[bundee1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvrWt_dHAT4

 

[bhd812]

I laughed so hard I missed half of it the first time but I got to watch the full video the second and laughed again.

What this video does not catch is why the police where standing behind at the start of the video? its almost like this was cut on purpose to start here and not on the real reason they were called to stand behind him.

then he plays or tries to play the public crowd on his side when they go to arrest him.

simple rules of life..

when police want this or that from you then do it..later on you can defend yourself in court but until then your only making it worse on yourself.

 

[will75]

While he shouldn't have been shut down in the first place, he certainly didn't cooperate long after the fact.

Dude wanted attention.

 

[ingwe]

There's no excuse for how this was handled.And Kerry just stood there. Coward.

Its funny--until it happens to you.

-m

 

[mrarroyo]

Miguel will now get even more hated!

So lets see this from a different perspective. A meeting is held open to various participants. One decides to stand up and continue to speak after his alloted time and after being told to stop. I go to City Hall meetings every two weeks as part of my job. Speakers are allowed 3 minutes to express themselves during a public hearing w/ no excuses. If a time limit is not established then with 30 or more speakers from the audience the meeting would never end.

So in this case a young man is told to stop he continues and the police attempt to restrain him. He is attempting to get away from the police (resisting arrest). Anyone that has tried to control a 2 year old having a tantrum knows how hard it is and how much force the child can exert. Now imagine a young man resisting arrest. At that moment should the police let him go? should the police risk injury and continue to physically subdue the young man?, or should the police use a non lethal tool (tazer) to subdue a person who is resisting arrest.

Well I for one back the police on this decision. So go ahead and shoot me.

We have freedom, the f___ker just abused it and would not shut up. I agree he wanted attention.

 

[will75]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrarroyo /img/forum/go_quote.gif Miguel will now get even more hated! So lets see this from a different perspective. A meeting is held open to various participants. One decides to stand up and continue to speak after his alloted time and after being told to stop. I go to City Hall meetings every two weeks as part of my job. Speakers are allowed 3 minutes to express themselves during a public hearing w/ no excuses. If a time limit is not established then with 30 or more speakers from the audience the meeting would never end. So in this case a young man is told to stop he continues and the police attempt to restrain him. He is attempting to get away from the police (resisting arrest). Anyone that has tried to control a 2 year old having a tantrum knows how hard it is and how much force the child can exert. Now imagine a young man resisting arrest. At that moment should the police let him go? should the police risk injury and continue to physically subdue the young man?, or should the police use a non lethal tool (tazer) to subdue a person who is resisting arrest. Well I for one back the police on this decision. So go ahead and shoot me. We have freedom, the f___ker just abused it and would not shut up. I agree he wanted attention.

Well said.

 

[facelvega]

A person isn't 'resisting arrest' if he isn't being arrested for something. The guy was disrupting a question and answer period, and thus should have been treated as a nuisance, not a criminal-- he clearly wasn't intending to be physically violent or dangerous, and so there was no excuse to tackle him to the ground or tazer him. This physical force was uncalled for-- an overreaction on the part of the officers on hand. Policework requires having the judgement to gauge appropriate response, and these guys dropped the ball.

 

[will75]

Quote:

Originally Posted by facelvega /img/forum/go_quote.gif A person isn't 'resisting arrest' if he isn't being arrested for something.

Semantics. He resisted the police. It's a no no.

 

[sugarinthegourd]

The guy was escorted in by the cops. He's well known to the campus police for disrupting events whereever possible, and always in front of a video camera. They weren't going to let him in at all, but then he needled the cops until they let him in under escort, and when he started talking about b$% j%&*s they tried to get the mic away from him at which point he started screaming about being arrested and running away from them. Should the cops have tasered him? Probably not. But did he deserve it? No doubt.

 

[bundee1]

facelvega if what you described was the case then why didnt the guy just walk out pissed instead of jerking around and trying to run from the security?

"Dude, dont step on my hacky sack! AAArrrrggghh!"

He's a ****** and I heard on the radio he has a website where he has posted other practical jokes (like yelling out the ending to the last harry potter book to people passing by). I think he just wanted attention. Did you hear his actual questions?

 

[Lazarus Short]

Whatever you may or may not think of the fellow, or what he deserved, I am disturbed to be living in a society where brute force is the first option to exercise in the resolution of any problem. It should be the last. Police have tazers, clubs and guns, and I recall that old adage: When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail.

BTW: Do not be fooled by the allegation that tazers are non-lethal, for they can and have killed several people.

Laz

 

[blessingx]

The video is behind a login so I can't see, but I have seen other videos of the event.

The speakers intentions are somewhat besides the point. If the guy was a fool and irritant so be it. Listen police are put in dangerous situations all the time, so we should get them the benefit of the doubt, but in this case their actions escalated the situation, broke up the debate and decreased safety. They invented crimes to justify actions after the fact (inciting a riot? - I assume any state law requires multiple people for a riot and the only movement were other spectators coming to his defense and being told to "Sit down!" by the police). Who ordered them to take action in the first place (if you don't believe the initial step that results in everything else is important what about this?)? The school is now circling the wagons in protection (Pres: "After Virgina Tech...." - hell might as well use that!). Fox is talking about "mysterious yellow books", that "blow job" is offensive, etc. Does anyone believe he wanted to be tasered to "make publicity"?

And I don't know the site lines or acoustics in the room, but it's hard from me to believe Kerry couldn't have stopped it. He really comes off as a coward. It's hard to believe Bill or Hillary Clinton or even Giuliani for instance wouldn't have gotten involved and calmed the situation down.

 

[ingwe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx /img/forum/go_quote.gif The video is behind a login so I can't see, but I have seen other videos of the event. The speakers intentions are somewhat besides the point. If the guy was a fool and irritant so be it. Listen police are put in dangerous situations all the time, so we should get them the benefit of the doubt, but in this case their actions escalated the situation, broke up the debate and decreased safety. They invented crimes to justify actions after the fact (inciting a riot? - I assume any state law requires multiple people for a riot and the only movement were other spectators coming to his defense and being told to "Sit down!" by the police). Who ordered them to take action in the first place (if you don't believe the initial step that results in everything else is important what about this?)? The school is now circling the wagons in protection (Pres: "After Virgina Tech...." - hell might as well use that!). Fox is talking about "mysterious yellow books", that "blow job" is offensive, etc. Does anyone believe he wanted to be tasered to "make publicity"? And I don't know the site lines or acoustics in the room, but it's hard from me to believe Kerry couldn't have stopped it. He really comes off as a coward. It's hard to believe Bill or Hillary Clinton or even Giuliani for instance wouldn't have gotten involved and calmed the situation down.

x2

Now...how long until this thread is shut down? Hopefully Jude won't use a taser. (i kid, i kid)

 

[britishbane]

I dont understand how Kerry or any one person would have stopped it from happening? You think the cops are gonna just stop because he says so? At that point I dont think it matters what Kerry did.

 

[user18]

No login required
http://blogtown.portlandmercury.com/...aze_me_bro.php