[pne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marvin /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, because that's outside of proper police protocol. Tasering isn't. Use of firearms is only acceptable when deadly force is justified. This case clearly didn't justify deadly force. Brutal beatings are never justified.

you're mistaken, deadly force WAS justified in this case. He was inciting a riot as well as flailing which can have deadly results. Not to mention he was resisting arrest. Now clearly someone who resists arrest has intentions of injuring the police or the public.

 

[marvin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pne /img/forum/go_quote.gif you're mistaken, deadly force WAS justified in this case. He was inciting a riot as well as flailing which can have deadly results. Not to mention he was resisting arrest. Now clearly someone who resists arrest has intentions of injuring the police or the public.

Brush up on your deadly force statues.

Police departments authorize deadly force in very few circumstances, I'll use Minnesota's as an example. Most will be along these lines ever since the Supreme Court put the kibosh on using deadly force on fleeing suspects that have committed non-violent felonies and/or are unlikely to severely harm others during there escape.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minnesota Statutes, Section 626.8452, Subdivision 1 III.PROCEDURE A.Use of Deadly Force It is the policy of this agency to accord officers discretion in the use of force to the extent permitted by MN Statutes, Section 609.066, Subd. 2, which authorizes peace officers acting in the line of duty to use deadly force only when necessary to: 1.protect the peace officer or another from apparent death or great bodily harm; 2.effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the peace officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony involving the use or threatened use of deadly force; or 3.effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the peace officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony if the officer believes that the person will cause death or great bodily harm if the person’s apprehension is delayed.

Point by point.

1) Flailing a handcuff when restrained by half a dozen policeman is not deadly force regardless of how you twist it. More importantly, no jury in the world will buy that. Without deadly force, no justification.

2) The guy didn't commit a felony involving deadly force or the threat of deadly force. No felony involving deadly force? No justification.

3) This one is somewhat closer. Effecting arrest/capture? Check. They were trying to arrest him. Committed or attempted to commit a felony? Check. He did resist arrest. Likely to cause death or great bodily harm if apprehension is delayed? Hell no. Unless running away to talk in front of the nearest newsies' camera is deadly force. So, no justification.

Note: Resisting arrest and inciting a riot are not acceptable justifications for the use of deadly force. Mere injury is not an acceptable justification for the use of deadly force.

 

[ingwe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LostOne.TR /img/forum/go_quote.gif while I do not completely think the cops were justified in their actions, I also think the student in this video is not completely innocent. Taken from DaveRose's posts with a link to CNN (post #22) And also sugarinthegourd's comments in post #9. It would seem this is not a normal case, because Meyer seems to actively go out and pursue these confrontations. I would assume if the campus police have had previous dealings with this student, they may have lost their cool and used more force than necessary with the Tasers. This of course is no excuse for their having done so, because as police they're held to a stricter standard as people with authority to protect the laws and the people. I would however argue that Meyer, seems like someone who just enjoys attention and goes out of his way to get it. He had it coming sooner or later. (with no justification for the ones who deal it to him. just that Meyer deserves it)

For every one of us, *someone* is of the opinion that we are not completely innocent, that we "have it coming to us" and should "get what we deserve."

Its a slippery slope. Gays, communists, Jews, Muslims, left, right, apple fan-boys...who's next?

That's why we have the constitution and bill of rights. That's why we have laws. That's why we have due process. That's why we (at least in the USA) have innocence until proven guilty. That is what we *all* have and must never be relinquished--never ever ever.

Some may be offended, some may think others deserve it and they have it coming to them. All have the right to have and express their opinion--but no one has the right to to enforce their opinion unlawfully.

 

[ingwe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marvin /img/forum/go_quote.gif Brush up on your deadly force statues. Police departments authorize deadly force in very few circumstances, I'll use Minnesota's as an example. Most will be along these lines ever since the Supreme Court put the kibosh on using deadly force on fleeing suspects that have committed non-violent felonies and/or are unlikely to severely harm others during there escape. Point by point. 1) Flailing a handcuff when restrained by half a dozen policeman is not deadly force regardless of how you twist it. More importantly, no jury in the world will buy that. Without deadly force, no justification. 2) The guy didn't commit a felony involving deadly force or the threat of deadly force. No felony involving deadly force? No justification. 3) This one is somewhat closer. Effecting arrest/capture? Check. They were trying to arrest him. Committed or attempted to commit a felony? Check. He did resist arrest. Likely to cause death or great bodily harm if apprehension is delayed? Hell no. Unless running away to talk in front of the nearest newsies' camera is deadly force. So, no justification. Note: Resisting arrest and inciting a riot are not acceptable justifications for the use of deadly force. Mere injury is not an acceptable justification for the use of deadly force.

Your post above: rational.

Those who justify the tasering with "he had it coming to him" and he deserved it and "he's so annoying" etc. : irrational.

 

[Thelonious Monk]

if my memory serves me right, this guy is a practical jokester and was friendly with the cops off camera.

 

[OverlordXenu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ingwe /img/forum/go_quote.gif left, right, apple fan-boys

Actually, I would be alright with that.

[/joke]

 

[ingwe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by OverlordXenu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Actually, I would be alright with that. [/joke]

 

[ken36]

Quote:

Dont Taze Me Bro! Quote of the year!

Could very well be.

 

[strungoutt1]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzkd_m4ivmc

 

[EyeAmEye]

There are many people out there with very legitimate complaints about the police, and it's a shame they get buried usually behind those that cause their own situations, such as this moron.

It's a fairly cut and dry situation. If you are asked to leave and don't comply, then resist arrest, that's what a taser is for. He didn't get shot or clubbed to death.

You certainly cannot give cops unlimited power to abuse, but you can't tie their hands either. The public needs to understand compliance with authorities, not see police as the joke this jackass is trying to make them out to be. You see this type of crap all the time, and I imagine as an officer it makes the job that much more difficult, and it's completely unnecessary.

Scrutinize and penalize the officers that go over the line, commend those that don't. There was no abuse of power here.

I'm sure in the not too distant future the bloodhounds will have some other video to fawn over.

 

[gritzcolin]

They told him to leave and he refused I think that becomes ground for trespassing violations. Then they try to cuff him after he struggles with them and causes a scene but when he refuses to put his other arm behind his back they say do it or get tazed and guess what he chose. Then he cried like a woman which was pure acting genius cause getting tazed doesnt hurt that bad it sucks but you don't scream like a b****. Lastly people should start getting tazed for calling everyone bro, I am not your bro never will be so please stop saying it to everyone before i rip out your larynx. My best friend just moved to Tempe where apparently everyone says bro, I feel sorry for some white folks i tells you that, cause he hates being called that by even his friends.

 

[Ingo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superpredator /img/forum/go_quote.gif Agree completely. That was absolutely 100% ridiculous, as evidenced by his being charged with inciting a riot, which translates into them not actually having a valid reason to arrest him. Resisting arrest is a valid reason, but they arrested him prior to his resisting arrest. He was tazed after he was already subdued. If they beat him in the face with a club after he was already pinned to the ground would that be okay? This was excessive force in my book. Again, let me just reiterate this: he was tazed after he was already subdued. Tazing is a method for subduing a potentially dangerous suspect in the process of resisting arrest, etc., not a method for punishing someone for not being cooperative. Someone physically resisting arrest resists being tazed. Someone already subdued says (or pleads, in this case), "Don't taze me." I don't think it could more clear.

If I was a police officer in that situation I would have just physically forced him into cuffs and hauled him out. There was plenty a reason to arrest him after he resisted the cops who were probably just going to escort him out of the building. I would think that they could have probably just stuck a disorderly conduct charge against him.

Bottom line is, this guy was far from innocence.

 

[ingwe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ingo /img/forum/go_quote.gif <snip> Bottom line is, this guy was far from innocence.

Bottom line: so is everyone. Your point lacks rigor

.

 

[ingwe]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gritzcolin /img/forum/go_quote.gif They told him to leave and he refused I think that becomes ground for trespassing violations. Then they try to cuff him after he struggles with them and causes a scene but when he refuses to put his other arm behind his back they say do it or get tazed and guess what he chose. Then he cried like a woman which was pure acting genius cause getting tazed doesnt hurt that bad it sucks but you don't scream like a b****. Lastly people should start getting tazed for calling everyone bro, I am not your bro never will be so please stop saying it to everyone before i rip out your larynx. My best friend just moved to Tempe where apparently everyone says bro, I feel sorry for some white folks i tells you that, cause he hates being called that by even his friends.

Wow. Thanks bro!

 

[bundee1]

Taze him^^^^