This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Tasered for asking John Kerry questions

Jump to new
2020hindsight said:
, (as against some CONSIDERABLY more obnoxious ******** in Queanbeyan) ,.....

Dear Garpal and drmb..
please advise your opinion of Peter Phelps, by the way.
Click to expand...
an obnoxious d.head who has since had to unreservedly withdraw his comments at risk of
a) him losing his job, and
b) his boss losing Eden-Monaro

and everyone knows "he who loses Eden-Monaro loses the election"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_Eden-Monaro
Since 1972 it has always been held by the government of the day, and it is thus regarded as a "bellwether seat".
Click to expand...
 

Dear 2020,

I decided I'd stay out of this thread because it has really gotten out of hand.

But I'm always willing to change my mind.

For what its worth I think Phelps is a turkey. Further if he had disrupted the meeting and disobeyed the police as "the Florida turkey" did, a jolt from a taser might have brought him back to earth. His statements were nasty and completely out of order.

By the way, if wayneL is about, NFI is a rather uncouth way to address a fellow forum member.

I was unaware of what it meant until I googled it.

It, I believe stands for "no f***ing idea" and is quite derogatory and deserving of a ticket from our moderator.

Garpal
 
see Garpal
like you, I find Phelps a complete moron -
but
unlike you, I detest the idea that he would be tasered for it, complete with a risk (ANY RISK) to his life.

He's just another deluded political staffer - (ok seriously rude into the bargain) - but not a hanging offence
especially not in a HEALTHY democracy..

which is where AUS differs from USA for instance.
 
Garp

You are dodging the discussion, I asked you a question as to what you thought my views are, because you intimated that I was promoting said views. Yet, you have no (yes ****ing) idea what they are. In this way you have sought to disrespect my opinion by building a disingenuous straw man argument.

I may be more "up front" than you, but you on the other hand have been following me around the forum and (unsuccessfully) tried to discredit me on several occasions. You seem to be bearing a grudge against me for having to moderate you in the past.

By trying to take the high moral ground you make yourself look a fool. It is OK for uniformed thugs to use high voltage against an already restrained person, yet feign indignation at an acronym. A monumental dissonance of values which rather exposes a poisonous objective.

It's time to get over it and debate on the true merits of the discussion rather than on some puerile vendetta.

Time to move on Garpal.
 

"You where spost to fall forwards Doofus"


Wow these Guys love Tasering so much that they even get practice in back at the office ! Bit of a collection of Tasering pics here

http://eyeball-series.org/taser/taser-eyeball.htm



Maybe its the sport of the future, an upgrade to paintball ? Got a pesky workmate, invite them out for a staff bonding session at the Taser range !


Dont taser me Bro
 
1. student gets up and craps on, annoying everyone
2. security asks said student to please stfu
3. student gets agitated, raises voice several octaves, begins to rant. loss of emotional control becomes evident.
4. discussion moderators cut microphone.
5. security moves in and asks student to please leave.
6. student arcs up, becomes highly irrational, pushes security, starts ranting, resists attempts made by moderators to peacefully remove him from the scene.
7. student gets taken down by security for causing a ruckus. continues to struggle.
8. student, in a highly agitated state and having lost control of his reason continues to struggle, despite repeated warnings not to do so.
9. student is tasered to end the confrontation.

points 6 and 8 are why this idiot got zapped. any time a person reaches point 6 with authority then they are at risk of being subdued. by point 8 it is a foregone conclusion. if you lose control of your reason and become irrational then you become a serious threat. arresting officers are obliged to then defend themselves and others by any means necessary. if its breaking the guys arms to get him cuffed, clubbing him over the head with a baton or zapping him with 20k volts its much of a muchness.

now if peter phelps was ranting and raving at a meeting that is one thing. if however he assaulted security, resisted arrest, lost control of his reason and refused to comply with the wishes of the moderators of the event then it is well within the rights of the authority to zap him. what's the problem?

wayneL said:
building a disingenuous straw man argument
Click to expand...

you use this line in just about every general thread.

Inigo Montoya said:
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Click to expand...
 


Dear wayneL,

I thought you had closed this thread.

Is it open again or not??

Garpal
 
To keep this thread on track, I will be removing off topic posts.

Thanks
 
disarray said:
learn what a straw man argument is before you keep using your favourite line
Click to expand...

Definitely looks like a straw man argument to me. The topic is about whether a student should be tazered.

Garpal has shown his superior intellect by talking about some bloke called Svejk. Apparently standing up to authority is ok if you're a czech soldier. Relevence to the topic at hand is a bit unclear.

Nobody has responded with a valid reason as to why the student was restrained in the first place (dissarray has at least attempted to present a chronology but failed to explain why the police actually restrained the gentleman in the first place - if 'not shutting tfu' is a valid reason then about 80% of the population should probably be in jail.).

Its pretty simple - instead of inventing clever names to ridicule the victim - explain why you think this bloke should have been restrained - and then once he was restrained why was he tazered?
 
I've been electrocuted and let me tell you I'd prefer a punch in the face...

:twak::horse::burn::whip:kebab

One of these things is not like the other
One of these things doesn't belong
 

Yep, you are onto the issue here. I have stayed out of the argument for the reason I may have a bias, as being an excop I am super critical of police behaviour.

I have gone over the opening of the video repeatedly and it starts, 'The agitator appears to ask a question, then stops/or pauses if you like, looking towards Kerry for an answer, at this point he raises his papers and turns towards the police who (not audible) must have made a comment to him. '

To this point everything is reasonable. The only explanation I can deduce is that in the question there was something said that the police did not like, they obviously said something, the youth was taken by surprise and on turning towards them they advanced and in touching him an arrest was underway. Only at this point did the youth arc up.

We can only conclude without further information that the youth had said something which was unlawful.

On what basis (how) do we catigorise this youth as a twit up to the point at which he raises his papers and the police advance????
 

I agree.

Garpal
 
I guess one of the reasons why this has got so much attention has been the recent use of Tasers in US colleges.

There is a lot of background to this that I'm not sure has been provided, and as one of the more rational arguers for an over reaction in this instance, I'l try to give it.

Over the last 12-18 months there has been 4 or 5 controversial cases where tasers have been used by security guards and police officers on campus. Even if this guy was acting like a twit, there has been a huge reaction to perceived brutality on campus from within the student populace. One such occassion was an UCLA student who was restrained and tasered repeatedly for 5 minutes or so in the library in front of a huge crowd, who were recording. It just happened to be that this person was of middle eastern ethnic descent.

So there is quite a large level of sentiment on the various campuses about the practices of the security guards. And from a distance, it's important to realise that this may just be the tipping point where the students finally react en masse. Especially when on multiple occassions in recent time, the tasers have been used in very marginal cases... I guess the fear resulting is that the students have, is of simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Because they feel they could get zapped for going about normal student behaviour...

Cheers.
 

Agree. Of course my interest is the use of, not the type of weapon. It is Governing Authorities that authorise and provide the weapons, the police are the statutory instrument that pulls the trigger if you like. The action again should be controlled by the rule of the legislation also.

In my learning the world was a peaceful place when the English Bobby carried no more than a rubber baton. There is a direct correlation between the issue of more potent instruments to police and the taking up of arms by the criminal sector. There is a more disturbing correlation and that is that as police have been issued with more sophisiticated (so called) defense/control equipment so too has their aggression towards the public.

Train a soldier to carry a gun and he will soon have no qualms at all about using it.
 
spot on explod !

in exactly the same way that RAMSI have been so effective in the Solomons - disarming people whilst not carrying weapons themselves .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Islands

the US police / authorities / mentality could never have come close to achieving what we've done in a million years of bashing / tasering / weaponry etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...