quote Originally posted by Phranc: Why don't you show some evidence I'm wrong.

Oh, is that how it works? You can twist the facts and make up any ridiculous story you wish and it’s then up to others to prove you’re wrong? Get a freaking grip on reality, Phranc.

quote Originally posted by Phranc: Have you even watched the video or are you just playing stupid.

Why would I bother “playing stupid” in any thread where you’re involved? It would be no contest. Whether it's “playing stupid” or "plain stupid", you're the undisputed champ in either regard, Phranc.

quote Originally posted by pokeyfiero: I think the protocol is " If you don't feel like arguing your absolute authority then just tazer em and book em."

patriot act ftw? It's clear this man was a terrorist.

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: Okay, let me play devils advocate. Lets say he wasn't tasered. Instead, he is screaming bloody murder and kicking cops off him for 30 minutes.

30 minutes? He was being told to step away from the mic within 30 seconds. Why?

Okay, now let ME play devils advocate.

Let's say this fella was given an opportunity to ask his questions. Might've taken a minute or two if he wasn't being continually harassed by “security”. Then maybe Kerry could’ve answered the questions. Worst case scenario - we all would’ve been better informed as to where one politician stood on an issue.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Why would I bother “playing stupid” in any thread where you’re involved? It would be no contest. Whether it's “playing stupid” or "plain stupid", you're the undisputed champ in either regard, Phranc.

So you haven't watched the whole video? Instead of arguing points you insult me but thats what you do best, not that I would expect more from you. I mean for you do debate you'd have to remove your head from your ass first. Oh look I can do it too. I can act like a whiny biatch just like you ans attach everything but the the point!!


Why don't you give me an irrelevant history lesson to make your self feel superior.

quote Originally posted by Phranc: Why don't you give me an irrelevant history lesson to make your self feel superior.

Nah, all I have to do is re-read any exchanges we've had.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Nah, all I have to do is re-read any exchanges we've had.

Like when you tell me a totally useless quip from history that has nothing to do with anything. Yeah I can see how that would you feel real good about your self since you get totally owned when discussing the actual points. Kinda like why a guy only gets 30 seconds to ask a question. So go on and cuddle up to your delusional greatness.

[This message has been edited by Phranc (edited 09-18-2007).]

i'm not going to spend 2 hours downloading videos on dialup.
the university of florida is located in gainesville, fl., originally known as hogtown. coincidence?

quote Originally posted by Phranc: Instead of arguing points you insult me but thats what you do best, not that I would expect more from you.

Phranc, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps you missed my post of 09-18-2007 05:54 PM where I politely asked you to explain your comments.

If you would be kind enough to respond to that post, great. If not, piss off...

quote Originally posted by pokeyfiero: I think the protocol is " If you don't feel like arguing your absolute authority then just tazer em and book em."

That seems to be the practice, and that's the problem.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Okay, now let ME play devils advocate. Let's say this fella was given an opportunity to ask his questions. Might've taken a minute or two if he wasn't being continually harassed by “security”. Then maybe Kerry could’ve answered the questions. Worst case scenario - we all would’ve been better informed as to where one politician stood on an issue.

So it sounds like your issue isn't with the police, it's with the school representative(s) who set up the rules of the discussion forum.

And I agree with you there. The police just used the tools they had to subdue an out of control person. Same way security escorted those antiwar activist ladies out of congress during Petraeus' report. The difference is they just walked away with the officers, they weren't trying to flee, they weren't pushing the officers away... And they also didn't get tasered.

[This message has been edited by ryan.hess (edited 09-18-2007).]

Regardless of wether or not you are totally 100% sure you did nothing and are not guilty, when the cops say "freeze" "get down" "stop" "move and I'll shoot" hit the pavement and be totally co-operative, all fighting cops does is gets you the wintery freshness of mace or the warm tingle of a taser. Once you go to court you can argue. All resisting arrest does is add another potential conviction to your record.

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: So it sounds like your issue isn't with the police, it's with the school representative(s) who set up the rules of the discussion forum.

Two points, Ryan:

1) Do we even know for sure what the "rules of the discussion forum" were? Were the actual rules of engagement reported anywhere? If 30 seconds was indeed the limit per person at the mic (which seems awfully short), was this a hard and fast limitation to any line of questioning, or was this limit conveniently invoked only when the questions were judged to be pointed?

2) I have a huge issue with police using Taser guns when they aren't absolutely necessary. It didn't look to me in the video like the police or any members of the public were in any imminent danger of this fella getting violent with them. As I stated earlier, it appeared that this guy's only weapon was his mouth.

Meanwhile, OJ gets away with murder and engages in armed robbery and has yet to feel the tickle of a taser. Sorry, but I digress...

[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 09-18-2007).]

HA! Exactly (well, pretty close) what I was saying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



OK, maybe Kerry did say something but not much effort standing there with his hand in his pocket...

Hmm I am taking a Admin of Justice class and from what I understand An officer must do everything he can to bring a violator into custody. they are given authority to use force to make the violators comply, but within reasonable cause. Now this guy was not obeying AT ALL! And they couldn't get the cuffs on him. Keep in mind that only 1 cop can cuff a man. It doesnt mean that just because their are 8 cops on the guy it will be easier to cuff him. Not all of them are holding his arms in order for the one cop to cuff him. So they resort to their next line of tactics, Which is the tazer. It is used to complete the arrest and as an alternative to beating him with a night stick. Would you have rather seen Something that actually causes physical damage used on the guy? I have to say that Its all fair game to use the tazer. Its used to detain a criminal for enough time to slap some cuffs on him. He got shocked and is still living without any damages. I would have to say that the tazer is a lot better than physical force. In fact it has to be one of the best ways to make the punk obey, nonetheless its definitely not the most favored by civilians.

------------------
(>-_-)> A signature Is suppose to be in here? <(-_-< )

Ok. Watching the event from the view of a different camera and also sleeping on it, I see it a little bit differently this morning. The guy was obviously trying to stir things up and I think he bit off more than he could chew, or he "staged" this wanting to get himself in a scuffle with police and all on tape. I watched a show the other week showing people who will get the cops engaged and they will scream "I don't know what I did wrong" or other things about how they are being abused when its really just a show for the cameras. That could definitely have been it. I think the cops should have gotten him off the mic and left it at that, probably shouldn't have escorted him out and then jumped/tazed him while trying to detain him, in which case things wouldn't have escalated to the point they did had they not tried to detain him.

Although, if you want to see what happens when tazers aren't available to cops, this can be the result as happened in my city. Guns weren't used as there are already very tense race relations between cops and the black of the city ('01 race riots and economic boycott which still prevents many entertainers from performing here, so they go to neighboring cities). So instead, they decide to see how many cops it takes to beat a man to death, although he was resisting at the time.

[This message has been edited by Rainman (edited 09-19-2007).]

http://www.boston.com/news/...ry_event_is_tasered/

quote Meyer, who has a history of chronicling his public hijinks, was released yesterday following a night in jail on charges of disturbing the peace and resisting an officer. I

quote Meyer apparently contributed to the thorough documentation of his dramatic arrest. "The student who was Tasered had handed a camera to another person who was with him before he went up to speak," said Steve Orlando, director of the university's news bureau.

Well now it looks like he may have resisted and caused a scene purposely. But I'm sure people will say its still all the cops fault.

quote Originally posted by Phranc: Well now it looks like he may have resisted and caused a scene purposely. But I'm sure people will say its still all the cops fault.

So if I hand a 6 pack of beer to a cop and say "drink this then drive home," they'll do it? Just because you present an opportunity for the po po's to act irresponsibly, they should take advantage of it and do so, then blame it on the person who opened the door?

quote Originally posted by F-I-E-R-O: So if I hand a 6 pack of beer to a cop and say "drink this then drive home," they'll do it? Just because you present an opportunity for the po po's to act irresponsibly, they should take advantage of it and do so, then blame it on the person who opened the door?

Yup keep blaming the cops. The only one acting irresponsible here is the idiot 21 year old who screamed and resisted arrest like a girl. But go on and blame the cops.

I think for clarification - we should say "disorderly conduct" - NOT resisting arrest.
resisting arrest is: cop "you are under arrest, you have the right to...etc..."
nothing like that happened. not even close.
maybe I should watch the video, eh?

ok, watched the video. that is CLASSIC oppression. as soon as they grabbed his arms and tried escorting him away - they are screwed. they committed themselves to a path they had no hope of coming out clean. yes, the dude is a idiot. that does not matter. its VERY bad form to an open mic Q & A session, and then shut down anyone asking the wrong Q's. of course, rattling on, endlessly, not even waiting for answers dont help.

so - what is the lesson here? dont Q authority?

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Not that much surprises me anymore... <snip>

Frankly, I can't disagree with you on point you made in this post. Unfortunately, the fact is, this particular guy wasn't actually asking any "tough questions". What he was doing was blathering on conspiracies, impeaching Bush based on the speculation that Kerry had actually won the election (old news) and then if he belonged to some secret Yale society. This guy was NOT who I would want representing my rebellious attitudes.
If this had actually been a person who didn't come across as being a complete raving lunatic, I would agree completely.

[This message has been edited by Taijiguy (edited 09-19-2007).]

quote Originally posted by Patrick: 2) I have a huge issue with police using Taser guns when they aren't absolutely necessary. It didn't look to me in the video like the police or any members of the public were in any imminent danger of this fella getting violent with them. As I stated earlier, it appeared that this guy's only weapon was his mouth.

...and his person. The guy was fighting off 2 cops and almost got away!

Look at this video, which I think parallels the situation:



He had no weapons either. I bet that even though there were 2 cops, he could have got away if he fought them. Lesson learned: failure to comply = Taser.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: I think for clarification - we should say "disorderly conduct" - NOT resisting arrest. resisting arrest is: cop "you are under arrest, you have the right to...etc..." nothing like that happened. not even close. maybe I should watch the video, eh? ok, watched the video. that is CLASSIC oppression. as soon as they grabbed his arms and tried escorting him away - they are screwed. they committed themselves to a path they had no hope of coming out clean. yes, the dude is a idiot. that does not matter. its VERY bad form to an open mic Q & A session, and then shut down anyone asking the wrong Q's. of course, rattling on, endlessly, not even waiting for answers dont help. so - what is the lesson here? dont Q authority?

The lesson is don't cause a disturbance that upsets the peace or resist arrest. He was resisting arrest. The cops said you are under arrest. Why do you think he was screaming like a girl " why am I under arrest?" This isn't classic oppression. I love how you say the guys idiotic actions didn't mater.


Keep blaming the cops. Maybe if you and the rest keep believing its all the cops fault it will come true.

no - he ASKED "Am I under arrest?"
I agree 100% this guy is idotic. that is NOT illegal. as much as I wish it were.

police cannot just grab folk for no reason. and, then taser them if they resist being grabbed for no reason.

they skipped the steps of escalation. I agree 100% the end result would have been the same. but, they needed to make the demand for him to remove himself. of course he would have refused. then they needed to present the threat of force. and, again, the fool would have refused. now, you can grab & escort him.

quote Originally posted by ryan.hess: ...and his person. The guy was fighting off 2 cops and almost got away! Look at this video, which I think parallels the situation: ... He had no weapons either. I bet that even though there were 2 cops, he could have got away if he fought them. Lesson learned: failure to comply = Taser.

OMG! The cops in this situation handled it perfectly! Saw a dangerous situation, used level heads, tried to calm the guy down knowing that trying to force the guy verbally and physically would only make the situation worse, got help and took appropriate action when needed.

1. the guy wasn't fighting anyone, but was resisting arrest
2. the guy stated that he would be willing to resist more and take on the dog as well
3. this is a BIG guy, with two officers working to arrest him
4. if I were trying to arrest this guy, damn straight he'd be tasered!

Now parallel this with this guy vs 5 or 6 cops...



These cops were poorly trained to handle these types of situations.

quote Originally posted by F-I-E-R-O: OMG! The cops in this situation handled it perfectly! Saw a dangerous situation, used level heads, tried to calm the guy down knowing that trying to force the guy verbally and physically would only make the situation worse, got help and took appropriate action when needed.

Watch your video @ 1:40 remaining. He is fighting off 2, then 3 officers. I would call that as "a dangerous situation".

How about this woman? There's only 2 officers here. The only thing she does wrong is she didn't get out of the car.



You're supposed to do what the cops say. Fight them in the court of law. If you physically and verbally fight them, a Taser is an expected outcome.

[This message has been edited by ryan.hess (edited 09-19-2007).]

Phranc, leave 'em go, they'll never understand the situation if they're first not willing to. I can't believe the BS some of you are spewing.

quote ...looks like the only weapon he had was his mouth

...or something along those lines.
I bet you I could cite more instances where people were beat to death by attackers USING THEIR BARE HANDS, than you could taser deaths. Like somebody else mentioned, it was not out of the realm of possibility for this kid to start swinging at the cops, he had already shoved them away. And they gave him PLENTY of time to comply before tazering him. They still had not gotten him under physical control when they tazed him.

The cops did good, kid was looking for a rise and got what was coming.

[This message has been edited by ConvictedRedneck (edited 09-19-2007).]

quote .....They still had not gotten him under physical control when they tazed him. The cops did good, kid was looking for a rise and got what was coming.

thats part of the problem here: did he need to be physically controlled?
if being an idiot is grounds for beating - well, then cops are way behind....
but, I am sure everyone here can see this guy would not shut up untill physically shut up. and even then wouldnt shut up.
and thats why this sucks. we are not required by law to shut up. especially in a Q & A session.
other folk got to speak for more than 60 seconds, didnt they?

OK - there was no time limit.

He was not reading his SUBMITTED QUESTION. That's one of the rules.... You submit your question in advance, the school OK's it, and you get to read it to Kerry. Ask some different question or go off on some tangent and you get booted. Simple as that.

Play the video. @ 2:57 remaining you hear someone behind him say "Read the question please."

@ 2:52 a lady says "ask your question." three or four times.

To which he responds, "I'll ask my question!"

[This message has been edited by ryan.hess (edited 09-19-2007).]

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: thats part of the problem here: did he need to be physically controlled? if being an idiot is grounds for beating - well, then cops are way behind.... but, I am sure everyone here can see this guy would not shut up untill physically shut up. and even then wouldnt shut up. and thats why this sucks. we are not required by law to shut up. especially in a Q & A session. other folk got to speak for more than 60 seconds, didnt they?

Yes, he did, he was physically resisting being ESCORTED from the building. When he started shoving officers away that were trying to escort him, he was now causing disorderly conduct, a cause for his arrest. And this is not a matter of freedom of speech, the QA session had RULES which he was clearly not following. They had every right to have him removed from the event. It was his actions, not his words, that got him arrested, and ultimately tazed. And the physical approach of the cops was not to make him shut up (to which you implied,) it was to just be able to cuff him.

[This message has been edited by ConvictedRedneck (edited 09-19-2007).]

he was already on his stomach, they didn't have to taze him for any reason other than shutting him up....which isn't a valid reason to use this weapon. yeah he was being annoying and a bit of an idiot, but the cops were out of line....if you can't see that, you have problems.

------------------

quote Originally posted by F-I-E-R-O: OMG! The cops in this situation handled it perfectly! Saw a dangerous situation, used level heads, tried to calm the guy down knowing that trying to force the guy verbally and physically would only make the situation worse, got help and took appropriate action when needed. 1. the guy wasn't fighting anyone, but was resisting arrest 2. the guy stated that he would be willing to resist more and take on the dog as well 3. this is a BIG guy, with two officers working to arrest him 4. if I were trying to arrest this guy, damn straight he'd be tasered! Now parallel this with this guy vs 5 or 6 cops... These cops were poorly trained to handle these types of situations.

So because someone did better on the genetic lottery, they should be more likely to be tazed? What if the scrawny buck-o'nine has a knife and decides to shove it into some officers' spine? You might as well say that you shouldn't taze him because he's white.

And I still don't know what Kerry was supposed to have done. You said he should have let him answer the question. The article indicates that occured. Then you say that he shouldn't have just stood there with his hands in his pockets, so I'm guessing you feel he should have physically intervened between law enforcement?

I'm curious, did the cops beat on you when you ran from them?

quote Originally posted by LITEDAZE: he was already on his stomach, they didn't have to taze him for any reason other than shutting him up....which isn't a valid reason to use this weapon. yeah he was being annoying and a bit of an idiot, but the cops were out of line....if you can't see that, you have problems.

Go ahead, keep seeing what you want to see and make the cops look like the bad guys. HE WAS RESISTING ARREST. When they tazed him he was pulling his arms away from the cops and trying to turn over on his back. They only had one hand cuffed at this point, they were not able to get the other one cuffed because of him pulling and resisting. You act as if he was lying peacefully on the ground with his hands behind his back and they tazed him because he was swearing at them. Get your head out of your ass.

if he was arrested, who read him his rights? they had him down, they were able to cuff him, the tazer wasn't needed. seems like it's your head that needs to be plunged out. you can't taze someone because they're swearing at you!! that's retarded

[This message has been edited by LITEDAZE (edited 09-19-2007).]

quote Originally posted by ConvictedRedneck: Yes, he did, he was physically resisting being ESCORTED from the building. When he started shoving officers away that were trying to escort him, he was now causing disorderly conduct, a cause for his arrest. And this is not a matter of freedom of speech, the QA session had RULES which he was clearly not following. They had every right to have him removed from the event. It was his actions, not his words, that got him arrested, and ultimately tazed. And the physical approach of the cops was not to make him shut up (to which you implied,) it was to just be able to cuff him.

what actions? he did nothing but speak.

sorry - I am two sided on this. I hate idiots. this guy is an idiot. I am glad his stupidity got him a beat down.
but - I am also worried about someone recieving a beat down for speaking - no matter how annoyingly.

quote Originally posted by LITEDAZE: if he was arrested, who read him his rights? they had him down, they were able to cuff him, the tazer wasn't needed. seems like it's your head that needs to be plunged out.

THEY ONLY HAD ONE CUFF ON WHEN THEY TAZED HIM. I'm not sure what you dont understand about this. He was stilling fighting off being cuffed when they tazed him. He was not read his rights because getting him under control was a bit more important at the time. They'll read him his rights once he's cooperative and will actually listen. Does an officer have to shout to an armed bad guy his rights before shooting back?

[This message has been edited by ConvictedRedneck (edited 09-19-2007).]

quote Originally posted by ConvictedRedneck: THEY ONLY HAD ONE CUFF ON WHEN THEY TAZED HIM. I'm not sure what you dont understand about this. He was stilling fighting off being cuffed when they tazed him. He was not read his rights because getting him under control was a bit more important at the time. They'll read him his rights once he's cooperative and will actually listen. Does an officer have to shout to an armed bad guy his rights before shooting back?

Oh my god, totally different situation, totally irrelevant to this conversation. u even know that. were there lives at stake here? come on, keep it on topic.

he wasn't screaming "I'm gonna kill you pigs!", he wasn't screaming "f*ck the police!"
he was screaming "let me fkcin go!" , "Let me go and i'll walk out of here", "don't taze me"

yes he was being a goof, and he did push them away at one point. but only because he knew he had the right to be speaking. it's a right that was fought for in case you don't remember.

if some person was up there kissing kerry's ass for 35 seconds, (as offensive as that may be) they wouldn't have been kicked out before asking their question because the time ran out.