so, i'm confused. i thought we lived in a dictatorship. the only person who should be allowed to raise their voice are those in power, right? i mean, who are we(the people), to voice our opinions or questions?

if you don't know the video i'm talking about, here's a link. there are several more, though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sE76LQwT6qA

 

This idiot was asked to leave, then the police tried to remove him, he resisted, for several minutes. The tazer was the safest use of non deadly force they could use in that situation. They couldn't use pepper spray because there were other people in the imediate area. You do have a right to the freedom of speech, but when somebody is holding a forum they have the right to kick you out.

 

The kid is an idiot. If he was so about his rights and the american law, he would have left when asked to. THATS THE LAW. The cops tell you to do something you do it, then appeal in a court of law.

If apprehended, you go willingly then fight the battle with your lawyers. REGUARDLESS of if he was needed to be removded or not, he was. And he resisted.
By him resisting it showed his lack of respect for authority and his ability to be a threat to those around him, even without a weapon. he hit a cop, he kicked a cop.

THATS A FELONY. If he is willing to commit a felony against a cop, then he was apprehended correctly because he was a risk to those at the convention.

They nipped it in the butt before it got bad. They did a good job.

 

Oh and he did not voice his opinion in an orderly manor like someone with a question. And he wanted everything on video. And when apprehended he gave a commentary on what the cops were doing to him. If he was that scared for his life to have to fight back, then how was he able to talk to everyone around telling them he is being tasered and all?

he did it all to get people against the government.

 

I agree that he was asked to leave, that they tried to remove him, then he resisted, but it sure looked like he was already restrained when they used the taser on him.

 

One arm was free when they tasered him. there are 2 videos. the other video shows his other arm.

 

May I get a link to that video, please?

 

Also the metal edge on a loose handcuff can be used as a weapon. I will tell you that I have been approached my cops and I have NEVER been cuffed, tazered or peper sprayed. Do you want to know why? I cooperate. Also my rights have NEVER been violated. And if I thought they were I would have hired a lawyer and fought the police in the courts.

 

I am in no way defending that student. If he was tasered after he was handcuffed then that's wrong. If he was tasered after he was told to stop resisting and he wasn't cuffed then good for him. Either way he needs to be tried for hitting the C.O.P.

 

Look at the video. he was tasered at 3:13 into it. At 3:15 seconds they still have his arm being pushed down, un cuffed.

I need to find the other video that fox aired.

 

He got exactly what he wanted, attention. He was not there to voice his opinion, he was there to capture a ruckus on camera, and the mentally challenged university cops were too eager to ablige.

I don't know what the format of the forum was, but typically, you get to ask a question, and then move on. He didn't want to do that, he was attempting to give a speech. If that's what he wanted, then he needed to book his own venue.

The UPs did an agonazingly pitiful job of aprehending and securing him which is why they tazed him. A proper take down would have avoided the whole scene, however, UPs are only glorified rentacops (pretty much like airport security), and substitute technological cheats with training.

Does anyone else find it odd that he was surrounded by UPs before he even got to the mic? That's not typical unless they think something is going on.

 

wow. i like how the topic jumped to the kind of force used and what he did in kind. nobody thinks it's wrong that he was attacked for SPEAKING. he didn't initiate any form of physical encounter. they didn't like what he said, so they beat him into submission and hauled him off. i can't believe nobody else sees anything wrong with that.

if you don't like what someone says, advocate the opposite, protest, or plain ignore them. beating someone into submission for having a different, unpopular opinion is akin to the spanish inquisition, or the kent state massacre. the end result was not as severe, but this is a rights violation, plain and simple.

and to state that tasering him is the safest way to diffuse the situation... tasers have killed. i've never heard of annoying opinions killing anyone.

it's these small battles that create a problem in the future because people just start accepting this behavior from our police force. it's wrong and should be stopped. if our police can't delineate between right and wrong, how can we expect the public to do it?

 

I have only one more thing to say:

 

He was attacked for not leaving.

they didn't like the time it took for him to say it. it doesn't seem to have been a debate, but more like a question and answer symposium.

But nonetheless, it was deplorable "police" work.

 

Wasn't he asked to comply before they beat him into submission? It was his initial failure to comply that lead the police to use the force that they did. It wasn't about the opinion he had, it was about the way he was presenting that opinion on camera. IMO the police were justified in the measures they took.

 

He got was he asked for. If only they stick a few lightbulbs into him before plugging him in....

 

You are missing the whole point. This was not a debate. The format of this forum was ask a question and wait for the answer. He chose to ignore the rules of the venue. He chose to ignore security requests to move on. He chose to resist arrest. He chose to hit the cops.
By your interpretation of free speech, I can stand in the middle of a crowded theater and start yelling the Gettysburgh address at the top of my lungs. Nobody better try to move me or ask me to leave the theater because after all I am excercising my freedom of speak.
He was purposely trying to be disruptive and cause a scene.
I hope they charge him with at least battery on a LEO.

 

I don't think the tazer was necessary, but the facts as I understand them were 1. He got special permission to ask his question, as the person before him was supposed to be the last questioner; 2. He rambled on asking more than one question and 3. he got agitated pretty quickly even though an exception was made for him and he didn't follow the rules of the forum.

In any event, the guy asked some particularly stupid questions anyway. "Are you part of the skull and bones society?" If he were part of a secret organization, why the hell would he tell you? Jesus.

The thing is, people are sitting at their computer saying 'this is undemocratic!' when really, if we were there, we would've been like 'serves that @$$hole right!'. He's the kind of guy that cuts you off on the highway and you steam for 30 miles plotting your revenge if you had the courage to do it. Not like you could, as your wife and kid are in the backseat and your car is underpowered and small anyway.

Wait, just me?

 

He asked to be beaten, cuffed, tasered, a$$ kicked, and more when he was being disruptive, not obeying police requests of shut up and leaving, and resisting arrest. That aside, he pretty much know what he's doing, but probably just didn't know he's gonna get plugged in.

You know what I mean, bro!

 

I grew up around law enforcement, my dad was a cop for 34 years before retiring. He taught the ASP tatical baton class at the academy and the pepper spray class as well. I was always under the impression that the taser was the last line of defense before you get to the pistol. Don't get me wrong the jacka$$ got what he deserved for his little publicity stunt. I do question why a baton on a pressure point wasn't used instead of the taser. Do UP's get that training ?