There is video of this shot by a student using a cameraphone on the website.
UCPD officers shot a student several times with a Taser inside the Powell Library CLICC computer lab late Tuesday night before taking him into custody.
No university police officers were available to comment further about the incident as of 3 a.m. Wednesday, and no Community Service Officers who were on duty at the time could be reached.
At around 11:30 p.m., CSOs asked a male student using a computer in the back of the room to leave when he was unable to produce a BruinCard during a random check. The student did not exit the building immediately.
The CSOs left, returning minutes later, and police officers arrived to escort the student out. By this time the student had begun to walk toward the door with his backpack when an officer approached him and grabbed his arm, at which point the student told the officer to let him go. A second officer then approached the student as well.
The student began to yell “get off me,” repeating himself several times.
It was at this point that the officers shot the student with a Taser for the first time, causing him to fall to the floor and cry out in pain. The student also told the officers he had a medical condition.
UCPD officers confirmed that the man involved in the incident was a student, but did not give a name or any additional information about his identity.
(via Boing Boing)
Update:
It’s up on YouTube.
Update 2:
The history of the cop who Tasered the student:
The UCLA police department identified the officer caught electrifying the student who did not produce his college ID card as Terrence Duren, an 18-year veteran of the UCPD.
Duren hasn’t had the smoothest career in law enforcement. He came to Westwood after being fired from the infamous Long Beach PD. A few years after being hired by UCLA he was accused of using his nightstick to choke a fratboy and the university asked the UCPD to fire Duren, but he was only given a three month suspension.
In late 2003 Duren shot a homeless man, Willie Davis Frazier, Jr., in a Kerckhoff Hall bathroom. Frazier, who attempted at first to shun lawyers and represent himself, was imbalanced enough to spend time in mental institution as the court tried to figure out if he was fit to stand trial.
During a 2004 preliminary hearing in which Duren testified against Frazier, the officer carried a Machiavelli book into court, “The Prince”, which argues that the ends justifies the means. “Did you know that this was Tupac’s favorite book?” he asked.
Less than a year after Duren shot Frazier, UCLA decided to invest $22,000 in tasers, according to the Daily Bruin.
Comments
57 Comments so far. Leave a comment below.Pigs.
Fucking asshole power tripping PIGS.
Think of it this way: they’re in a lot of trouble, and he’s about to become a very rich fella.
I’ve got chills after listening to that guy scream while he was being tazered. I wonder if those guys actually did any training with those tazered? They’re only supposed to be used to disable violent/dangerous people, not as a “move along” technique.
Actually, it’s the UCLA-attending hippie that’s to blame. He clearly did not obey the orders of the officers. Fool.
Jeb Bush in 2008!! We will make it happen!
Ah, how we love to put on uniforms and pull triggers!
While I agree they should not have gone so far, I don’t understand why he couldn’t have just cooperated. It’s like he wanted to keep pushing them.
This is interesting:
“Mostafa Tabatabainejad, a UCLA student, was repeatedly stunned with a Taser and then taken into custody when he did not exit the CLICC Lab…”
http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38960
I worked security for quite a while and this was out of hand. In any laws regarding the use of force on the part of authorities, they can only react with the same force used to threaten them. This guy obviously wasn’t using that kind of force against them. Even though the camera was turned on halfway through, we know they already had him in cuffs. At that point using a Taser it is literally torture.
The most remarkable part is that the students witnessing this didn’t react violently. They had the numbers. They had the emotion. But they all kept their cool and decided to handle this the civilized way. Which is more than you can say for the officers.
I tend to automatically take the side of the little guy whenever there are conflicts involving a normal person and some fascist in uniform.
However… I can’t really tell very much of what really went on from the video. You do sort of get the impression that the student is acting loud and in a threatning manner before any tasering takes place. Why all the screaming? Why was he asked to show his ID to begin with? There may be things here we aren’t fully told. I guess the investigation will reveal more. Hopefully.
regardless of whether he was cooperative. tazing a handcuffed person is torture. tazers are meant to immobilize dangerous individuals, not “move people along”. and in the article in the daily bruin: http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38960 The officer threatens to taze another student, that’s assault. I’m sorry those officers had an uncooperative suspect, you’d think they’d handle it more professionally. fire and fine them all, and send the “i’ll taze you too” officer to jail.
I love the internet.
The USA really does seem to regressing to 3rd world status in some respects. Not only was this brutality, but these were also really lazy and badly trained police officers.
It comes to something when two of your police officers cannot escort an unarmed and harmless but admitedly un-cooperative student, out of a library, without resorting to torture.
I think there’s a lesson here for all of us…no eating or drinking in the computer lab.
It is PIGS like this that make me happy when cops get killed.
Wow this guy was a retard. I mean i see that tasers aren’t supposed to be used on handcuffed people and stuff but still. This guy get’s tazed, is threatened to get tazed again, and doesn’t even say “i cant get up” but rather keeps yelling “FUCK YOU” He’s about as stupid as the cops.
Hey, leave the cops alone… the guy was probably not white so they are justified ;]
Right?
I mean their actions are justified…
Right? ;]
A policeman holding your arm to escort you off the premises when you have loitered is not unreasonable. The first thing we hear is this guy literally screaming “don’t touch me” repeatedly, then “let go of me” repeatedly. We then hear the cops saying “stand up” over and over again, so not only is he demanding rights he doesn’t have, he’s refusing to cooperate. The student is then tasered, and told again to get up. Each time he doesn’t do what he’s told, he gets tasered. So what’s the problem? If you don’t like people holding your arm, leave when you’re asked. Don’t want to be tasered? Do what the officer tells you. It ain’t rocket science, and it ain’t unreasonable.
Schmoo:
Didn’t you see those shots of him lying on the ground “Schmoo”? There’s probably a very good chance that he couldn’t get up. Those things really fucking hurt and I’m not sure if most anyone would do most anything that they were told after just one blast – which leads me to believe that he was unable to physically stand. Didn’t you notice how he stopped yelling things at the officers as it went on – he just got really quiet when not being shocked.
Cops like this sould be either shot in the face or subjected to their own torture methods.
Bob: Really quiet? Are you watching the same video? People who physically can’t stand up don’t tend to be able to scream – literally scream – about the patriot act. You’re also forgetting that he was told repeatedly to stand up before he was tasered the first time. What was physically stopping him then?
Okay FIRST OF ALL, I am not believing those of you who say these cops are right in what they have done here. If you read the article at all, you ought to know that the guy was aksed to leave. The cops left, came back, the guy was WALKING OUT THE DOOR, and one of the cops grabbed him. The another cop approached the guy.
Now, if I was leaving the library like I was asked and some cop grabbed me? I’d be like “get off me” also. This is when the guy got tazed. Repeatedly.
And the reason the cops kept saying “GET UP!” was because this poor kid was in so much pain that he couldn’t. So, what did they do? THEY TAZED HIM MORE! And kept on and on and on. These guys deserve to have the ever loving SHIT beat out of them.
Fucking ASS HOLES who let a badge and a tight navy blue uniform go to their heads.
Instead of harassing and torturing a student who forgot his ID, they ought to be out protecting us from crimes and REAL dangers. Instead of making all of us look like ignorant fuckwits.
Ever see a couple of bouncers eject a “rowdy” from a bar or concert?? No yelling “stand up” no screaming or tasering, or even physical assault. If professional bouncers want somebody out of the place they are physicaly grabbed, surrounded and carried off the premesis. No need to “stand up”. You will be bodilly removed whether you cooperate or not. It happens so fast that if you blink, you might not even notice it happened. A couple of professional bar bouncers could have diffused this situation much more effectively, professionally, and humanely than this debacle! I hope to see things like this widely publicized and circulated. Those officers, I hope, will not only be fined and fired but also serve sometime in prison for the assault they committed. I hope they enjoy learning what if feels like in prison to be the one on the receiving end. Being lound and un-cooperative are not the same as presenting a threat to the police officers or other patrons. Yes, he needed to go but what they did was torture. Why on earth should he have to “stand up”? It sounded to me like the cops were just mad that he was not following their orders. Like a petulent child frustrated that it can’t control everything and resorting to a tantrum in retaliation. They could have easily taken this suspect by the arms and quickly removed him from the premesis and diffused the situation. I hope they lose everything for their actions! This was an abuse of power and they deserve the worst for their actions. I look forward to updates.
I hope those fucking people using tasers burn. It’s stupid. This whole country is getting more and more stupid by the day.
I’ve been mistreated like this in highschool, fortuantly before the day of tasers. So fucking stupid.
I’m glad to see his peers screaming against this blatant abuse, it would be a cold day when people are quiet.
Laura:
They were saying it to him before he got tasered for the first time. What stopped him then?
Kelly:
Wrong way around. See below.
Everyone who thinks he shouldn’t have been tasered (everyone except me?):
When I read the story I said to myself (and said it out loud, too), “what a bunch of wankers”, assuming that the Bruin was telling it like it was. Then, however, I watched the video and found that they’d left out the bit about him resisting and completely failed in neutral point of view reporting. His conduct, his attitude, his tone of voice tell me exactly what kind of person he is – the “you can’t make me” type. Typical ‘entitled’ mentality. (‘Petulant’ is the perfect single word summary Kelly, you just slapped the tag on the wrong side).
The tantrum, the mouthing off, the sitting down was out of line. He was being asked to leave somewhere he had no right to be, he was being accompanied to make sure he did, and he didn’t like it. He thinks they have no right to hold his arm when he’s complying, but he’s wrong. While he’s where he’s not entitled to be, he’s the one in the wrong. If a police officer thinks that the best way to ensure he leaves is to hold on to him, then the officer is entitled to do so. The officer’s right to ensure he stops breaking the rules overrides the students right not to be touched, because the student is the one breaking the rules.
The student doesn’t see it that way because, like I said, he’s a classic case of “you can’t make me”-syndrome. The trouble for him is that they can make him and if he insists on calling their bluff, they will. The choice to cooperate or not was his, and he chose to risk the consequences of not cooperating.
Related to this, I keep seeing mentions in a lot of places about how police are reluctant to use rubber bullets to break up rioters, because around 1 in 10 people hit by a rubber bullet will suffer a more serious injury. So? If you don’t want to be shot with a rubber bullet, don’t fucking riot. Simple, no?
Another one: Over here in the UK, a group of prisoners have just settled out of court with the government for their claim that their human rights were abused. What did the prison do to them? Stopped them using heroin. Their claim was that they were forced them to go cold turkey. What the fuck? Did the prison make them take herion? No. The moment they first took herion, they assumed all responsibility for it. They assumed responsibility for any effects they suffer from it, and for any effects they might suffer if they couldn’t find it in the future. Prisons upholding the law is not something you can sue for, why they paid out is
beyond me.
The outcry over this tasering, the fuss over rubber bullets, burglars suing homeowners when they injure themselves while breaking into a house, sueing the government for something that’s your own damned fault – it’s pathetic. If you are trying to violate my rights, you give up whatever of your rights I have to violate to stop you. Simple. Law-breakers currently have more protection of their rights than the innocent do of theirs. That’s just retarded, as is anyone who defends the position. If that means 99% of the population are retards, then so be it, that figure sits nicely with my perception of the world. I’m a misanthrope and proud of it.
Schmoo, quick question.
Were the cops who threatened to taser the students who were asking for their badge numbers out of line?
Yep, they were. Unless they started interfering with the cops’ ability to deal with the first student they should have been safe from tasering, and the threat of tasering.
In fact, just to be clear, I think that the cops that I’m defending were a little quick to action and a little heavy handed. I think they were still well within the boundries of being reasonable, hence the defence, but “Get up now, or I’ll taser you in 3… 2… 1…” would have been better.
This is grotesque and made me feel ill.
Hey, guys – Schmoo doesn’t represent what we in the UK think. Besides, he’s probably just trying to be controversial.
I’ve got nothing to worry about, because I’m not doing anything wrong, attitude? Hit the link: http://www.telisphere.com/~cearley/sean/camps/first.html
That might sound extreme, but sliding into a dictatorship wasn’t something the German’s imagined in the 1930’s, either.
When law enforcement officers can publically get away with violence, (eg. Rodney King), don’t be surprised if there’s a riot at the other end.
(Schmoo) “If you don’t want to be shot with a rubber bullet, don’t fucking riot.” Maybe we should all just lie down on the ground and stop thinking, altogether? A great big riot in this country stopped the Poll Tax (Once in 1381 and again in 1990), for example.
Thankfully, rioting isn’t necessary for dealing with these cops – just a legal system that works and people who care about human dignity.
Remember your rights. If all else fails, there’s always the second ammendment, eh? lol
Schmoo, you are using invalid arguments and unrealistic comparisons.
The rioters and rubber bullets argument? Not applicable. A riot is by definition “a violent disturbance.” Since a rioter is already using violent force, then authorities are within their rights to use an equal amount of force to subdue them. Hence rubber bullets. No one disagrees with that. And heroin? Are you honestly comparing heroin use to a person loitering in a library? That’s extreme. And the resulting lawsuit was of course ridiculous. We agree.
But let’s stay focused. What everyone is disagreeing with you about is this case. Not the others.
You’re arguing that the kid was treated this way because of his uncooperative attitude or his generally petulant personality. So what if he was uncooperative and petulant? Does that warrant excessive force? No. By law, an officer can only retaliate with the same force used to threaten them. This “if he didn’t want to get tazed, he should have cooperated” argument is ridiculous. What if he had been shot? Schmoo-logic says, “If he didn’t want to get shot, he should have cooperated.” Your argument gives carte blanche to the authorities. You’re letting the police act however they want because someone annoys them.
So the question is, “Did these officers use excessive force?” The one and only correct answer to this question is “Yes.” So what if the kid sat on the floor. So what if he was loud, screaming, petulant, or obnoxious. None of these things matter to this case. Did he use violent physical force on the police? No. Did they use violent physical force on him? Yes. You mean they used violent physical force on a guy, while he was handcuffed, and he didn’t do anything violent first? Wow, is that ever illegal.
So from here on in, let’s stick to relevant and valid arguments. For the sake of debate.
I think there’s simply no question that these police officers were out of line. Excessive use of force, undoubtedly.
Policies for taser use differ between police departments, but the general guidelines indicate appropriate use during situations wherein:
-The subject is threatening harm to himself, the officers, or others
-The subject is armed
-The subject displays violent or aggressive behavior
None of these scenarios apply to this situation (based on the video footage, who knows what happened before recording began).
Please refer to the “Advanced Weaponry – TASER” article here:
http://www.less-lethal.org/web/articles.aspx?group=2
It outlines very specifically Monroe County Sheriff’s Office’s policies on appropriate use – other agencies probably aren’t much different.
Two things I find most interesting there:
“Once the subject is restrained or has complied, the taser shall be made safe.”
“The taser should not be used in response to passive resistance…”
The subject in this case was definitely restrained and certainly passive (can’t get much less aggressive than lying down). Sure, he wasn’t complying with the officers’ orders to “get up.” Maybe because tasers are specifically designed to immobilize.
This (http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Czarnecki/Taser.Recommendations.htm) clearly educated person recommends 3 taser exposures at the most and only on “physically assaultive subjects.”
Finally, a hammy news cast with a reporter being voluntarily tasered, but I think it illustrates rather well the effectiveness of one taser exposure: http://media.skoopy.com/misc/taser_reporter/
I hope to see some reprimand/retribution coming to these officers. Seriously, I hate how these (hopefully isolated) incidents foster distrust of law enforcement.
I am wondering, don’t take me wrong. This guy, by name sounds a Muslim. “MOSTAFA”. If he is, then you get my point why I am wondering.
Stewart Johnson said:
How do you know what their policy is? What precisely a taser may be used for is up to the department.
Justin said:
Clearly your job with “security” has not educated you on use of force matters as much as you’d like to think. The police are in fact not limited to reacting with the “same force used to threaten them.” Police officers are authorized to use physical force to gain the compliance of an uncooperative individual. Physical force is most certainly authorized when someone is resisting arrest (and going limp is considered resisting).
Laura said:
Were you at the scene? What are you basing this on? Because the news report said so? Even so, if they can articulate reasonable suspicion for approaching and stopping him (given his lack of proper ID they already met that standard), they have the right to stop and question him.
Good for you. Too bad you don’t have the right to resist when given a lawful order. News flash: police officers have the right to make physical contact with you. Grabbing a trespasser’s arm to escort him out is not unreasonable and is allowed under the law. You resisting such action, however, is *illegal*. I wonder where this attitude comes from that makes you folks think you can ignore a police officer, behave in a non-compliant manner and then expect them to stand around and twiddle their thumbs instead of taking action. What do you think they’re being paid to do? Eat donuts all day?
That’s the purpose of the campus ID policy. If this individual had simply complied when asked by the CSO to leave instead of being belligerent, there would have been absolutely no issue. This guy wanted attention and he got it.
Justin blathered:
Before you continue to publicly display your ignorance of California law, let me interject something:
Section 300.21 of the California Penal Code, subsection 835 (A):
“Any peace officer that has reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense may use reasonable force to effect the arrest, to prevent escape, or to overcome resistance. A peace officer who makes or attempts to make an arrest need not retreat or desist from his/her efforts by reason of resistance or threatened resistance of the person being arrested; nor shall such officer be deemed the aggressor or lose his/her right to self-defense by the use of reasonable force to effect the arrest or to prevent escape or to overcome resistance.”
We have two criteria that must be met:
1) Was there “reasonable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a public offense”? Yes, quite clearly. First there was the question of his presence in the library without ID. (Loitering/trespassing). First probable cause of a violation of law. Second, he refused a lawful order to leave the building. Second probable cause of a violation of law. Third, when an attempt was made to lawfully escort him out of the building (lawfully includes an officer grabbing your arm, like it or not), he refused to comply again with the lawful order by going limp. Third probable cause of a violation of law. Then he started to become belligerent, caused a public scene and repeatedly engaged in obscene language. Disorderly conduct (or whatever the CA equivalent is, every state has such a statute), his fourth probable cause of a violation of law. Further compounded by obstructing governmental administration and resisting arrest. His fifth and sixth probable causes of a violation of law.
2) Reasonableness. Contrary to your misconception, there is no requirement for “equal physical force” to be used. The force must only be reasonable. In this case the force was used to “overcome resistance” and “effect an arrest.” A taser does not cause any lasting physical injuries. It causes pain, but it’s probably preferable to the alternative, which would have been the use of compliance strikes by hand or baton. It would seem, at first glance, the officers used the least severe of their force options in this case. A proper investigation will reveal the exact details.
Folks, please stop armchair lawyering/policing. Especially when you blatantly have no clue what you’re talking about.
I bet most people these days dont’ work on farms. I also doubt many would bet against me.
I’d like to bet that if most people did, they would maybe realize that tasers are for the animals and not the people.
Lets quit painting a fancy hi tech name on these gagedts and get back to calling them cattle prods.
America, why have you singed us up the same way you serve our beef?
A cattle prod would kill a human being. But being that you don’t work on a farm either, you probably have no clue what you’re talking about.
Am I the only one who noted the cop that stepped in around 6 minutes and 30 seconds? At 6:39 he threatens, “Get back over there, or you’ll get Tased, too” to the boy in the white t-shirt (who was visibly upset by what had just happened). Maybe the cops wouldn’t have had such an unruly crowd on their hands at that point if they wouldn’t have been so ridiculous in the first place. This video makes me sick.
When determining reasonableness, you have to refer to the use-of-force continuum. This hierarchy is exactly what enumerates the bounds of legal force.
Did the student act in a ridiculous manner? Yes. Did he resist and thereby break the law? Yes. But he still maintained the role of a physically passive resister, which should have warranted some kind of less abrasive contact control. Pain compliance tactics are, by any force continuum I’ve ever studied, reserved for active resisters. And a Taser is considered a pain compliance tactic.
The force continuum is like a step function, and the police can’t move to the next level unless the subject initiates it. In this case, however, they did. I think the best evidence of that overstep occurs when the officer threatens to use his Taser against a witness. The bystander asks for a badge number, and the officer threatens him with a pain compliance technique. Clearly this man does not understand the bounds created by a use-of-force continuum, and thus is operating outside of responsible boundaries.
UOF, you speak as though the legality of an action is the same as the justification for it. People write laws, not cops. People did not write these laws or elect lawmakers to do so to see this sort of outcome. If the implementation and outcome of seeing these laws enacted is a grotesque spectacle like this, we are naturally upset and say f&^k the fact that they may have been on the side of the law in their actions, it’s still reprehensible. Since laws ultimately originate with the people, not the lawmakers or the cops employed them, the people have the right to be offended to the point of civil disobediance or outright rebellion. Watching that video my visceral feeling was that if I was in that library at the time, I would have found the largest reference book within sight and thrown it with all my might at the head of the cop directing the action. Yes, I would assault a police officer, so what. He was assaulting a citizen. Wanna shoot me, go for it. Let’s make this intersting. The cops work for me and my fellow citizens, not the other way around.
People who insist that cops should start catching REAL lawbreakers, are usually also the people that give most cops such a hard time that every action takes thrice as long, leaving them no time at all to do their real jobs. You think the police likes that? No they don’t, they’d rather spend their time doing really usefull thingss, not solving stupid arguments and escorting absolutely obnoxious people out of a library they shopuldn’t be in in te first place.
Especially students do not respect police officers at all. Very many students think they are way better than anybody else … absolutely frustrating people to be around when you’re not one of them. Those students used to outrage me even when I was in college. Think they’re on top of the world, they can do it all, when really they have never ever contributed anything to society yet, other than being really drunk every weekend.
I’m not saying the student here was one of them. Looking at the video he was a bit of a loud drama queen, and absolutely feeling superior to the cops. As do many commenters here that think they know how the law should be interpreted. They know nothing, but think they know how it SHOULD be, and insist that everyone should feel it that way. I ma of course referring to the dumb remarks about ‘equal force’. It’s a figment of the imagination: sounds nice, but really would not work, of course. It would mean that you could ultimately only shoot a criminal after he had just shot you … yeah right. Good thinking!
Judging the officers on what you see here is dangerous, at least. We do not know what happened before, and images have a way of not really being a good report of the events. An officer threatening a bystander to taser him is appalling, yes. The whole situation does seem pretty hostile towards the officers though, they are very outnumbered in a small area.
And who knows what they had to do earlier that day? They may have faced stress that most students won’t know in their lifetime. And no, they don’t get paid enough for that, instead of most of the college-boys and girls who will get paid way more in the future.
Give them respect, you’ll get it back. Think you’re better, you will get in trouble. It is not new: anyone remember Bobby Fischer in Pasadena? A little cooperation could have spared him a night in jail …
Probably, after all, everyone you’ve ever met agrees with you, don’t they?
Did it? Or was it one of the many other non-violent forms of protest?
Indeed. When you see the relevence of my points and yours are valid, let me know. I will not waste my time knocking down the straw men you set up (‘police can do what they like because you annoy them’), answering facetious questions (Am I really comparing herion use to loitering? or are you missing my point?) or explaining myself further to you when you will apparently ignore the bits you don’t like (Are you going to acknowledge UOF’s point about the letter of the law? You seemed pretty adamant about legality in your response to me, then when he shows you to be wrong – and even goes to the trouble of finding and quoting the relevant section of law – you don’t even mention it?). Maybe though, you can start things off by explaining what the ‘equal force’ reaction to his sitting down should have been? Trying to talk him into leaving? How long would they have to do that for? How long is it reasonable to keep a police officer off the street because some punk kid doesn’t want to leave somewhere he’s not entitled to be?
You’d've got zapped and arrested for your thuggery, and good thing too.
Well said.
Hi, Schmoo
Yes. Yes, as a matter of fact, everyone I meet does agree with me. If they don’t, I electrify their ass hahahaha
First of all, equal force does exist. It is established by a use-of-force continuum. A use-of-force continuum is a set list of situational responses accepted and used by every single law enforcement agency, federal and state, in the United States. Without a use-of-force continuum, there would be no legal limit to the severity of police response in any given situation. It does not require an equal reaction to an action, only an equal reaction to a threat. So an officer doesn’t have to wait to be shot at to use his gun, but he does have to wait until the threat of deadly force to employ deadly force.
Secondly, my dear friend Schmoo, I did address our respected conversational partner UOF. He quoted the specific law for us, which he pointed out had two criteria, a) a public offense and b) reasonableness. I first agreed that the law had been broken, which no one disputes. But as for reasonableness, you have to refer to a force continuum to determine what reasonable force is. And as I said, pain compliance tactics are reserved for active (not passive) resistance, or at least they are in every continuum I’ve ever studied. And I’ve studied a few through the years as I got my law degree, worked for a Commonwealth Attorney (which is called a DA in most places), and worked that security job in which I apprehended and exerted force on people every week. What would I have done in this situation? I would have placed a hand on his arm and led him out while he was still standing. If he had sat down, I would have picked him up with a fellow officer and carried him out. Most importantly, I would have acted quickly. I know the police are under pressure to make impotant split second decisions, but they need to at least have a firm handle on the force they’re legally allowed to use in a given situation.
As for my lack of citation, I must have forgotten that I’m writing a research paper here. Plus, I thought force continuums were common knowledge. So I skipped on the parenthetical documentation. I mean, it makes sense that there has to be something limiting the force police can use, right? That something is a force continuum. If you’re interested in knowing more about the rights of a citizen, read up on it.
I want to share a very powerful short human rights video. It would behoove anyone yielding a taser to see it. http://www.afreshopinion.com/2006/09/human_rights.html human rights
I see what Schmoo is trying to say.
Of course, using the taser is way excessive, but the dude should have been listening. I’ve been asked for my ID on campus, and you know what? I provide it. I don’t yell and disrespect security. Personally, I like my campus being secure and if someone doesn’t have their ID, then they need to go the fuck home and get it, not yell at the cops.
That being said, yeah, the tasering was uncalled for, but he can’t have seriously expected to be treated like royalty acting like an entitled ninny.
I can’t believe the right wing morons that defend these cops actions. They talk as if the man had committed a crime in forgetting his card. He may have broken the college rules but is forgetting your library pass really a criminal offence in America? If it is then it’s hardly the land of the free.
The people who defend these cops are the types of people that turn a blind eye to atrocities in fascist dictatorships. The “well if you don’t do anything wrong you have nothing to worry about” types who are the drones that fascists thrive off.
I think somebody pointed out earlier that nightclub bouncers have much more stubborn and dangerous characters to escort from premises than petulant students. They manage in the whole without the need to torture with electrical devices.
If two cops cannot escort a mouthy student from a library without resorting to this then there is something essentially wrong with your society. A quiet word in his ear and a bit of understanding that sometimes people might forget their passes is all that was needed, instead the guy was treated like a criminal because he did something that happens to all of us sometimes. The cops are the criminals here.
Officers resort to tazering uncooperative people they pull over on the highway if they resist arrest. You can find videos of that just about anywhere. The difference is, the drunks they pull over are not only breaking the law but are putting themselves and others in danger. I don’t see how this student was putting anyone in danger, so tazering him was definitely excessive use of force. The fact the police issued a statement concerning one of the officer’s history of abuse should clear up any doubts about wrong doing.
About his shaky history: yes, it’s bad. But choking a fratboy with a night stick? People should get rewards for that.
Of course, but you’re trying to make it too granular. As far as I’m concerned there is 1) no physical force, 2) physical force and 3) deadly force. Like I’ve said before, there are other forms of physical force that could have been used, some better (dragging him out), some worse (baton), but they’re all in that one category for me, and therefor equal.
They didn’t taser him for forgetting his card, they tasered him for refusing to cooperate. If you can’t see the difference, you might like to refrain from throwing around the ‘moron’ tag.
“there are other forms of physical force that could have been used, some better (dragging him out), some worse (baton), but they’re all in that one category for me, and therefor equal.”
In that case, Schmoo, may I suggest you are an utter moron; maybe I could try beating you around the head with a rubber hose, electrocuting you, and then escorting you by the arm and see if you think they are all in the same category.
For me the argument is simple: The student is outnumbered, unarmed, handcuffed and non-violent. Any one of these factors should instantly negate the use of batons, tear or pepper spray, stun guns or Tazers.
These Police should be instantly dismissed, without the publicity of a investigation. Even a ‘campus cop’ with two weeks training could have handled this better – fuck even a librarian could have handled this better….
He got what he deserved. This is just anther case of liberal college students trying to fight the power. Why didn’t just show his I.D.? The situation became out of hand because of the student not following direction.
1) Escorting by the arm is not physical – it is symbolic, much like placing you hand on your holster without drawing your gun. Dragging is physical force.
2) Beating me around the head with a rubber hose or electrocuting me is pretty much the same thing, as is dragging me. If you do any of them, I’ll fight back. If a cop does any of them (not that they’d have to), I’ll comply. I have no right to object to which one he chooses ends when I have forced him to choose in the first place. If I don’t like his choice, I can comply and he’ll stop. I really don’t think this is rocket science.
You think that any of those means you should be safe from physical force, yet I’m the moron? So if he’s outnumbered but trying to beat the shit out of the cops with a chair he’s safe from physical force because he’s outnumbered? If he’s unarmed but punching, kicking and headbutting he’s safe from physical force because he’s unarmed? If he’s handcuffed but kicking and headbutting them he’s safe from physical force because he’s handcuffed? Non-violent – well, hey, that’s the subject of the entire thread ain’t it?
I liked that he was tazered ;] that was awesome and he deserved it…
now that I said that, I think those cops should be fired… ok maybe not all of them but they should be treated harsh and told what was wrong with their action. They need to very clearly understand every aspect of that situation and realize how many things they did wrong.
I’m not making things too granular my dear Schmoo. You’ve established a force continuum with three levels. They usually have six. I don’t think I’ve ever seen one with less than five. Every use of force continuum at every level of state and federal government draws certain distinctions within physical force. It’s never lumped together in one broad category like that. Thus the penalties are also differentiated.
You’d agree that at some point, there is a number of levels that is too granular? What are your criteria?
“If he’s handcuffed but kicking and headbutting them he’s safe from physical force because he’s handcuffed?”
In fact yes, he is. Once he has handcuffs on he is in the custody of the police and their responsiblilty, and is technically, restrained. Any harm coming to him from that point on, wether from the police or other persons, is totally the responsibilty of the police. If they bang your head on the roof of their patrol car, their responsibility, if you break free and run off a cliff, their responsiblity.
“If a cop does any of them (not that they’d have to), I’ll comply. I have no right to object to which one he chooses ends when I have forced him to choose in the first place.”
Now who is the moron? So if a cop decides to shoot you dead cos your protesting and he has had a bad day you have no right to object? If the police break down your door and bludgeon you and your family half to death cos they Got the Wrong House you wouldn’t object? How about you are already in handcuffs and a cop is tazering you you wouldn’t object?
Don’t be so goddamn stupid, cops are people and people are dumb as posts – even more so for cops where the entry requirement, over here at least, is just 1 GCSE.
The police have limits & rules the same as normal citizens – normal citizens are punished for not obeying the laws and, in some cases, disobeying police officers – However that punishment does not and should not include Physical torture (in fact I believe that is mentioned specifically in the constitution of the US, hmmm?). Being handcuffed and tazered is NO DIFFERENT from being strapped to a chair and tortured.
Each of us has a choice wether to obey the laws of our country or not, but whichever option we choose, our basic human rights are NOT AFFECTED – even if you were a mass murdering terrorist Paedophile – and I’m not saying you aren’t Schmoo! – you still have the right to humane treatment.
And this ain’t it…..
Anyone know what’s going on with this cop? I’d like to send him a holiday basket for all the laughs he’s given me since this happened.