", which is presumably what this student was attempting to do by refusing to leave, refusing to show ID, and asking nearby students to "join him" in resisting arrest.

So much for his dreams of being the next civil rights posterboy lol.

:thumbsup:

Hahaha, what an idiotic policy. It just invites a ridiculous situation to escalate like this one did.

This was poor training, poor execution, and poor decision making on the part of the officers involved.

Step 1 : Moron kid causing problem in library (filled with bystanders, staff, etc)

Step 2 : Kid is generally uncooperative, and resists being detained by lawful officer demand.

Step 3 : Flip him, cuff him, take him out.

Yea, its always that easy. Just flip him, cuff him, and take him out. You obviously have no law enforcement experience.

How many times have you seen someone arrested? I have spent a lot of time around the bars and downtown areas, and have seen this EXACT procedure repeated ad nauseum. I've seen angry drunk 6 foot tall jerks who were easily contained and shoved into the back of the cruiser without so much as a blink of an eye. This guy was what? 5'9"? A hundred and change? In any case, the longer you let someone flop around uncuffed, the longer you leave the door open for something truly stupid to happen. Btw, I have asked a local highway patrol officer about this case (he is a customer of mine), and after showing him the video, he called the officers a bunch of **ssies, and said that we would have had that kid in bracelets faster than he could finish 'patriot act'.

Besides, one of the primary focuses of police academy is the containment and detention of suspects, INCLUDING cuffing them. It's not rocket science. Quick, brute force is usually preferred, rather than letting situations remain unresolved.

Thank you for your insulting, knee-jerk, butthole response, just because I happened to point out the BLATANT errors in judgment by these officers.

WOW, you have seen this exact procedure?? I watch football every sunday, why do they let the quarterback get sacked, its so easy to block someone, I have seen it done hundreds of times, its not rocket science!!

Funny thing is, you may have seen this done and watched a documentary on PBS about a police academy, but I have actually been to a Police Academy and done this exact procedure up in real life. Do you know when the most dangerous time of an arrest is? It is when you have your handcuffs out and are going to physically cuff him. Do you realize that it is difficult to handcuff someone that does not want to be handcuffed, whether they are 5'9 or 6'10?

So you talked to one tough talking highway patrol officer, thats great. Using the taser makes it so that you can hand cuff someone without transitioning to your baton, or using other non lethal tactics. Would you rather get your ass beat with a baton and be black and blue for weeks, or would you rather get a jolt from a taser and be feeling fine in a few minutes?

My first response was not a "insulting, knee-jerk, butthole response", I was stating the obvious. Unless you do have some law enforcement experience, it was spot on. Now, if you have never "been there" and "done that" I would suggest you stop playing monday morning quarterback and saying how easy things are when you have no idea. Most arrests do end up being easy, but I'm not going to take a chance with some dumbass kid that wants to make a scene when I have a wife and child counting on me to come home at the end of my shift. It's that one time that you let your guard down because you think its going to be easy that some whacko pulls out a knife or a gun, uh oh, too late, my wife and kid now have to look after themselves but at least I didn't offend all these internet wannabe tough guy cops that know how easy it is.

In your own words, explain why they didn't go ahead and cuff this kid after the first tasering? Be sure not to contradict yourself

 

[imported_heyguy]

The cop should never have laid a hand on him. At the point where a cop stops acting like a cop should, we shouldn't follow his orders for sh!t. Right, the kid could have saved himself a lot of physical pain by just following orders, but that's a very poor attitude to have. Thomas Hobbes says in any government, the citizens must follow orders to gain their right to not be killed. That's fascism, and a surprising and disappointing number of posters seem supportive of that type of thinking.

Cops work for us. We can be apathetic and blindly trust that they are doing the right thing, or we can be aware of our rights and protect them in the best way possible (how about passive protest?). If we don't do it, who will? The warning seems to be enough to justify the officers' actions to a lot of you. What if the warning was "get up, or I'll kill you?"

Yes, cops do some pretty good things, but they can find another line of work if the responsibility is too much to handle. There are a lot of jobs that I can't do because I would be bad at them. That does not mean that anyone better than me is qualified.

 

[tomywishbone]

I think the officers were justified in their actions. It's tough to know the difference between a college student and a criminal, and I'm glad they were proactive in guarding the safety of others. Many lives were possibly saved by their quick actions.

 

[cumhail]

The cop in question has been at the center of controversy multiple times in the past. Once for shooting a homeless man, once for beating a student/suspect and allegedly telling him "I thought I'd have to go Rodney King on you" (or something along those lines). His name is Terrence Duren and he's been in court and nearly fired, in the past, for his excessive use of force.

Just google his name, either in general google or google news, and you'll find out plenty about him.

 

[ECUHITMAN]

Originally posted by: tomywishbone
I think the officers were justified in their actions. It's tough to know the difference between a college student and a criminal, and I'm glad they were proactive in guarding the safety of others. Many lives were possibly saved by their quick actions.

Yeah I watched the video, I am pretty sure they didn't save any lives by tasering that guy...

The ROE (rules of engagement) change depending on the department and circumstance. I know nothing about the ROE at UCLA. However, had that happened at my school or town, the cops would have been fired. I know this because I have been through the BLET (basic law enforcement training) program and know that would not have been allowed around here.

On a side note, I think it was funny that they kept telling the guy to stand up AFTER they tased him. Um, does anyone think that doesn't make a lot of sense? From my experience after being tased you were not exactly walking around normally..

 

[imported_heyguy]

Originally posted by: tomywishbone
I think the officers were justified in their actions. It's tough to know the difference between a college student and a criminal, and I'm glad they were proactive in guarding the safety of others. Many lives were possibly saved by their quick actions.

Umm, no lives were saved because of their actions. Criminal, or not, the dude was cuffed and on the ground. Taze him again, in the name of safety??? The students in the video weren't scared that the kid might hurt them. The only thing they had to be scared of was getting tazed, themselves. You're right, the cops have no way of knowing if the kid was a criminal or not. You know what? They don't have any way of knowing if any one of us are criminals. I guess you would prefer everyone be treated guilty until proven innocent. It's safer that way.

 

[cumhail]

Originally posted by: heyguy

Originally posted by: tomywishbone
I think the officers were justified in their actions. It's tough to know the difference between a college student and a criminal, and I'm glad they were proactive in guarding the safety of others. Many lives were possibly saved by their quick actions.

Umm, no lives were saved because of their actions. Criminal, or not, the dude was cuffed and on the ground. Taze him again, in the name of safety??? The students in the video weren't scared that the kid might hurt them. The only thing they had to be scared of was getting tazed, themselves. You're right, the cops have no way of knowing if the kid was a criminal or not. You know what? They don't have any way of knowing if any one of us are criminals. I guess you would prefer everyone be treated guilty until proven innocent. It's safer that way.

And they had reason to be scared of that, too, as the cops responded to students who asked for their names and badge numbers by telling them to back away or they'd be tased, too.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: heyguy
The cop should never have laid a hand on him. At the point where a cop stops acting like a cop should, we shouldn't follow his orders for sh!t. Right, the kid could have saved himself a lot of physical pain by just following orders, but that's a very poor attitude to have. Thomas Hobbes says in any government, the citizens must follow orders to gain their right to not be killed. That's fascism, and a surprising and disappointing number of posters seem supportive of that type of thinking.

Cops work for us. We can be apathetic and blindly trust that they are doing the right thing, or we can be aware of our rights and protect them in the best way possible (how about passive protest?). If we don't do it, who will? The warning seems to be enough to justify the officers' actions to a lot of you. What if the warning was "get up, or I'll kill you?"

Yes, cops do some pretty good things, but they can find another line of work if the responsibility is too much to handle. There are a lot of jobs that I can't do because I would be bad at them. That does not mean that anyone better than me is qualified.

This is not fascism. Hopping on the fascism bandwagon is always fun I guess. The kid, seeing as he was unable to produce an ID, was asked first to leave by the CSO. He resisted so the CSO had to call in the UCPD. The UCPD arrived later. If he was on his way out, what took him so long that the UCPD had to be called in to escort him out? When he couldn't produce an ID, he was trespassing and should've followed the CSOs request that he leave. He could've went home and retrieved his ID, he could've asked them to look him up in the system, he could've a multitude of things but being a college student of a minority ethnicity, he decided to let the chip on his shoulder (the same one that allows everyone to jump to fascism as the reasoning for everything) control his emotions. Why do people believe freedom equals a do whatever you want mentality? How is his trespassing a sign of racial profiling, the article already said others were being asked for their IDs too. His passive resistance was unwarranted (5 shots from the taser was also unwarranted) but so many people want to just absolve the student of any responsibility. As in all things in life, there are always fine lines between right and wrong.

 

[imported_heyguy]

Originally posted by: glutenberg
(5 shots from the taser was also unwarranted)

That is all I was trying to say. We have one kid, who could be an idiot and overly sensitive (and lets just say he is), and a group of cops who use that kind of force for a small offense, who also threaten bystanders (who are doing nothing illegal) with the same force. On top of that, we have a bunch of people who think the only person in the wrong is the kid who got tazed five times. Out of all those things, which should be the most cause for concern? I believe it is the last.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Arkaign


In your own words, explain why they didn't go ahead and cuff this kid after the first tasering? Be sure not to contradict yourself

I wasn't there, so I'm not going to second guess the Officers that were there. What if the cops were told there is someone with a weapon inside, what if they were told there was a crazy person there, what if etc...If you weren't there then you have no idea what was going on, no matter what video you saw, you still need to be there to understand the "totality of the circumstances".

If you have a problem with the Police, the way you were treated, think you are innocent, etc.. the time to question all of that is NOT when the Police are trying to detain/arrest you. Thats what the courts are for. Try and remember that the Officer on the street is not the one that made the law, and is not the one that came up with the departmental policy, he is just doing his job by enforceing those laws. Listen to the Police, be a good boy and do what you are told, otherwise you are going to get hurt. If an Officer says that he is going to arrest you then he is going to arrest you, there is nothing you can do to change his mind. The time for you to deal with all of this is when your day in court comes.

Innocent until proven guilty does not only apply to civilians, it applies to the Police as well. So many of you are so quick to judge the Officers there and say that they are guilty just because you saw a video of what happened. You should afford these men and women the same courtesy that you are (innocent until proven guilty), its only fair. Those of you that are ready to convict these cops without so much as a trial are just plain ignorant.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: heyguy
The cop should never have laid a hand on him. At the point where a cop stops acting like a cop should, we shouldn't follow his orders for sh!t. Right, the kid could have saved himself a lot of physical pain by just following orders, but that's a very poor attitude to have. Thomas Hobbes says in any government, the citizens must follow orders to gain their right to not be killed. That's fascism, and a surprising and disappointing number of posters seem supportive of that type of thinking.

Cops work for us. We can be apathetic and blindly trust that they are doing the right thing, or we can be aware of our rights and protect them in the best way possible (how about passive protest?). If we don't do it, who will? The warning seems to be enough to justify the officers' actions to a lot of you. What if the warning was "get up, or I'll kill you?"

Yes, cops do some pretty good things, but they can find another line of work if the responsibility is too much to handle. There are a lot of jobs that I can't do because I would be bad at them. That does not mean that anyone better than me is qualified.

You are incredibly ignorant.

 

[imported_heyguy]

Originally posted by: JD50
You are incredibly ignorant.

You shouldn't have spent so much time on such a well thought out reply. Your time would have been better spent coming up with more "what ifs" to justify what the video showed. What if he was reaching for a detonator for a nuclear weapon??!?! Also, your post would have had more impact if you said "You don't know what it's like in the INSIDE." Then challenge me to spend one day, no no ONE HOUR, doing a policeman's job.

Your previous reply was a joke. We can't use video evidence to judge a cop's actions, huh? We can't use eye-witness accounts, either. Only a cop can understand "totality of the circumstances." Pretty convenient for them to be their own judge. Cops must feel so damn special. It's pretty clear how self-important they feel when they say condescending crap like "be a good boy..." How many people complain about cops being a-holes on power trips?

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: heyguy

Originally posted by: glutenberg
(5 shots from the taser was also unwarranted)

That is all I was trying to say. We have one kid, who could be an idiot and overly sensitive (and lets just say he is), and a group of cops who use that kind of force for a small offense, who also threaten bystanders (who are doing nothing illegal) with the same force. On top of that, we have a bunch of people who think the only person in the wrong is the kid who got tazed five times. Out of all those things, which should be the most cause for concern? I believe it is the last.

I also don't have much respect for the students badgering the officers while they're trying to make an arrest. These are pretty much the same people who don't know how to shut up at times and learn to wait for a more appropriate moment. These are typically the same people who will try to talk over you just to make their point. If a police officer tells you to move back why are you trying to be a tough guy? You're not proving any point outside of the fact that you're an ass who can't handle any form of authority (unless of course the authority saves you from direct harm, then, oh the world be praised, they are great).

It pretty much comes down to accountability. You can't blame just the kid and you can't blame just the police. Both are at fault but only the student gets to sue? Why don't the police get to sue? Oh, because they are serving the public. The US is a sue happy nation. I know, I see it every day at work. If the student gets to sue, then he should also be charged with trespassing, attempt at inciting a riot, verbal assault on a police officer, disturbing the peace. Where are all the activists rushing in to call out the kid on what he did? Oh, I understand, since it's UCLA (my alma mater), there's a natural desire to be an activist. To feel important as if you just took on the world. Give me a break. If you can't learn to look at issues from more than one narrow viewpoint, then you don't have much to offer in the debate (not directed at you, directed at the students).

 

[imported_heyguy]

glutenberg, he gets to sue because the officers are the ones who messed up the worst. Imagine if they wrestled his ass down, cuffed him, and carried him out, while the kid was kicking and screaming. Or if it took one shock to detain him, the situation wouldn't be nearly as appalling as it is now. The cops wouldn't be in the hot seat as much as they are now, and the kid would have all those charges brought against him (and look like a complete idiot). That's a pretty good (and completely legitimate) way to deter that kind of behavior from civilians. Well, the cops and the school completely f-ed up their responsibilities and need to know that it can't happen again (think McDonald's coffee case). The cop with the tazer has a history of abuse and had no business with the responsibility to protect students.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: heyguy

Originally posted by: JD50
You are incredibly ignorant.

You shouldn't have spent so much time on such a well thought out reply. Your time would have been better spent coming up with more "what ifs" to justify what the video showed. What if he was reaching for a detonator for a nuclear weapon??!?! Also, your post would have had more impact if you said "You don't know what it's like in the INSIDE." Then challenge me to spend one day, no no ONE HOUR, doing a policeman's job.

Your previous reply was a joke. We can't use video evidence to judge a cop's actions, huh? We can't use eye-witness accounts, either. Only a cop can understand "totality of the circumstances." Pretty convenient for them to be their own judge. Cops must feel so damn special. It's pretty clear how self-important they feel when they say condescending crap like "be a good boy..." How many people complain about cops being a-holes on power trips?

Reread my post and you might get it. I said to wait for your day in court. You advocating that people stand up against the Police if you don't think what they are doing is right will just get you and others hurt. Basically, tell it to the judge, thats the whole point of having a court system. You coming out and condemning these cops just because of a video you saw on the internet is pretty damn ignorant, do they not have the right to be innocent until proven guilty? The other part of your post that was ignorant is you telling people to not comply with what a Police Officer is asking you to do, like I said, that will get you hurt.

Of course people complain about cops being on a power trip, the cop probably caught them doing something wrong and/or stupid so they are not going to be happy. People will bitch about anything.

Do you even understand what "totality of the circumstances" means?

Edit - I am not saying that what the Police did was right, I am saying that the Police should also be innocent until proven guilty. Some of you are way too quick to go against the Police on this one, after all, they should be given the benefit of the doubt.

 

[imported_heyguy]

I'm finding it impossible to believe there is any missing information that we could have that would justify tazing the guy when he was already cuffed and on the ground. That point aside, there are people who think the situation went down just as I am imagining it, and think the cops did no wrong.

I don't mess with cops, ever. If I was in that kid's situation, I would have just dealt with it, because it wasn't worth it. But if the guy truly believed he was being treated differently because of his race, it's hard to fault him for standing up (sitting down ) and not participate in his own persecution.