No ID - College Student Tazed - 3 Times

[Makalakumu]

All I can say to that, is we used to zap ourselves for fun... it hurt like hell, but I'd take a quick jolt or 3 over being Pepper Sprayed or beaten with a club anyday.

Part of my training included the use of OC and mace and I have taken quite a few shots with a club during training. None of that compared to being tazed. That single shock was overwhelming.

While I see your point...that we should expect consequences for our actions...I would like you to ponder what it would be like if you wanted to protest against something/someone and they had a weapon that would completely nullify your efforts and render your actions as useless.

I think that using the tazer as a tool of compliance walks a thin line between our constitutional rights and the states rights.

 

[Makalakumu]

John,

A tazer was not used by the students who were part of the safety from my understanding. It was used by the PD which are actual police and trained in use of force and the laws associated with it.

As to use of force, people are upset when four or five police carried a person away and they jerked and the police could not stop the person from falling. Another tactic used to make a point or by those who are so high or drugged up they do not know any better or feel it.

Some people are upset about impact tools as a weapon of compliance.

Some people are upset by the use of fire hoses as a weapon of complaince.

The Tazer might seem cruel, and it might hurt but it usually gets the response required.

As I have seen all of the above tactics myself, the Tazer gets peoples attention no matter what condition they are in mentally or physically.

So, the question John is if a child in your class refuses to comply what do you do? Obviously you do not taz them but they get their way with their disruption.

While I personally think the Government has taken more of our civil liberties than these tactics have.

The question I have to ask is no one in this country wants to take responsisbility for their own actions and no one wants to educate people with the note that certain things are not acceptable in public or in society. Yet it seems more and more people want to protect everyone from being touched, but the person was not complying with a reasonable request.

I proved a point once at a University, by using water guns and water ballons to make my point that between 12:00 Noon and 1:00 PM the only person who could respond or make a decision was a student dispatch and a student safety officer. It too them much longer than anyone expected to get someone of authority their to respond to my requests/demands. At the sign of the first person of authority, I complied with all requests. I was not in trouble for no damage was done. The senior staff of the U were impressed that I had figured out the best time to cause a problem, and asked what I had done before my scene to try to change it. I talked to Safety and the Dean's Office and student government which I was a member of, and no one thought it was important.

So there are ways to make your point.

There are ways to bring things to people attention and still take responsibility for their own actions.

So yes in my opinion in this case from what I have seen, it was a reasonable response.

While I understand your point, I still must say that I think that using a tazer to get someone to do a simple task, like leave a building, walks a thin line. Imagine how effective protests against Veitnam would have been if a tazer had been in use. Think about how effective a tazer would have been at stopping various the various unions from fighting for the rights we enjoy? Think about Rosa Parks being tazed and hauled off the bus like some animal?

Yeah it might make them a martyr. Most likely it just gets them out of the way.

 

[Makalakumu]

BTW, whatever happened to making principled stands?

How far did that get Ghandi? MLK?

 

[zDom]

One of the problems in this situation was the student was an ***. Enough experiences like this one should convince him it just isn't worth it.

On the other hand, one of the other problems seemed to be a lack of people-skills on the part of those police officers. A really good cop could have got the jerk to produce an ID or leave without reaching for the tazer or causing a big scene.

There are a lot of hard working good people in uniform. Unfortunately, there are also a lot of pricks who believe the badge makes them "The Law" as opposed to a public servant.

And that only makes things more difficult on those hard working public servants out there trying to make this country a safer place to live.

In this case it looked like the officers were using the tazer to punish the student for not complying, similar to the LAPD officers who recently punched a reputed gangbanger as they cuffed him. That isn't their job, as frustrating as it must be for them at times to deal with jerks.

 

[Rich Parsons]

While I understand your point, I still must say that I think that using a tazer to get someone to do a simple task, like leave a building, walks a thin line. Imagine how effective protests against Veitnam would have been if a tazer had been in use. Think about how effective a tazer would have been at stopping various the various unions from fighting for the rights we enjoy? Think about Rosa Parks being tazed and hauled off the bus like some animal?

Yeah it might make them a martyr. Most likely it just gets them out of the way.

As to the Union, they were locked in a building and the police did not enter.

If they had and many times they did before and dragged people out, which is what drove people to think up locking themsleves in.

As to Rosa Parks there was no Police officer telling her to leave. Just a person on the bus.

Your conclusions are not the same situation.

You try to make one thing fit all, and that is not the way it works and Iam very surprised by you as you work with the young. Do all the young ones respond the same? Does the same word and instructions get the exact same response form all of them? No it does not.

 

[Makalakumu]

One of the problems in this situation was the student was an ***. Enough experiences like this one should convince him it just isn't worth it.

On the other hand, one of the other problems seemed to be a lack of people-skills on the part of those police officers. A really good cop could have got the jerk to produce an ID or leave without reaching for the tazer or causing a big scene.

There are a lot of hard working good people in uniform. Unfortunately, there are also a lot of pricks who believe the badge makes them "The Law" as opposed to a public servant.

And that only makes things more difficult on those hard working public servants out there trying to make this country a safer place to live.

In this case it looked like the officers were using the tazer to punish the student for not complying, similar to the LAPD officers who recently punched a reputed gangbanger as they cuffed him. That isn't their job, as frustrating as it must be for them at times to deal with jerks.

Good points. This guy is not innocent by any means and, by all accounts, was acting like a jerk before he was tazed. However, imagine what the world would be like if you could taze everyone you thought was a jerk.

Sweet...right?

Until someone thinks you are the jerk.

And when people in positions of power start thinking you are just being a jerk, this can trample on your constitutional rights.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Good points. This guy is not innocent by any means and, by all accounts, was acting like a jerk before he was tazed. However, imagine what the world would be like if you could taze everyone you thought was a jerk.

Sweet...right?

Until someone thinks you are the jerk.

And when people in positions of power start thinking you are just being a jerk, this can trample on your constitutional rights.

John you are being silly.

That is like aying you can go out and shoot or stab or beat anyone you want because they looked at you wrong in traffic.

You complain about logic in some arguements, yet I am having a problem following your points here.

It is nice of you to say that in this case the guy was being a jerk which is what I have been saying all along. Nice of you to agree with my original points in a manner that makes it look like you thought this all along but instead you go off on tangents on this thread.

 

[MJS]

There is a seven minute video floating around YouTube.

Apparently a Middle-Eastern Looking student at UCLA was walking into the schools computer lab. He did not display his student ID.

The campus police tazed the student three times.

It is unclear what occurred before the first shock. The student, later in the tape, claims he was leaving the building.

From what I heard and saw, the student, after the first tazing, began practicing what appeared to be a civil disobedience tactic of not assisting the officers. They yelled at him several times to stand up (He hands were restrained behind his back at the time). When he could not, or would not acceed to their request, they tazed him a second, and then a third time.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/16/ucla-student-tased-repeat_n_34272.html

Like any news story, or video tape that is shot without knowing the full story, we don't have enough to base solid facts on. Its amazing how people want the cops to do their job, but when the suspect does not comply, it makes the cops job that much harder. The person who was tazed, could have avoided this mess, by simply complying with the officers. Instead, he was a jerk and wanted to be a tough guy and show off, and resist, so the police are forced to escalate their response.

I'll admit, I'm sure there are some that abuse their power, but I just can't see any abuse here.

Mike

 

[Makalakumu]

As to the Union, they were locked in a building and the police did not enter.

Not always.

If they had and many times they did before and dragged people out, which is what drove people to think up locking themsleves in.

And if the companies private security force could force their way in and taze people they wanted to remove, what then?

As to Rosa Parks there was no Police officer telling her to leave. Just a person on the bus.

There could have been. There are many "Rosa Parks'" out there. It was just an analogy. Just imagine if Ms. Parks was hauled out of the bus like some animal after being tazed?

Your conclusions are not the same situation.

I think you may be missing my point. They were analogies.

You try to make one thing fit all, and that is not the way it works and Iam very surprised by you as you work with the young. Do all the young ones respond the same? Does the same word and instructions get the exact same response form all of them? No it does not.

One of the things that I have learned, working with the population that I do, is that when you do say something, you had better be able to back it up. Otherwise it won't matter. Often, this had led to me reassessing what I considered important...reassessing my values by looking through another person's eyes.

This is very important for all people in positions of authority.

With a tazer, you don't have to do this. The response is always the same. NO ONE can fight a tazer. It is physically impossible. You never EVER need to understand why a person is doing what they are doing. You only need to zap.

This lack of understanding is damaging to society, IMHO.

 

[MJS]

I totally appreciate the use of a tazer as a non-lethal tool to end dangerous confrontations. I oppose the use of a tazer as a tool of compliance.

What do you suggest as an alternative?

 

[MJS]

Does it matter? Should a tazer be used as a compliance device? I would say no. In my opinion, that sort of thing infringes on our 1st amendment rights of Freedom of Expression.

If its required that people have ID, then yes, it does matter. Its no different than a suspect taking off on foot, the cop telling him to stop, suspect refuses, and they send a dog after him.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Not always.



And if the companies private security force could force their way in and taze people they wanted to remove, what then?



There could have been. There are many "Rosa Parks'" out there. It was just an analogy. Just imagine if Ms. Parks was hauled out of the bus like some animal after being tazed?



I think you may be missing my point. They were analogies.



One of the things that I have learned, working with the population that I do, is that when you do say something, you had better be able to back it up. Otherwise it won't matter. Often, this had led to me reassessing what I considered important...reassessing my values by looking through another person's eyes.

This is very important for all people in positions of authority.

With a tazer, you don't have to do this. The response is always the same. NO ONE can fight a tazer. It is physically impossible. You never EVER need to understand why a person is doing what they are doing. You only need to zap.

This lack of understanding is damaging to society, IMHO.

The lack of understanding is damaging our society, I agree.

But take responisibility for your actions is the bigger damage to our society, for if one if not taught responsibility then they do things that get them into trouble that when they were younger people laughed at or ignored.

Like I said you are trying to apply one small point across a lot of points and issues here.

I also note you did not answer my other questions.

 

[Makalakumu]

John you are being silly.

That is like aying you can go out and shoot or stab or beat anyone you want because they looked at you wrong in traffic.

You complain about logic in some arguements, yet I am having a problem following your points here.

It is nice of you to say that in this case the guy was being a jerk which is what I have been saying all along. Nice of you to agree with my original points in a manner that makes it look like you thought this all along but instead you go off on tangents on this thread.

I'm sorry if you think that I'm being silly, Rich. All I'm trying to say is that one person's jerk is another person's friend. Alot of this is relative.

My point is this...if people in power can use a tazer to enfore their opinion of what they think is right upon you, even if you are being peaceful, what does this do to your freedom?

I deal with angry and uncompliant people all of the time, Rich. Imagine if I had a tool that I could use to just make them do what I want? Imagine if I just didn't have to listen anymore? When the State has this power, you lose your rights.

And I don't think that this is terribly tangetial to the thread...

 

[Makalakumu]

If its required that people have ID, then yes, it does matter. Its no different than a suspect taking off on foot, the cop telling him to stop, suspect refuses, and they send a dog after him.

In the five years I worked as a security guard, not once did I have to use force against someone for not having an ID. Sure, some people were very angry. Some people verbally abused me. Some people even threatened me...but I stood my ground and they eventually left. That is all the officers had to do. If the student threatened them in any way or assaulted them, then have at it, but, from the video and the report that I read, that is not clear.

I remember dealing with an incident very similar to this. I stated the policy. Listened to the other person. Stood my ground. And I didn't say a thing. When the person got tired of ranting and raving, they left.

 

[Makalakumu]

But take responisibility for your actions is the bigger damage to our society...

I'm not sure this is true. If you think about how relative taking responsibility is, then you start to understand how understanding why the person is acting in such a way is so important.

It's a two way street.

 

[Rich Parsons]

I'm sorry if you think that I'm being silly, Rich. All I'm trying to say is that one person's jerk is another person's friend. Alot of this is relative.

My point is this...if people in power can use a tazer to enfore their opinion of what they think is right upon you, even if you are being peaceful, what does this do to your freedom?

I deal with angry and uncompliant people all of the time, Rich. Imagine if I had a tool that I could use to just make them do what I want? Imagine if I just didn't have to listen anymore? When the State has this power, you lose your rights.

And I don't think that this is terribly tangetial to the thread...

John,

It is difficult.

I have complained and called my representatives about the HSA and the fact that they can come into my house without a warrant now if the President thinks it is a state of emergency, I have somplained about the no need for warrants for tapping phones and such.

I have complained and wrote letters and made phone calls.

I talk to people.

My biggest complaint about my boss is that he does not listen he only states and talks, but does not listen. Even if he tells me he does not agree if he listened then I would feel somewhat validated.

The problem with this case and in most cases like this is that the person does not want to listen and or talk or see what the problem is with their actions. Why is it bad for them to drop their pants and leave execrement on the floor.

There are ways within the system to accomplish any task this guy may have wanted without being a jerk and requiring action to be taken for his action.

Instead people all complain that he was abused and no one knows what really happened. Once again I question the video and it source and why did it hit the web so fast.

I know there are bad people out there and some of them wear a badge.

I know there are bad people out there but some are also good.

I have to wait for more information, but based upon what I have seen I am fine with what happened.

If more comes to light then I will review it then.

And by your arguements, what is to stop the Government from coming into your home right now? Nothing. They can come in and take you away. Hold you without trial under charges of terrorism.

That to me is much more of a crime and also a bigger threat to my rights, then someone else not taking responsibility for their actions and looking to me to make a point.

 

[Rich Parsons]

I'm not sure this is true. If you think about how relative taking responsibility is, then you start to understand how understanding why the person is acting in such a way is so important.

It's a two way street.

John,

It is a two way street. Nice of you acknowledge the other point. Like I said in other threads it cannot be only one way.

 

[mrhnau]

My point is this...if people in power can use a tazer to enfore their opinion of what they think is right upon you, even if you are being peaceful, what does this do to your freedom?

I don't think its a matter of enforcing "their opinion". If there is a law written saying this guy needs an ID, then it needs to be enforced. If the guy is being disruptive and breaking the law, what do you suggest the cops do? Say something along the lines of "Well, just go around w/out your id. You can just lay on the floor and curse. Thats fine".

If they take him out by force, they risk injury to themselves and the jerk. Somebody breaks something or gets seriously injured, then you regret the whole stupid thing. From my understanding, while being TASERed is not fun, its not going to leave permanent damage. Its unpleasant, but not lethal (normally). There needs to be some method for enforcing the law.

I'm imagining this situation has come up hundreds of thousands of times. If they guy takes it cool, go gets his ID or simply leaves, this is a non-event that would be -extraordinarily- boring on youtube.

I deal with angry and uncompliant people all of the time, Rich. Imagine if I had a tool that I could use to just make them do what I want? Imagine if I just didn't have to listen anymore? When the State has this power, you lose your rights.

Cops have power to do things. Given the rights circumstances they can shoot someone. When you are breaking the law, you lose rights. Thats kind of the nature of the beast. Jail is one such expression of losing your rights, death by gunshot being another. I don't think you automatically start losing rights when the government weilds power, but I expect it to happen when you break laws.

I don't get frantic every time a cop shoots someone, but if its unjustified then we have a problem. Same thing here. I don't think we have enough info, but I'd like to hear all of the cops account of what happened and why the TASER was used. I think that would be insightful... anyone know if statements have been issued?

 

[Rich Parsons]

In the five years I worked as a security guard, not once did I have to use force against someone for not having an ID. Sure, some people were very angry. Some people verbally abused me. Some people even threatened me...but I stood my ground and they eventually left. That is all the officers had to do. If the student threatened them in any way or assaulted them, then have at it, but, from the video and the report that I read, that is not clear.

I remember dealing with an incident very similar to this. I stated the policy. Listened to the other person. Stood my ground. And I didn't say a thing. When the person got tired of ranting and raving, they left.

And in the years as a bouncer and security I talked my way out of lots of conflicts and go lots of people to leave.

Sometimes force was required.

What about the time I saw five guys beating on this small guy by himself. Should I have not gotten involved? Should I have just asked them how they were feeling?

No, I acted and stopped the fight by hurting multiple of them real fast as they did not listen to me when I yelled stop. Afterwards, I was able to talk to them but I had their attention and they knew the result of not listening to me when I am the one who at the moment is responsible and in charge.

The police once told me I should have let this guy and his 10 friends hit this young woman. I asked him and the rest of the police if they would have wanted their wives/girlfriends or daughters to get hit like that or not?

Sometimes talking does not work.

 

[Makalakumu]

First of all, Rich, I commend you for taking the initiative to actually call and write your representatives about what you feel. People need to realize that the only way that they'll see your point of view is if you communicate it.

Secondly, I want to attempt to show you how your two analogies may be linked.

I have complained and called my representatives about the HSA and the fact that they can come into my house without a warrant now if the President thinks it is a state of emergency, I have somplained about the no need for warrants for tapping phones and such.

Imagine if they came into your home while you were at home and you simply asked the officers why...and they tazed you while they ransacked your house. Imagine standing in front of your private records, demanding a reason for their confiscation, and they taze you to get them.

And by your arguements, what is to stop the Government from coming into your home right now? Nothing. They can come in and take you away. Hold you without trial under charges of terrorism.

That to me is much more of a crime and also a bigger threat to my rights, then someone else not taking responsibility for their actions and looking to me to make a point.

If you look at this as a continuum, where the government uses more and more force merely to make you comply, then you'll see the connection. If the state has the right to make "jerks" dance just for being "jerks," then this is a step in the direction of actual tyranny.

Its the difference between having a law on the book and actually being able to carry it out.