Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   UCLA student tased multiple times... pointless police violence?
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 142 (364629)
11-18-2006 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Taz
11-18-2006 7:24 PM


Reviewing the video
I don't know what actually transpired before the camera was turned on, so it would be presumptuous of me to insist either that the man was in the wrong or if another avenue could/should have been taken by the UCLA police dept.
All that I can do is critique what little we can see and hear from the video. I found footage that lasts alot longer than what the OP had posted. According to testimony, UCLA PD rove the library at 11:00 pm to check for transients and anyone not affiliated with the school who are trespassing. Apparently, the man was no a student, or if he was, he didn't have his id with him. He was asked to leave several times, but refused. After battling with him to leave and giving several commands, the individual became belligerent and incompliant. After making it clear that he was going to leave after several warnings, he was tased. After the initial tase, I counted 79 commands to "get up." He was also warned several times that he would be tased. That didn't seem to affect his decision. The man started touting some rhetoric about brutality and something about the Patriot Act.
Given the man's disposition and the officer's patience in the matter, from what I saw, the officers were well within the realm of a reasonable use of force in accordance to the level of escalation. Now, my only question about the officer's actions is that I'm pretty sure that I heard their handcuffs being employed. I also thought that I saw the man handcuffed. That means he was fairly secure. Why tell him to get up instead of pulling him to his feet? That makes think that the man was acting like a 'limp noodle,' meaning he was using passive aggressive techniques. Officers are not supposed to carry anyone, especially handcuffed by the arms and legs because it could separate their shoulder girdle.
I believe that the man was just being 'emo,' for lack of a better word. And all the people in the library watching the event, clearly know nothing about law enforcement, otherwise they'd be more inclined to be irritated by the suspect rather than the officers. This is just one instance of a whole counter-culture who demonize law enforcement and seek to emasculate the field.
Final analysis: The police were justified in their actions.
Having made that determination, I will give you clips showing what true police brutality looks like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9hS0ZhpFPA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVW5_PJHzR4&mode=related&...
Here's an example of what is NOT police brutality, but rather, an instance where activism wants to completely emasculate law enforcement and turn the criminal into a hero.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baix0Xa9x3o
I hope any reasonable person can see the difference between good and bad law enforcement.
Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : add link

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Taz, posted 11-18-2006 7:24 PM Taz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by jar, posted 11-18-2006 10:13 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 6 by fallacycop, posted 11-18-2006 10:38 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 8 by ringo, posted 11-18-2006 10:55 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 38 by Dr Jack, posted 11-19-2006 7:37 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 142 (364633)
11-18-2006 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by jar
11-18-2006 10:13 PM


Re: Reviewing the video
Right now there is far too little information to make a full determination of the whole event, but I can see NO justification of using violence simply because someone refuses to leave a library.
For the record, I agree that far too little is known about what transpired. That's why I only based my decision on what I could see and hear.
How would you have handled it if you asked the man to leave and he didn't leave? Diplomacy failed, so what other alternatives exist?

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by jar, posted 11-18-2006 10:13 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by jar, posted 11-18-2006 11:01 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 12 by Taz, posted 11-18-2006 11:04 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 142 (364635)
11-18-2006 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by fallacycop
11-18-2006 10:38 PM


Re: Reviewing the video
That was clearly a case of abuse of power.
Since we have quite a few criminal justice majors in here, what should they have done differently? And under what circumstances is tasing justified in your best estimation?
I am alittle disgusted by what I saw and by your comments too.
What exactly did I say that was egregious? The man was warned numerous times. He failed to comply, the police followed through. He had ample time to comply. Would you disagree with that?
I personally would not have tased him. I would have used some pain compliance techniques like pressing on the pressure point behind the ear or putting my finger underneath his and applied pressure first. If that still didn't work, then I would threaten to use either pepper foam or a taser.
How do you get someone to walk when they use passive aggressive techniques? What do you think officers should be able to do?

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by fallacycop, posted 11-18-2006 10:38 PM fallacycop has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by fallacycop, posted 11-18-2006 11:37 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 142 (364637)
11-18-2006 11:02 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by ringo
11-18-2006 10:55 PM


Re: Reviewing the video
What "level of escalation" are you talking about?
The standard level of escalation.
1. Presence
2. Verbal
3. Come-along techniques
4. Pain compliance
5. Pepper foam/taser
6. Impact weapons
7. Deadly force (fireamrs)
You start at the bottom and depending on the situation, you follow the levels accordingly. You also want to one-up the individual. It really just depends on the situation. There is no perfect scenario.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by ringo, posted 11-18-2006 10:55 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by ringo, posted 11-18-2006 11:14 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 142 (364640)
11-18-2006 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by jar
11-18-2006 11:01 PM


Re: Reviewing the video
1. Do nothing.
That's not a viable option when someone is trespassing on private property. Maybe we'll let the guy come to your house and we'll see how long doin' nothin' will work out for you.
2. Observe.
Observe what exactly? Observe him reading? What's that going to accomplish?
3. Call for additional response.
There were three officers present. How many more were really necessary?
4. Take a picture of him and tell him it will be turned into student services in the morning.
Turn him into student services? And what exactly is that going to accomplish? Revoke his library card? Something tells me that anyone not willing to comply with officers after being tased won't be willing to listen to librarians either.
5. Sit down beside him.
Maybe they did. I'm sure what prompted the camera to come on was after he made a big scene by not leaving after he was talked to. Something tells me they didn't break down the door, rush over to him and start tasing him.
In the final analysis, it would seem that you are still left wondering what to do.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by jar, posted 11-18-2006 11:01 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by jar, posted 11-18-2006 11:26 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 142 (364644)
11-18-2006 11:28 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Taz
11-18-2006 11:04 PM


Re: Reviewing the video
But according to both the witnesses' accounts and the police's, he was leaving the library when he was held back. In this particular case, diplomacy did win.
So, he was leaving, but then they grabbed him to stop him from leaving, then they decided to tase him and repeat 79 times to get up? That doesn't seem to make much sense.
I don't think anyone is here to argue that the kid wasn't annoying and playing the passive agressive game.
If he was playing his little games, then wouldn't that suggest that he had no intention of leaving? Wouldn't that indicate that he just wanted to put on a big show? You saw yourself how many different ways he was asked to leave. He didn't want to. He wanted to play a game.
What people like me don't understand is the use of taser at least 4 times being a necessary thing in this case. While I haven't been tased before, I've been electricuted. It wasn't a pleasant experience. Scratch that. It was a painful experience.
Well, now that you are going into law enforcement, as a prerequisite, you are going to have to get tased and pepper foam several times in your career. The reason why is so that LE officers will understand and be able to empathize with a suspect instead of just going rogue and indiscriminately tasing people. Nobody likes being electrocuted. And often, just the threat of it alone is able to gain the compliance of the offender. The reason they use it, is because they won't like it. Of course they don't like it. That's the whole point. Pain, unfortunately, is a greater motivator for some hard-headed offenders.
Ok, assuming he had enough time to regain his motor control after the first tase but decided to keep lying on the floor. I noticed that the officers were ordering him to get up while tasing him again and again. I thought the whole point of a taser gun is to incapacitate a person, not make his legs more mobile.
It only incapacitates someone while you are employing it. Unless you have a medical condition, there is no reason why you won't be able to regain your motor functions. He had alot of time to decide. His choice was to continue playing the passive aggressive, F-you game. You can gather from his choice of words that he had an aversion towards law enforcement. He didn't have to go that route. And when you get out there, you'll see it first hand.
Excessive force?
I can almost guarantee that, per the law, the officers were justified. I personally would not have employed the taser until much later. But then again, we don't know what transpired beforehand. You can hear him saying, "Get your hands off of me!" and then heard rustling. He might have made an erratic movement or went to strike the officers. I don't know. They also might have been in there 10 minutes trying to get him to leave of his own volition. I don't know for sure. All I know is what I saw and heard.
I also personally would have tried strongarming him to his feet. If all of that failed, I would have threatened him to use my taser or pepper foam. Again, all of that based on the information that I know of.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Taz, posted 11-18-2006 11:04 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Taz, posted 11-19-2006 12:57 AM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 35 by crashfrog, posted 11-19-2006 2:43 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 17 of 142 (364646)
11-18-2006 11:34 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by ringo
11-18-2006 11:14 PM


Re: Reviewing the video
Well, my question was in reference to the officers' response to the victim's actions. In what way did the victim "provoke" an escalation of response by escalating his actions? His "actions" seemed to consist mostly of lying on the floor.
When you're trying to remove an unauthorized person, surely nothing beyond "come-along techniques" is justifiable. If the officers couldn't handle their subject without the use of "pain compliance", they are - at the very least - incompetent.
Come along techniques don't work on passive aggressive offenders. How do you get someone to move when they refuse? The next step is applying a little pain, like tweaking their wrist or a pressure point to incur some discomfort. Some people have a high pain threshold and can endure that. And since you can't just go and haul off on someone by hitting them, the next step is either pepper foam or a taser. With the assistance of other officers, I personally would have just picked him up carefully and properly and dragged him to the car. And if you see the last part of the clip I provided, that's what they ended up doing. They probably could have avoided tasing him all together, particularly because he was not violent.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by ringo, posted 11-18-2006 11:14 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by ringo, posted 11-18-2006 11:39 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 23 by fallacycop, posted 11-19-2006 12:02 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 142 (364652)
11-18-2006 11:53 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by jar
11-18-2006 11:26 PM


Re: Reviewing the video
It's a library nemesis, a library.
Immaterial. Would it matter more if he was trespassing in a daycare center or any other buisness?
First off it is NOT private property, it is the "University of California Los Angeles". You love bringing up completely off topic comparisons. That might work some places but that dog won't hunt here.
Public places like parks and even sidewalks are still sibject to the exact same laws, are they not? The University of California made those rules for a reason. Its to keep order, cohesion, and safety, like all other laws. If I could just do whatever I wanted on public property I might just be inclined to do that.
It will put someone on site in case ANYTHING threatening were to happen. As long as he is studying and not disrupting other people, what is the problem?
The problem is, without an id nobody knows if he's supposed to be there. He might have been a student, he might not have been. I don;t know. But how hard would it have been to have gone and retrieved his id? He seemed bent on drawing his line in the sand. But if you want to jettison this rule, then why not get rid of them all and run amok? Who don't get to pick and choose which laws we want to follow.
quote:
There were three officers present. How many more were really necessary?
If they had to resort to a taser, then obviously not enough.
So lets suppose you bring 30 officers in. Now you tie up 30 officers to watch a man read because he's made it clear that he isn't going to go without throwing his tantrum first. Its impractical. And supposing they did bring in more officers, the next argument would have been how much of an overkill that would have been. You are placing the officers in an indefensible position by not allowing them any viable options to do their job.
quote:
Turn him into student services? And what exactly is that going to accomplish? Revoke his library card? Something tells me that anyone not willing to comply with officers after being tased won't be willing to listen to librarians either.
Get serious. If he is a student then he had EVERY right to be there.
If the rules of that library states that you must have id in order to be in that library, then the school has every right to protect its constituents and its laws. I'm sure at most it was a minor inconvenience for him to go get his id-- this all assuming he was even a student.
quote:
Maybe they did. I'm sure what prompted the camera to come on was after he made a big scene by not leaving after he was talked to. Something tells me they didn't break down the door, rush over to him and start tasing him.
They obviously didn't sit long enough.
How much longer should they babysit a brat by tying themselves up? And what are you going to say to the Chief when he asks why you are sitting there watching a man read? "Sorry, Chief, but he doesn't want to leave, so lets just give this one guy free reign to do whatever the hell the hell he wants." I think that would go over with the boss like a fart in church.
Come on nemesis, it is a library at a publicly funded school, owned by the citizens of California.
And? If it was at the University of Miami, a private college, the rules suddenly get to be enforced? The highway is a public place. The park is a public place. Can I just do whatever I want because taxes payed for the land? Certainly not.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by jar, posted 11-18-2006 11:26 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by jar, posted 11-18-2006 11:58 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 142 (364653)
11-18-2006 11:57 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by fallacycop
11-18-2006 11:37 PM


Re: Reviewing the video
quote:
What exactly did I say that was egregious? The man was warned numerous times. He failed to comply, the police followed through. He had ample time to comply. Would you disagree with that?
I think I made it clear I disagree with that
Not really if you don't offer any solutions.
quote:
I personally would not have tased him. I would have used some pain compliance techniques like pressing on the pressure point behind the ear or putting my finger underneath his and applied pressure first. If that still didn't work, then I would threaten to use either pepper foam or a taser.
that would have been abusive too.
LOL! What isn't abuse then?

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by fallacycop, posted 11-18-2006 11:37 PM fallacycop has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by fallacycop, posted 11-19-2006 12:07 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 142 (364657)
11-19-2006 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by ringo
11-18-2006 11:39 PM


Re: Reviewing the video
quote:
I personally would have just picked him up carefully and properly and dragged him to the car.
Exactly. The obvious solution.
So, we're all okay with dragging people out? That's fine with me.
quote:
And if you see the last part of the clip I provided, that's what they ended up doing.
And incompetence consists in doing the obvious thing last.
I wouldn't call it incompetence. Like I said, per the law, I'm confident that they were justified in their actions.
quote:
They probably could have avoided tasing him all together, particularly because he was not violent.
Bingo. That's what everybody is trying to tell you. And that tasing is completely over the top for somebody whose "crime" is being in the wrong place without ID.
The infraction of not having an id card is what precipitated the crime of obstruction. But, yes, I would have just handcuffed him and carried him to the car.
I wouldn't worry though. Because its in California, with any luck, he'll get off and be offered a major book deal over his ordeal, the state will award him punitive damages in the amount of 6 million dollars and all the officers will not only be fired, but also will go to prison for 30 years without the possibility of parole.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by ringo, posted 11-18-2006 11:39 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by ringo, posted 11-19-2006 12:16 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 28 by fallacycop, posted 11-19-2006 12:21 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 29 by jar, posted 11-19-2006 12:42 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 142 (364663)
11-19-2006 12:51 AM


Gaining Compliance
This is the most comprehensive training manual that I could find on the web. I've just made a cursory view and from what I can gather, this is a very good manual and is very detailed in how every LE officer should appropriately respond to certain instances.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by fallacycop, posted 11-19-2006 1:15 AM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 39 by jar, posted 11-19-2006 10:44 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 142 (364669)
11-19-2006 1:48 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Taz
11-19-2006 12:57 AM


Re: Reviewing the video
quote:
If he was playing his little games, then wouldn't that suggest that he had no intention of leaving? Wouldn't that indicate that he just wanted to put on a big show? You saw yourself how many different ways he was asked to leave. He didn't want to. He wanted to play a game.
Repeating what I said serves what purpose?
The purpose was to point out that you had it right. He was just being a jackass. Just because he said he was leaving doesn't mean it was actually trying to leave. I don't no how many times I've seen an officer tell an individual to either get down, place their hands behind their back, or stop resisting, all the while the person is saying, "I'm not resisting." Saying it doesn't prove the action. The action is what matters.
The student may have been hard-headed, but I beg to differ whether it warranted the use of taser at least 4 times.
Well, we could look at in two ways. If the kid really didn't want to be tasered, he wouldn't have. If he really wanted to leave, he would have. If he didn't want to get tasered, at any given time he could have taken their threats seriously, especially after at least being tased once. He just wanted to play his little game. So, you can either look at it as the cops were being completely unreasonable, or you can look at it that he chose, willfully, not to comply. That's how I see it. As an LE officer, you have to take control or they will walk all over you. Could they have tried to diffuse the matter verbally better? I don't know. I would certainly hope that they tried very hard at diplomacy. But I can't make that determination with the evidence provided to me.
I was pointing out the fact that they were ordering him to get up while they were tasing him. Even if he was playing the passive agressive game, I still don't agree that tasing him at least 4 times was a necessary thing.
They were ordering him to get up the second he was on the floor. So, whether they were saying that he needed to get up while tasering him seems like a reactionary statement. And when your adrenaline is pumping, you'll understand what I'm talking about. Its a very confusing place to be. I'm sure the added stress of a mob coming at them only exacerbated things, not helped to alleviate it.
And if you cared to read my posts more carefully, you'd know that I haven't commented on the initial shock. What I've been trying to figure out is the necessity for a second, third, fourth, and may be fifth time while he was handcuffed on the floor.
Because he refused to get up. I wouldn't have done it. I would have just picked him up and carried him to the car to begin with.
I honestly don't know how the officers could have felt threatened by a handcuffed, incapacitated person on the floor.
Well, handcuffing a person is a defensive maneuver. I've fought handcuffed people before. Its not always an easy thing. But, regardless, the issue is about this particular case. This man didn't seem to pose an immediate physical threat as far as I could tell from the video. It was just a spoiled little emo kid. I would have picked him up though. And, if I were there, I would have ordered him to not tase him after the initial one because it seems they had him cuffed after the first one.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Taz, posted 11-19-2006 12:57 AM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Taz, posted 11-19-2006 2:46 AM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 64 by Jaderis, posted 11-20-2006 6:09 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 142 (364671)
11-19-2006 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by fallacycop
11-19-2006 1:15 AM


Re: Gaining Compliance
quote:
A subject physically refuses to comply or respond. He/she does not make any attempt to physically defeat the actions of the officer but forces the officer to employ physical maneuvers to establish
control.
For example: A subject may be involved in a demonstration. The subject ignores an officer’s requests to move and the officer must use physical strength to move the subject.
It says to use physical strength to move the subject. It does not say to tase the subject.
This manual was written in 2002 prior to the acceptance of taser devices, however, tasers were invented as pain compliance, which if you look at the appropriate threat level response, falls under this tier.
Response Level 3-- Physical Control
There are five classifications of physical control.
  • Restraint Devices:
    Mechanical tools used to restrict a subject’s movement and facilitate searching, such as handcuffs, flex cuffs, leg irons, belly chains, nylon restraints.
  • Transporters:
    Techniques used to control and/or move a subject from point A to point B with minimum effort by the officer in order to gain and retain control over the subject.
  • Takedowns:
    Techniques that redirect a subject to the ground in a controlled manner in order to limit his/her physical resistance and to facilitate the application of a restraint device.
  • Pain Compliance:
    Techniques that force a subject to comply with an officer as a result of the officer inflicting controlled pain upon specific points in the subject’s body, such as pressure point techniques.
For example: Subject refuses to move, so the officer has the option of applying gradual controlled pain upon specific points in the subject’s body, such as pressure point techniques.
For example: Subject refuses to move, so the officer has the option of applying gradual fingertip pressure to a nerve in order to gain compliance.
Pepper foam and tasers are designed to gain compliance by momentarily incapacitating a person long enough to gain physical control over them. The use of impact weapons is the next level of force for extremely violent, but unarmed offenders. The next level is deadly force which is only necessitated under immediate danger to life and limb for civilian law enforcement. Military law enforcement extends that a bit further to serious cases of sabotage or highly sensitive areas that affect national security.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by fallacycop, posted 11-19-2006 1:15 AM fallacycop has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Silent H, posted 11-19-2006 5:26 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 142 (364719)
11-19-2006 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by crashfrog
11-19-2006 2:43 AM


Re: Reviewing the video
quote:
So, he was leaving, but then they grabbed him to stop him from leaving, then they decided to tase him and repeat 79 times to get up? That doesn't seem to make much sense.
So what if it doesn't make any sense? That's the point; it was a nonsensical, unwarranted escalation of force.
You wouldn't know either way about what transpired except for what can be seen and heard on the tape. And what I saw and heard was a man asked to comply 79 times.
Police abuse, in other words. They were taser trigger-happy because they found a Pakistani with no library card.
He was Iranian-American, not a Pakistani-- which is a superfluous element, at best. There's no doubt that the strategic move on this one is to add the tacit assertion that the whole instance was racially motivated.
He did have a medical condition, according to his statements.
And where can I see find this information?
quote:
I also personally would have tried strongarming him to his feet. If all of that failed, I would have threatened him to use my taser or pepper foam. Again, all of that based on the information that I know of.
So, by your own admission, you would have done something completely different and non-escalatory; but you don't think what the officers did was wrong? Now you're not making any sense.
I am making perfect sense. The initial shock was off camera, however, you hear him shouting to get off of him. Common sense would indicate that they went to take him in to custody. At that point, you hear shuffling as if a bit of a struggle ensued, then you hear him being shocked. We don't know what happened. Assuming that the officers were warranted in the initial use of the taser, I would have used it as well as long as other methods were first exhausted to oust the angry man. Once properly secured, I personally would have just picked him up. But at the same time, I have no objections to how they handled it, because at the end of the day, all he had to do was stand up and walk out.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by crashfrog, posted 11-19-2006 2:43 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Silent H, posted 11-19-2006 11:16 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 43 by ringo, posted 11-19-2006 12:23 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 50 by crashfrog, posted 11-19-2006 1:43 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 142 (364720)
11-19-2006 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Taz
11-19-2006 2:46 AM


Re: Reviewing the video
A simple yes or no. Do you or do you not agree that shocking him that many times all the while he was handcuffed on the floor was excessive force?
Based on the information that I currently have, no.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Taz, posted 11-19-2006 2:46 AM Taz has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024