Tasered for asking John Kerry questions

[Julia]

Don't feel to sorry him. He will probably get a huge payout from the media exposure. This is probably the best thing that has ever happened to him.

And probably exactly what he was looking for, given the comments from the Uni of Florida student which Garpal quoted.

And, 2020 Hindsight, you manage to draw quite astonishing conclusions from my earlier comments. I have not supported the use of a taser. I simply observed that on the video it appeared to do little to subdue him.
Further, though, no I do not have empathy for some twit whose main purpose is disruption.

 

[disarray]

tasers are non-lethal weapons. accidental deaths may result but such is also the case with a baton to the head, a sleeper hold or slipping over and bashing your head. unfortunate but such is life. i fully support the police having many levels of force to deal with situations.

Being annoying in no justification for being tazed

yes it is. it really is very simple, don't arc up at authority.

problem today is what snake said - people constantly have this idea drummed into their head that they are precious little wonders and end up shocked and surprised when someone beats the snot out of them for being a loudmouth.

http://www.winknews.com/news/local/9849252.html

a decent video of the incident. the guy was a complete douchebag and i would have tasered him as well. might shock some sense into him and teach him in the future to stfu because no one really cares about your self-important opinions.

 

[drmb]

Last time I was in the US (last week!) tasers were on sale over the counter in shopping plaza, together with slingshots, pepper spray, crossbows, etc. In a land where personal weapons like this are on sale, not sure if I was a pol ossifer that I would be taking any chances. In the US if a police person or security guard gives you instructions best advice is comply politely or suffer!

 

[cuttlefish]

In my view anyone that does not think the police reaction was a disgrace has a big problem.

I am also surprised that people think the police behaviour was reasonable, and thus far have not seen anyone actually explain why he was restrained in the first place.

If the initial restraint was illegal and unecessary then all the subsequent reactions by the bloke seem completely reasonable though possibly not the smartest course of action.

Yeah sure it is possible he was deliberately baiting them - in which case all the more reason for the police to have acted with restraint.

My understanding is that Tazer's are meant to be used defensively in a situation where police consider that a person might be at risk of harming others or themselves. They were originally introduced as a way to reduce the number of people getting shot weren't they? Would a shooting have been justified in this situation? Sounds like some people think so.

With 5 people restraining him I don't think this bloke was a danger to anyone and so I don't see how anyone can justify the use of the tazer.

 

[2020hindsight]

and surprised when someone beats the snot out of them for being a loudmouth.

.. i would have tasered him as well. might shock some sense into him and teach him in the future to stfu because no one really cares about your self-important opinions.

sheesh I'm assuming you're taking a lend of us here, disarray-

but if you really do believe that
and you aren't just dramatising a red neck position to add some spice
then the question will become "will anyone really care about your self-important opinions" as well.

 

[insider]

and that justifies the police being douche bags and using electricity?

.................................

he wasnt even a threat

They are all douche bags IMO... However the officer did warn him several times about the taser... But still a taser is heavy handed and he was just asking a question... God Bless America

I bet If I asked the question I would stayed long enough to finish it...

 

[cuttlefish]

yes it is. it really is very simple, don't arc up at authority.
...
the guy was a complete douchebag and i would have tasered him as well

What if the authority is acting outside the rule of law?

If you are walking along the footpath and a policeman tells you to cross the road would you quietly and obligingly comply without question or ask and expect to be told why?

If you are walking along the footpath and a policewoman asks you to dance around like a gorilla making 'ooh' 'ooh' noises would you quietly and obligingly comply? Or would you be a 'douchebag' and 'arc up'?

 

[disarray]

watch the video hindsight. not the 30 second youtube one which just shows him getting tasered but the one i posted that showed an obnoxious, aggressive, sanctimonious and slightly unhinged individual push people away, resist arrest and completely ignore all instruction to stop struggling.

cops - "stop resisting or you will be tased"
git - "help me omg get off me ahhhh"

its why i love watching Cops. they try and be reasonable but firm, some idiot arcs up in a towering rage of self-righteousness and gets smacked down. its almost like watching a darwin award.

when people get emotional (as this guy was) they lose their sense of reason and become completely self-absorbed - almost a state of hysteria. in old movies when people get hysterical a short sharp slap across the mouth snaps them out of it and subdues them. a quick jolt of electricity has much the same effect and this is the purpose of the taser.

i think we should bring back the cane in schools, flog rapists and thieves and execute those who commit murder. i also believe police have the right and the duty to control irrational, overly emotional people, and if this method involves tasering then so be it. obviously many feel differently, as is their right so i respect that.

at its heart this is a question of personal limits - some think we should be free to do what we want when we want. others think human beings need to be shown their limits and need to learn to respect the fact that there IS a higher authority than the individual. peoples opinions about this incident will reflect their wider view on how society should be run. yay for democracy.

then the question will become "will anyone really care about your self-important opinions" as well

i don't expect them to.

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

What if the authority is acting outside the rule of law?

If you are walking along the footpath and a policeman tells you to cross the road would you quietly and obligingly comply without question or ask and expect to be told why?

If you are walking along the footpath and a policewoman asks you to dance around like a gorilla making 'ooh' 'ooh' noises would you quietly and obligingly comply? Or would you be a 'douchebag' and 'arc up'?

That is absurd and extreme.

How about: I get asked to stop talking because my time is up and I obey! Responsible. Rights come second to resposibilities.

 

[disarray]

What if the authority is acting outside the rule of law?

then organise and try to effect change. getting mad at the foot soldier won't do anything except get you busted.

If you are walking along the footpath and a policeman tells you to cross the road would you quietly and obligingly comply without question or ask and expect to be told why?

i saw this happen at APEC. you see that middle aged guy try to cross the road, be refused, try to cross anyway and get taken down? its just simple emotional control - don't raise your voice, don't assume an aggressive stance and don't try to plow through the obstacle. be polite and there will rarely be any problems.

If you are walking along the footpath and a policewoman asks you to dance around like a gorilla making 'ooh' 'ooh' noises would you quietly and obligingly comply? Or would you be a 'douchebag' and 'arc up'?

silly example.

Rights come second to resposibilities

that point is the essence of the argument. i would think that those being outraged by this incident believe rights come first.

 

[2020hindsight]

back to tasers
we are talking about using cattle prods on people
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattle_prod

I went searching for horse battery ...
and came up with this ..

Austrian Corps in Russia in 1812 & Their Opponents16th Horse Battery. Total 57526 men and 180 guns (July 1812). In September, 1812 Tormasov’s 3rd Russian Army of the West and The Army of the Danube ...

http://www.antiquesatoz.com/habsburg/1812/auscorps.htm

But if I'm not mistaken
a) it is illegal to use batteries under saddles in horse races (doh)
b) it is illegal (?) to use em to train a horse (guessing)
c) they are pretty much frowned on across the board - good way to screw up a horse and its attitude - except perhaps in abattoirs

 

[imajica]

rather than be horrified by the events we should actually find the whole situation amusing

 

[cuttlefish]

That is absurd and extreme.

But tazering someone for talking a bit too long isn't absurd and extreme?

silly example.

So who decides the difference between a 'silly example' and a 'reasonable request'.

Obviously my example was deliberately silly to highlight a point, which is that blind and unquestioning compliance with authority is not actually a social requirement.

Nobody has yet provided a reasonable explanation as to what law he broke that created the initial requirement for him to be restrained, and funnily enough on the video I couldn't hear it being explained to him by the police either.

then organise and try to effect change. getting mad at the foot soldier won't do anything except get you busted.

What - organise change - like go to a lecture by a leading politician and try to ask some questions that highlight your viewpoint? Didn't quite work for this bloke did it?

The fact is he was trying to organise and effect change - he was asking a well structured question in order to highlight a major flaw in the US electoral system and asking John Kerry why he didn't act to impeach Bush.

I personally would have been interested to hear John Kerry's answer. I'm sure a lot of others would have as well.

I think they refer to it as freedom of speech in the US - the first consitutional amendment - apparently even more important than the right to bear tazers : (the second amendment).

 

[imajica]

you are forgetting the third and fourth amendments

3rd - the right to be ignorant and obnoxious

4th - the right to invade other countries (for the sole purpose of securing oil reserves) and fabricate lies in order to justify your state-sanctioned act of terrorism.

god bless America hehe

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

And probably exactly what he was looking for, given the comments from the Uni of Florida student which Garpal quoted.

And, 2020 Hindsight, you manage to draw quite astonishing conclusions from my earlier comments. I have not supported the use of a taser. I simply observed that on the video it appeared to do little to subdue him.
Further, though, no I do not have empathy for some twit whose main purpose is disruption.

Dear 2020 and wayneL, there are better ways to achieve change against imperialism than the taser turkey attempted with John Kerry.

Read "The Good Soldier Å vejk and His Fortunes in the World War" , by Jarslav Hasek.

Although a work of fiction it displays how with single minded dedication, a low IQ and a capacity to soak up military and police maltreatment, one man was able to bring the Austro-Hungarian empire to its knees. Svejk appears to possess similar personal attributes to the taser turkey.

And he didn't need Andy Warhol's five minutes of fame on the tube.

Garpal

 

[wayneL]

Dear 2020 and wayneL, there are better ways to achieve change against imperialism than the taser turkey attempted with John Kerry.

Read "The Good Soldier Å vejk and His Fortunes in the World War" , by Jarslav Hasek.

Although a work of fiction it displays how with single minded dedication, a low IQ and a capacity to soak up military and police maltreatment, one man was able to bring the Austro-Hungarian empire to its knees. Svejk appears to possess similar personal attributes to the taser turkey.

And he didn't need Andy Warhol's five minutes of fame on the tube.

Garpal

You and disarray still miss the point. Whether the guy is an idiot or not is totally irrelevant to the use of the taser in these particular circumstances.

The taser has a definite role in policing and are a godsend as a means of restraining someone who is a threat to themselves or others, where the use of a firearm is inappropriate.

Akin to a slap in the face in the old movies? Ridiculous. Pure fantasy. Real life doesn't work that way. Just try it, you end up in a brawl or under arrest for assault.

Where is the line? They are being used by police as an on the spot punishment rather than their intended use.

Explod is dead right.

 

[disarray]

Akin to a slap in the face in the old movies? Ridiculous. Pure fantasy. Real life doesn't work that way.

you are correct. hence the taser is an effective means of controlling emotionally erratic people.

Where is the line? They are being used by police as an on the spot punishment rather than their intended use.

police abusing powers and tasering people indiscriminately is not on. tasering people who have lost control of their reason is a viable method of control. in this case, the guy had lost it so the taser was employed in an appropriate manner. had he not struggled, pushed security guards, started wailing hysterically, resisted attempts to remove him and above all listened to advice to "stop struggling or we will tase you", then this would not have been an issue.

the onus isn't on security to put up with this ****, the onus is on the individual to not be an out of control idiot. its time focus turned back to individual responsibilities.

 

[wayneL]

you are correct. hence the taser is an effective means of controlling emotionally erratic people.



police abusing powers and tasering people indiscriminately is not on. tasering people who have lost control of their reason is a viable method of control. in this case, the guy had lost it so the taser was employed in an appropriate manner. had he not struggled, pushed security guards, started wailing hysterically, resisted attempts to remove him and above all listened to advice to "stop struggling or we will tase you", then this would not have been an issue.

the onus isn't on security to put up with this ****, the onus is on the individual to not be an out of control idiot. its time focus turned back to individual responsibilities.

OK we are going around in circles here, but clearly, your view is a minority one.

I'm happy about that.

Cheers

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

The title should read: Tasered for resisting arrest.

I don't agree with the use of the taser in this case, I am sure 5 police could handle it.

 

[disarray]

OK we are going around in circles here, but clearly, your view is a minority one.

yes the large sample size and representation from a broad cross section of society here at ASF adds a great deal of weight to your argument.

I'm happy about that.

that's great.