Student gets tasered.

[Christopher]

A student in Florida was forced to be quiet by the use of a taser gun after he asked John Kerry a couple of "annoying" questions.

After asking about Skull and Bones he got dragged away by a bunch of cops, but he wouldn't be quiet so they tasered him.


I think this is pretty shocking, esspecially because you can see it all happen on this video:

tCBcOQkUNjI

[esaul17]

I can't believe that they would actually do something like that...

[Gitsnik]

Well that only confirms it...
And why the f*** isn't anybody interferring?!?!

[Luke]

So the guy asks about the Skull and Crossbones society and ends up getting tasered? Sure he was a bit annoying but I missed the part where it said Democracy doesn't count in prescence of a senator.

Rock on US police force.

[Chris.]

At least John Kerry attempted to stop them :lol: I guess "Hey, wait a second, let me answer his question" is an attempt to stop it.

They tasered him because he started to resist arrest...not because he wouldn't shut up. Even though it's still not right, he should have just let them escort him out. If I was threatened with a taser, I wouldn't fuck around with them. :lol:

[Todd]

The dumbass deserved it. I don't care what you're getting arrested for, and whether or not you're innocent or guilty, you don't resist and try to fight the cops. Just let them arrest you, and if you really didn't do anything, the truth will come out later. He could have just let the cops arrest him and probably not been charged with anything, but now I'm sure he has a resisting arrest charge coming his way.

[Timothy]

The dumbass deserved it. I don't care what you're getting arrested for, and whether or not you're innocent or guilty, you don't resist and try to fight the cops. Just let them arrest you, and if you really didn't do anything, the truth will come out later. He could have just let the cops arrest him and probably not been charged with anything, but now I'm sure he has a resisting arrest charge coming his way.

Agreed. Tbh, when it comes to excessive force by police, I think a taser is the least of your worries. It's certainly better than getting your skull caved-in with a nightstick.

[Chris.]

Agreed. Tbh, when it comes to excessive force by police, I think a taser is the least of your worries. It's certainly better than getting your skull caved-in with a nightstick.

Yeah really, I don't think it was excessive at all. He wasn't injured or anything and he was being really aggressive with the cops. They had to do something to control him.

[Gitsnik]

Agreed. Tbh, when it comes to excessive force by police, I think a taser is the least of your worries. It's certainly better than getting your skull caved-in with a nightstick.

Well there are quite a few people who died of it you know.

[Timothy]

Well there are quite a few people who died of it you know.

Maybe Captain Dumbass should of thought of that before he started to resist
the cops. I'm not saying what they did was justifiable, but considering the circumstances, it could have been worse. A LOT worse.

[Dedicated]

Fucking pigs.

I don't understand what is wrong with asking questions? It's fucking ridiculous. As soon as a question gets asked which may cause a problem or that the government doesn't want to hear, the pigs are onto you. I mean, the kid had the microphone infront of him when he was asking the questions, therefore he was surely allowed to ask about something? I'm guessing that all of the questions he asked are on people's minds but no one has the balls to ask them, mainly because this type of thing is allowed to happen.

Fair enough, the kid probably shouldn't have resisted arrest, but I would have retaliated in a similar fashion if I was being arrested and man-handled for no fucking reason. As for the tasering, I like the way that they cut the video at the specific time that the police apparently warn him about the taser. All I can hear from the video is 'tase him' and then the guy shouting 'don't tase me bro'.

I'm starting to wonder why politicians do these type of events considering that all of the questions are staged, and when they're not, this type of thing happens.

Fuck the government. I feel sorry for all you Americans, somehow your freedom of speech has been eradicated. Have fun without it.


Edit: I'm unsure what I find more disturbing; this, or the fact that everyone seems to believe that it could have been a lot worse. It says a lot about the American police force. You guys are a lot more fucked than I'd thought.

[Christopher]

At least John Kerry attempted to stop them :lol: I guess "Hey, wait a second, let me answer his question" is an attempt to stop it.

They tasered him because he started to resist arrest...not because he wouldn't shut up. Even though it's still not right, he should have just let them escort him out. If I was threatened with a taser, I wouldn't fuck around with them. :lol:

Sure he shouldn't have resisted the arrest but he was just trying to make a point by it.

Look at how many cops there are standing over him... there was no need to taser him.

@Dave: I completely agree.

[Timothy]

Fucking pigs.

I don't understand what is wrong with asking questions? It's fucking ridiculous. As soon as a question gets asked which may cause a problem or that the government doesn't want to hear, the pigs are onto you. I mean, the kid had the microphone infront of him when he was asking the questions, therefore he was surely allowed to ask about something? I'm guessing that all of the questions he asked are on people's minds but no one has the balls to ask them, mainly because this type of thing is allowed to happen.

Fair enough, the kid probably shouldn't have resisted arrest, but I would have retaliated in a similar fashion if I was being arrested and man-handled for no fucking reason. As for the tasering, I like the way that they cut the video at the specific time that the police apparently warn him about the taser. All I can hear from the video is 'tase him' and then the guy shouting 'don't tase me bro'.

I'm starting to wonder why politicians do these type of events considering that all of the questions are staged, and when they're not, this type of thing happens.

Fuck the government. I feel sorry for all you Americans, somehow your freedom of speech has been eradicated. Have fun without it.


Edit: I'm unsure what I find more disturbing; this, or the fact that everyone seems to believe that it could have been a lot worse. It says a lot about the American police force. You guys are a lot more fucked than I'd thought.

Dude you wouldn't even believe some of the shit the police have done to people in this country. It's fucking unbelievable. I don't know about anybody else but I'm scared shitless of the police. Last time I checked their motto
was "To Serve and Protect" not "What the Fuck Are You Looking At?" It's a
sad state of affairs to be sure.

[Chris.]

Sure he shouldn't have resisted the arrest but he was just trying to make a point by it.

Look at how many cops there are standing over him... there was no need to taser him.

@Dave: I completely agree.

It looked like he was going to go until everyone started making noise and then that got him riled up. I'm just saying that it would have been a lot smarter for him to just go, whether or not he thought it was right. The police gave him fair warning about the taser and he continued to resist.

As for all the cops, they wouldn't have been able to get him off the ground without him resisting and obviously, all the cops wouldn't have been able to hold him at the same time because there's just not enough room around one person for 10 cops to hold him. I'm not saying there were other options but I wouldn't have resisted in the first place, no matter how wrong I thought it was.

[Christopher]

It looked like he was going to go until everyone started making noise and then that got him riled up. I'm just saying that it would have been a lot smarter for him to just go, whether or not he thought it was right. The police gave him fair warning about the taser and he continued to resist.

As for all the cops, they wouldn't have been able to get him off the ground without him resisting and obviously, all the cops wouldn't have been able to hold him at the same time because there's just not enough room around one person for 10 cops to hold him. I'm not saying there were other options but I wouldn't have resisted in the first place, no matter how wrong I thought it was.

Yeah, that's true, but there still was no need to taser him...

Although I don't think "Taser him!" is a warning. Then he kept yelling "No, don't, don't taser me."
He was going to back down...

[Nick]

i dont see why they had to use Cops to get him to stop talking John could have just answered the question but steered into a different answer (like politicians usually do) then said thats all from you

[Gitsnik]

I also agree with you Dedicated.


i dont see why they had to use Cops to get him to stop talking John could have just answered the question but steered into a different answer (like politicians usually do) then said thats all from you

Because he asked a question that is VERY embarassing for those "Big Boys".

[Beca]

I don't know what tasered means, but that video looks pretty shocking.

[Christopher]

I don't know what tasered means, but that video looks pretty shocking.

It's a weapon the police use, it gives an electric shock to the person that it's fired on.

[Chris.]

I thought I heard the police say "We're going to taser you if you don't co-operate." but it was just the news guy that said it :lol:

If you listen near the beginning you can hear John Kerry say "Wait a minute, let me answer his question" but the police didn't wait a minute. or even half a minute. :lol:

[Luke]

Fucking pigs.

I don't understand what is wrong with asking questions? It's fucking ridiculous. As soon as a question gets asked which may cause a problem or that the government doesn't want to hear, the pigs are onto you. I mean, the kid had the microphone infront of him when he was asking the questions, therefore he was surely allowed to ask about something? I'm guessing that all of the questions he asked are on people's minds but no one has the balls to ask them, mainly because this type of thing is allowed to happen.

Fair enough, the kid probably shouldn't have resisted arrest, but I would have retaliated in a similar fashion if I was being arrested and man-handled for no fucking reason. As for the tasering, I like the way that they cut the video at the specific time that the police apparently warn him about the taser. All I can hear from the video is 'tase him' and then the guy shouting 'don't tase me bro'.

I'm starting to wonder why politicians do these type of events considering that all of the questions are staged, and when they're not, this type of thing happens.

Fuck the government. I feel sorry for all you Americans, somehow your freedom of speech has been eradicated. Have fun without it.


Edit: I'm unsure what I find more disturbing; this, or the fact that everyone seems to believe that it could have been a lot worse. It says a lot about the American police force. You guys are a lot more fucked than I'd thought.

Quoted for the truth.

And sorry but how is tasering the guy not excessive? He wasn't posing a threat to anyone, he just felt strongly about the quiestion he was asking. Why the fuck did the cops try and arrest him in the first place? Surely America hasn't given up on free speech to that extreme length has it? If that guy had been me I probably would have gotten alot worse than a Taser because he was being told to shut up when he had every right to speak his mind and that's something I believe in very strongly. Evidently this guy did too.

Next up in America they'll be burning books.

[Will]

Dude you wouldn't even believe some of the shit the police have done to people in this country. It's fucking unbelievable. I don't know about anybody else but I'm scared shitless of the police. Last time I checked their motto
was "To Serve and Protect" not "What the Fuck Are You Looking At?" It's a
sad state of affairs to be sure.

Yeah. I mean, I believe it was in Cincinnati where some guy ran from the cops and was shot in the back two or three times. He was unarmed, wasn't high or drunk -- he just didn't want to go to jail because he'd never gone before. Needless to say he died, but the cops got off scott free for thinking he had a weapon.

[Derek The Infamous]

Every one of those police officers should lose their jobs due to police brutality, This guy was expressing his 1st Amendment Rights and they tazered him.

As Tucker said, they should ALL be ashamed of themselves.

[Paul]

The dumbass deserved it. I don't care what you're getting arrested for, and whether or not you're innocent or guilty, you don't resist and try to fight the cops. Just let them arrest you, and if you really didn't do anything, the truth will come out later. He could have just let the cops arrest him and probably not been charged with anything, but now I'm sure he has a resisting arrest charge coming his way.


I never thought I'd say this, but I actually agree with you. :lol:

[Derek The Infamous]

I don't care if he was resisting arrest. I agreed with them pulling him off of the premises and felt he deserved to be removed from the building.

But tell me how in god's name he deserved to be tazered when he was not threatening ANYBODY? I swear to fucking god, we are losing more freedom with every passing day, in this country.

Our democracy is turning into a dictatorship.

[Todd]

I don't care if he was resisting arrest. I agreed with them pulling him off of the premises and felt he deserved to be removed from the building.

But tell me how in god's name he deserved to be tazered when he was not threatening ANYBODY? I swear to fucking god, we are losing more freedom with every passing day, in this country.

Our democracy is turning into a dictatorship.


If you think that he should be pulled off the premises, but he is refusing and not cooperating, what would you do if you were the cops?



Whether or not he should've been removed is irrelevant, the point is, that if you're under arrest, you cooperate and let the facts come out in the investigation. Fighting like this guy did isn't going to help your case at all and will only make things worse, as we saw here. He had it coming IMO.

[Chris.]

If you think that he should be pulled off the premises, but he is refusing and not cooperating, what would you do if you were the cops?



Whether or not he should've been removed is irrelevant, the point is, that if you're under arrest, you cooperate and let the facts come out in the investigation. Fighting like this guy did isn't going to help your case at all and will only make things worse, as we saw here. He had it coming IMO.

I agree. He wasn't even being arrested, He was being escorted off the premises. I never hear any of the cops recite his miranda rights nor do I hear any cop say "you are under arrest", which leads me to believe that he was just being escorted outside because he got out of hand (in their eyes).

[Timothy]

I agree. He wasn't even being arrested, He was being escorted off the premises. I never hear any of the cops recite his miranda rights nor do I hear any cop say "you are under arrest", which leads me to believe that he was just being escorted outside because he got out of hand (in their eyes).

From what CNN says he hasn't been charged with anything yet either. It's like some people can't get over the tasering aspect of it. Is that a horrible thing to do to somebody? Yes, but I don't see anybody coming up with any solutions other than "they shouldn't have tasered him." I'll be the first to call out the cops when they've done something wrong (read my last post), but in this case I don't think they used excessive force.

[Mark]

He was approached several times by the security because he went well over the one-minute maximum for asking questions.

He then became belligerent and hostile towards Kerry and the cops, then resisted being removed from the premises. He deserved what he got. You do not resist the cops.

Then he started overreacting and crying out for attention, to cause a scene (which is what he was there for in the first place, obviously). In all actuality, I think he wanted to be tazed just so he could get the attention towards whatever ridiculous premise he was trying to put out there.

He was charged with a third-degree felony for resisting arrest with violence.

Washington Post Article (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/2007/09/university_of_florida_student_1.html)

[Derek The Infamous]

He was approached several times by the security because he went well over the one-minute maximum for asking questions.

He then became belligerent and hostile towards Kerry and the cops, then resisted being removed from the premises. He deserved what he got. You do not resist the cops.

Then he started overreacting and crying out for attention, to cause a scene (which is obviously what he was there to do). In all actuality, I think he wanted to be tazed just so he could get the attention towards whatever ridiculous premise he was trying to put out there.

He was charged with a third-degree felony for resisting arrest with violence.

Washington Post Article (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/2007/09/university_of_florida_student_1.html)

I did not know there was a one minute limit and that he was approached several times. The video looks like he was suddenly just...taken out of there.

After reading this, I believe the tazering was far more justified. I still feel they did it WAY too long and excessively, but I agree with the charges.

[+ / –]

I did not know there was a one minute limit and that he was approached several times. The video looks like he was suddenly just...taken out of there.

After reading this, I believe the tazering was far more justified. I still feel they did it WAY too long and excessively, but I agree with the charges.

Leave it to the mainstream news stations to leave out important facts in order to make a story look more exciting.

[Gitsnik]

After reading this, I believe the tazering was far more justified.

Nothing is justified being tazered (except killikg of course). It's just a very dangerous weapon that gives 50 000 V shocks to people who mostly don't deserve it.
And fot that one minute thing, why didn't Kerry just say "You're time is over, next one please". Or was he too embarassed to answer the question?
That article says that Kerry answered but can anyone hear what he says?

[Jordan]

Then he started overreacting and crying out for attention, to cause a scene (which is what he was there for in the first place, obviously). In all actuality, I think he wanted to be tazed just so he could get the attention towards whatever ridiculous premise he was trying to put out there.



I guess we should all shut up then.period.

[Arashi]

Disturbing.

[Todd]

Nothing is justified being tazered (except killikg of course). It's just a very dangerous weapon that gives 50 000 V shocks to people who mostly don't deserve it.
And fot that one minute thing, why didn't Kerry just say "You're time is over, next one please". Or was he too embarassed to answer the question?
That article says that Kerry answered but can anyone hear what he says?

Kerry had nothing to do with it, he even said after the whole thing that he could've handled it.

So what else are the cops supposed to do? He obviously won't cooperate. Tazering was the right option IMO.


And generally, being tazered is safe. There is a very, very small chance of someone dying from it, but overall, it's rather safe. And if you do happen to die from it? Well you shouldn't be fucking resisting arrest

[Luke]

He shouldn't have resisted his arrest but there is no justification in tasering the guy, full stop. There were dozens of police officers there, all they had to do was cuff him and drag him outside. That's what the English police force do and it works fine.

Tasering someone should only come as a last resort. The guy wasn't posing a threat to anyone so I think the cops overdid it big time. It seems the only time the cops were actually working as a unit were when they were holding him down while he was being tasered. If it actually took all those people to subdue the situation then the US police force must be more of a joke than I thought.

[Christopher]

I heard on the news today that 2 of the 7 cops that arrested him were made redundant.

There's a huge protest going on at the university of the student and people feel like their free speech was taken away.

Just an update on what happened.

[Todd]

If it actually took all those people to subdue the situation then the US police force must be more of a joke than I thought.

They're campus police. They're the rent-a-cops that barely got through the police academy and the best job they could get was on a college campus.


It's hard to tell from the video though, but with the way he was fighting and kicking, he was probably posing a threat to the police officers themselves, and that's why they tazed him. And IMO, he deserved every bit of it.

[Timothy]

I did not know there was a one minute limit and that he was approached several times. The video looks like he was suddenly just...taken out of there.

After reading this, I believe the tazering was far more justified. I still feel they did it WAY too long and excessively, but I agree with the charges.

They kept telling him his time was up, but he was like "I've got more
questions!"Afterwards in the lobby he was heard screaming "their trying to kill me!" I shit you not! :lol:

[Gitsnik]

They're campus police. They're the rent-a-cops that barely got through the police academy and the best job they could get was on a college campus.

Well that only explains their lack of self-control but still not the tazering.

[Todd]

Well that only explains their lack of self-control but still not the tazering.

theres nothing to explain, he was fighting the cops. I would have tazed the bastard too.

[Timothy]

theres nothing to explain, he was fighting the cops. I would have tazed the bastard too.

Exactly! What do they expect them to do, take him down with some Judo move or something? Their fucking security guards! Has anyone ever tried to hold down someone who doesn't want to be held down (anybody who's dealt with
drunks)? It's easier said then done to say the least.

[Todd]

Exactly! What do they expect them to do, take him down with some Judo move or something? Their fucking security guards! Has anyone ever tried to hold down someone who doesn't want to be held down (anybody who's dealt with
drunks)? It's easier said then done to say the least.

ditto. and if they would have beat him senseless with nightsticks, they would be saying "they should have tazed him, the injuries would be less permanent!"

[Christopher]

Still there were 7 of them I think they could've taken care of it without the tasering.

[Derek The Infamous]

Plain and simple, the more I think about it the guy was being out of control and if you see how he was kicking and swinging you would've felt he was a threat as well. I've watched the video several times and now believe he was out of control.

Still, the fact 2 of the security guards have already been fired..it should give you an idea that the situation is being handled. Listen to Todd, He knows a thing or two about rent a cops, as St. Louis is the rent-a-cop capital of the world. There was a huge brawl that happened there at a girl's basketball tournament back in the late 90's because some referee hit a woman in the face, and it caused the seats to empty as everyone went after the guy for hitting her.

The rent-a-cops did nothing, and tried to arrest my mom/family for inciting a riot..since the seats subsequently emptied as a result when everyone tried to basically kill the ref for hitting her.

By the way...this woman? Was my fucking mom.

[Timothy]

Plain and simple, the more I think about it the guy was being out of control and if you see how he was kicking and swinging you would've felt he was a threat as well. I've watched the video several times and now believe he was out of control.

Still, the fact 2 of the security guards have already been fired..it should give you an idea that the situation is being handled. Listen to Todd, St. Louis is the rent-a-cop capital of the world. There was a huge brawl that happened there at a girl's basketball tournament back in the late 90's because some referee hit a woman in the face, and it caused the seats to empty as everyone went after the guy for hitting her.

The rent-a-cops did nothing, and tried to arrest my mom/family for inciting a riot..since the seats subsequently emptied as a result when everyone tried to basically kill the ref for hitting her.

We could start an entire thread of anecdotal and newsworthy injustices that have been done by law-enforcement officials in the U.S. On the same token, though, this is one of the rare instances I think it was justified. It's easy for us to be arm-chair commandos and talk about how we could have done it better, but we weren't there. Those security guards made their decision and warned the man, yet he still wouldn't let down. In the end, nobody was seriously hurt, so I think we should just say what's done is done.

*rant over*

[esaul17]

It's just...we went years and years without tazers...I would think that 7 or so cops could bring one guy outside.

Also, if Kerry told them to let him stay, why the hell didn't the cops listen? It seems ridiculous.

[Luke]

It's just...we went years and years without tazers...I would think that 7 or so cops could bring one guy outside.

Also, if Kerry told them to let him stay, why the hell didn't the cops listen? It seems ridiculous.

Exactly.

As I said before, it's astounding that it went to those lengths to subdue the situation when there were around a dozen cops.

[Christopher]

Exactly.

As I said before, it's astounding that it went to those lengths to subdue the situation when there were around a dozen cops.

I'm with you on that too.

One guy doesn't pose a threat to 7 or more trained policemen, even if they were campuspolice...

[Timothy]

So I'm guessing all of you have tried to subdue a man before? Like I said before, it's easy to say something can be done, but believe it or not, one man CAN pose a threat to seven people if said people don't know what their doing.

For the record, most of the people who have died from tasers were either
children, elderly, or people with bad health.

[Christopher]

So I'm guessing all of you have tried to subdue a man before? Like I said before, it's easy to say something can be done, but believe it or not, one man CAN pose a threat to seven people if said people don't know what their doing.

For the record, most of the people who have died from tasers were either
children, elderly, or people with bad health.

You're saying 7 or more armed policemen, who are trained to handle these types of situations, can't control one student who wasn't even fighting back?
Then I don't even see the point of having them there in the first place, if they can't control anything without having to hurt people.

Because seriously, I see a student holding his hands up to show he isn't trying to harm the officers. Obviously, he made a mistake by struggling but then again who wouldn't if those policemen are giving you such a rough handling.

[Timothy]

You're saying 7 or more armed policemen, who are trained to handle these types of situations, can't control one student who wasn't even fighting back?
Then I don't even see the point of having them there in the first place, if they can't control anything without having to hurt people.

Because seriously, I see a student holding his hands up to show he isn't trying to harm the officers. Obviously, he made a mistake by struggling but then again who wouldn't if those policemen are giving you such a rough handling.

They were only trying to escort him out of the building when he CLEARLY broke the rules. Letting some douche stand up and ask as many questions as he wants, when everybody else only gets one, excuse me if I have no sympathy for the guy.

As far as them being trained to do so. Their campus cops! The way they are trained to subdue people is by tasering them. Their not real cops who are trained with a myriad of weapons and situation. My father was a campus cop in his youth (boy did he fucking hate that job) so I'm not ignorant to the subject, mind you. It just baffles me that of all the bullshit going on in the world, young people get rilled up over some overreacting prick who gets tasered for being an ass.

[Todd]

You're saying 7 or more armed policemen

So since they're armed, instead of tazering him, they should've shot him?

[Christopher]

So since they're armed, instead of tazering him, they should've shot him?

No... that's really the opposite of what I'm saying.



This is just turning into an endless discussion. I made this thread to point out what had happened, as a report of the news, and I thought it was pretty shocking so I wanted people to know about it.

Obviously, opinions will differ.

[Dedicated]

Resisting arrest with violence? What the fuck? I didn't see anything violent in what he was doing. I saw him get wrestling to the floor and tasered, but I'd say that that was more the police being violent. He wasn't kicking or fighting, he was shrugging the police off. It's not like he raised a fist or pulled out a weapon on them, unlike they did to him.

I really hate the way there is a double standard for the amount of force the police can use and what we can get arrested for. If I had tasered someone for that much of a reason I'm very certain that, in America at least, I would be thrown into prison and given a hefty sentence. If the police do it however, they're completely justified.

[Timothy]

Resisting arrest with violence? What the fuck? I didn't see anything violent in what he was doing. I saw him get wrestling to the floor and tasered, but I'd say that that was more the police being violent. He wasn't kicking or fighting, he was shrugging the police off. It's not like he raised a fist or pulled out a weapon on them, unlike they did to him.

I really hate the way there is a double standard for the amount of force the police can use and what we can get arrested for. If I had tasered someone for that much of a reason I'm very certain that, in America at least, I would be thrown into prison and given a hefty sentence. If the police do it however, they're completely justified.

There were just trying to get him out of the building and he was making a
escorting out to be like the police were trying to kill him (which he actually said
later on). This video doesn't show the whole event transpire. The reason they had him pinned to the ground is because he kept running away from them. They warned him that if he didn't stop they were going to taser him. I don't know about you, but if a cop said that to me I would shut my fucking mouth and get a lawyer. This guy, imo, was intentionally trying to make a scene and he got what he deserved for being a jackoff. Maybe that's just me, though.

[Derek The Infamous]

He was also kicking and swinging as the cops tried to grab him. I'd say that's violence people.

After seeing a longer version (i.e. NOT the video posted here) my viewpoint has changed dramatically.

[Chris(tmas)]

I'm with you on that too.

One guy doesn't pose a threat to 7 or more trained policemen, even if they were campuspolice...
This a USA vs Europe thing :lol: Although the Dutch police come with 10 people for a drunk person but they dont taser him.

[Dedicated]

Maybe I need to see the whole video to form a better opinion of the situation.

I can see that the kid did go over the top but from what I've seen, the police tasered him for no reason and he was being escorted out for a ridiculous reason as well. If I was him, I'd be pissed off. I know what police are like in the UK when things don't go their way though and I have, on occasion, retaliated to how they act.

This said, I shall never believe that there was justification for tasering the guy. He was well outnumbered and no matter if they are the actual police or school police, they will have had training in how to deal with a situation where someone isn't too fond of being arrested. I'm also going to suggest that tasering someone after wrestling them to the floor isn't one of the first few options.

Anyway, I'm less interested in if he should have been tasered or not compared to whether he should have been removed/arrested in the first place.

Hah, all this fuss over some kid who took too long on a question and asked what a lot of people were thinking. No wonder no one asks the questions we all want answers to anymore.

[Derek The Infamous]

This is the other angle that shows him fighting the police.

Warning, VERY graphic as it shows the WHOLE tazering. He shoves and kicks and pushes at the police as they're pulling him away. Hence the resisting with violence:

iqAVvlyVbag

[Gitsnik]

This a USA vs Europe thing :lol: Although the Dutch police come with 10 people for a drunk person but they dont taser him.

This threat is defenitely showing the difference between european and american opinions...

@Derek: Who wouldn't fight back when you know you didn't do anything wrong?
Secondly, in the video you can see some people talking to the cops and telling them to arrest the guy, which would be because of the questions he asked.

And I still don't understand why people aren't trying to help him...

[Christopher]

:lol: Derek, I'm sorry but I couldn't see a thing on that video.

Infact it made me feel even stronger for the student because he was right, he was saying something other people agreed with too because they clapped for him.
It just shows the police kept interfering so he couldn't say what he wanted to say. Kerry would've answered his question, but I'm really curious about what his answer would be...

I didn't see any kicking or pushing, he was obviously right. The people around him were shocked by how the policemen acted and the tasering just pushed that even further. There was no need for it and that's the end of this for me...

[Timothy]

This threat is defenitely showing the difference between european and american opinions...

@Derek: Who wouldn't fight back when you know you didn't do anything wrong?

He did do something wrong. Instead of showing some decency and leaving the podium when his time was up (which everybody else did) he tried to make
a scene. I'm starting to think he did this all on purpose just so he could become a martyr or something. If he knows he didn't do anything wrong, there's a legal system in place to prove that. This all could have EASILY been avoided had he not made an ass out of himself.

[Gitsnik]

I'm starting to think he did this all on purpose just so he could become a martyr or something.

He just asked important questions (was it his fault there were many?) and didn't understand why the cops reacted that way.

[Chris.]

He just asked important questions (was it his fault there were many?) and didn't understand why the cops reacted that way.

If you're at a public event where you are allowed to question someone and you are given guidelines, you do NOT break those guidelines or else you face some sort of consequence. It's not that hard to understand. He deliberately disobeyed the rules that were given and was being escorted out as a result. So yes, it was his fault that there were so many. If he really wanted to know the answer to all of his questions, he could've politely asked someone next to him to ask John Kerry instead of breaking the rules and causing a scene.

I honestly don't feel the least bit sympathetic for him.

[Chris(tmas)]

Why does everyone keeps saying questionssss? It was one question that was long.

[Christopher]

Why does everyone keeps saying questionssss? It was one question that was long.

Indeed and they kept interrupting him so he had to start over every time.

[Mark]

Indeed and they kept interrupting him so he had to start over every time.

I haven't read that. Source?

Even so, it doesn't change the fact he got what he deserved.

[Tom]

What an arrogant jerk.

I've dealt with drunk people and seen it when i've been out, you get the situation under control as fast as possible without making a huge scene.

Yeah he was just asking questions, but if they are arresting you, then you go a long you don't scream and shout like an idiot because it will just land you in more trouble, i heard on the video derek posted that they were saying they would tazer him if he didn't co-operate, and then he resisted arrest for not putting his hands behind his back.


Yeah there was like 7 campus police there, but the fact was, that guy would have just tried his luck if there were just 2, so i have no sympathy what so ever for the guy.


He just chose the hard way :\

[Christopher]

I haven't read that. Source?

Even so, it doesn't change the fact he got what he deserved.

You can see that in the video.

Anyways, I stick to what I said and I'm done with this...

[Dean]

What an arrogant jerk.

I've dealt with drunk people and seen it when i've been out, you get the situation under control as fast as possible without making a huge scene.

Yeah he was just asking questions, but if they are arresting you, then you go a long you don't scream and shout like an idiot because it will just land you in more trouble, i heard on the video derek posted that they were saying they would tazer him if he didn't co-operate, and then he resisted arrest for not putting his hands behind his back.


Yeah there was like 7 campus police there, but the fact was, that guy would have just tried his luck if there were just 2, so i have no sympathy what so ever for the guy.


He just chose the hard way :\
qft

[Mark]

You can see that in the video.

Anyways, I stick to what I said and I'm done with this...

What I see in the video is him asking numerous questions in one sentence.

What we were watching was well past the one-minute mark, well after the University staff approached him numerous times to wrap things up, so I'm unsure how that conclusion can be made.

[Derek The Infamous]

The guy was trying to make the police look bad for calmly escorting him out. He kept going 'DO YOU SEE THIS?', 'GET YOUR FUCKING HANDS OFF OF ME' etc. What an attention seeking douche.

He deserved everything he got.

[Luke]

So since they're armed, instead of tazering him, they should've shot him?

Sorry Todd but that's not what he was saying at all and you know it.

The fact of the matter is that these people are trained to deal with situations like this (well, they're trained to be able to subdue people anyway) and yet both videos show no evidence of them handling the situation in a professional manner at all even though there are around 7 or 8 officers. You mean to tell me that with all the training of 7 or 8 cops combined their solution to a completely non-violent problem was to grapple the guy to the ground and tase him? I've seen first hand singular police officers handling a far worse situation than this without the use of weapons. Jesus, with this evidence they probably would have shot him if he made a break for it.

But then again that seems to be the way of a large part of the American police force - shoot first and ask quiestions later.

[Timothy]

But then again that seems to be the way of a large part of the American police force - shoot first and ask quiestions later.

Normally I would agree with this statement, but it's just not true in this case.
They warned him that if he didn't calm down they were going to use the taser, he refused. This guy knew exactly what he was doing and knew he was starting a bunch of bullshit over nothing. He could have just dealt with getting thrown out, but oh no... he had to go and make an ass of himself and he was dealt with accordingly.

[Messy Marj]

I don't see the point of everyone yelling stuff at everyone in this thread.
What happened, happened.
You cannot change someone elses views. -_-

[El Muerto]

It seems to me that you're all just giving him the attention he wanted..

[Luke]

Normally I would agree with this statement, but it's just not true in this case.
They warned him that if he didn't calm down they were going to use the taser, he refused. This guy knew exactly what he was doing and knew he was starting a bunch of bullshit over nothing. He could have just dealt with getting thrown out, but oh no... he had to go and make an ass of himself and he was dealt with accordingly.

Why are they resorting to the taser anyway? If the guy is resisting arrest there's more than enough of them to drag him out of the place and into a cop car.

[Mark]

There's no yelling going on. It's a debate. Debates happen in Serious Chat.


The fact of the matter is that these people are trained to deal with situations like this (well, they're trained to be able to subdue people anyway) and yet both videos show no evidence of them handling the situation in a professional manner at all even though there are around 7 or 8 officers. You mean to tell me that with all the training of 7 or 8 cops combined their solution to a completely non-violent problem was to grapple the guy to the ground and tase him? I've seen first hand singular police officers handling a far worse situation than this without the use of weapons. Jesus, with this evidence they probably would have shot him if he made a break for it.

This was a non-violent situation until he started pushing and shoving at the officers who were originally trying to calmly take him out of the auditorium.

He upped the aggression by resisting, and they needed to make sure he was removed from the auditorium, for the safety of Kerry and anyone else. He continued to resist, and even tried to break away, until the officers finally wrestled him to the ground. At this point, he was going out of control and deliberately disobeying their orders to calm down.

At one point, one of the policewomen told him, straight to his face, that if he did not calm down and stop resisting, he would be tased. Fully knowing the consequences of refusing to cooperate, he continued to resist the arrest, forcing the officers to subdue him via taser, and subsequently helping him achieve his goal of being turned into some sort of martyr or lightning rod for upholders of the "freedom of speech" debate. He got what he wanted; attention.

[Messy Marj]

There's no yelling going on. It's a debate. Debates happen in Serious Chat.

Yes, I figured that much. I should've used something else instead of 'yelling'. Ohwell, I'm never good at this.

*walks out*

[Luke]

There's no yelling going on. It's a debate. Debates happen in Serious Chat.



This was a non-violent situation until he started pushing and shoving at the officers who were originally trying to calmly take him out of the auditorium.

He upped the aggression by resisting, and they needed to make sure he was removed from the auditorium, for the safety of Kerry and anyone else. He continued to resist, and even tried to break away, until the officers finally wrestled him to the ground. At this point, he was going out of control and deliberately disobeying their orders to calm down.

At one point, one of the policewomen told him, straight to his face, that if he did not calm down and stop resisting, he would be tased. Fully knowing the consequences of refusing to cooperate, he continued to resist the arrest, forcing the officers to subdue him via taser, and subsequently helping him achieve his goal of being turned into some sort of martyr or lightning rod for upholders of the "freedom of speech" debate. He got what he wanted; attention.

That's not the point. I'm just saying that there was no point in grappling the guy down to the floor and eventually tasering him in front of all those people when there was more than enough cops to overpower him and put him in the back of a police car.

[Timothy]

Why are they resorting to the taser anyway? If the guy is resisting arrest there's more than enough of them to drag him out of the place and into a cop car.

He would have continued to try and wrestle his way out which could have hurt somebody (maybe even himself). Tasers are meant to immobilize people... not kill them. People keep taking the handful of taser misuses or deaths and using that info as if it's the gospel truth. Dozens of newscasters have been shot with tasers in demonstration clips on the news. The chances of getting seriously hurt by a taser (while possible) are very slim.

[Mark]

That's not the point. I'm just saying that there was no point in grappling the guy down to the floor and eventually tasering him in front of all those people when there was more than enough cops to overpower him and put him in the back of a police car.

You've probably got that right.

Regardless, he was threatened with the punishment and he refused to comply, so he got what he deserved.

[Gitsnik]

Does someone know if Kerry made any kind of statement after this?

[Derek The Infamous]

The official police report cites injuries to the security personnel involved.

Shall this be true, the kid crossed the line from being a nuisance to a physical threat and totally deserved any form of 'severe' punishment he received.

Injuries = resisting arrest with violence and thus the kid's charges were justified.

[Chris(tmas)]

The staff coulve just let him ask the question. How many times does something like that happen?

They coulve just lift the guy up, and throw him outside instead of lying him on the ground and give him a taser.

[Timothy]

It just saddens me that this is getting so much press. Especially when there are more pressing issues at the moment (Iraq war and the Jena Six come to mind).

[Gitsnik]

I saw it on the french tv today and they said it was one of the most viewed videos on the internet.

[esaul17]

You've probably got that right.

Regardless, he was threatened with the punishment and he refused to comply, so he got what he deserved.

If they threatened to shoot him in the head and he refused to comply, would he have still gotten what he deserved?

People can't get away with anything just because they warned them first, I don't think. If I told you that, if you replied to this message, I'd track you down and kill you, then did so I doubt everyone would say "He was warned so he got what he deserved".

The guy should not have asked so many questions, and should have been told to leave. However, Kerry told them to let him continue, so I don't see why they didn't listen to him. Kerry probably knew that dragging him out like they did would just cause a scene and that it was easier to just let him talk. I am not sure why the police seemed so determined to let him be some sort of martyr. It isn't tough to see that that is what he was aiming for and by tasering him they let him acheive that.


In short, I don't see why you should tackle, arrest, and taser a guy because he wanted to ask a question to the speaker that the speaker openly said was an important question and worthy of answering.

[Timothy]

If they threatened to shoot him in the head and he refused to comply, would he have still gotten what he deserved?

People can't get away with anything just because they warned them first, I don't think. If I told you that, if you replied to this message, I'd track you down and kill you, then did so I doubt everyone would say "He was warned so he got what he deserved".

The guy should not have asked so many questions, and should have been told to leave. However, Kerry told them to let him continue, so I don't see why they didn't listen to him. Kerry probably knew that dragging him out like they did would just cause a scene and that it was easier to just let him talk. I am not sure why the police seemed so determined to let him be some sort of martyr. It isn't tough to see that that is what he was aiming for and by tasering him they let him acheive that.


In short, I don't see why you should tackle, arrest, and taser a guy because he wanted to ask a question to the speaker that the speaker openly said was an important question and worthy of answering.

He wasn't tasered because he wanted to ask a question, he was tasered for struggling with the security guards. People are blowing the effects of the taser
way out of proportion. The reason this seems so brutal is because of how he screams. I've seen many people (on video and on the news) getting tasered
and none of them screamed that loud or that long. He was obviously trying to
make them look bad and he succeeded. A taser isn't some handheld death-device. It's a (relatively) safe measure to incapacitate someone from
hurting themselves or somebody else. Nobody was seriously injured (except maybe that guys pride), and things could have been much worse.

[Luke]

If they threatened to shoot him in the head and he refused to comply, would he have still gotten what he deserved?

People can't get away with anything just because they warned them first, I don't think. If I told you that, if you replied to this message, I'd track you down and kill you, then did so I doubt everyone would say "He was warned so he got what he deserved".

The guy should not have asked so many questions, and should have been told to leave. However, Kerry told them to let him continue, so I don't see why they didn't listen to him. Kerry probably knew that dragging him out like they did would just cause a scene and that it was easier to just let him talk. I am not sure why the police seemed so determined to let him be some sort of martyr. It isn't tough to see that that is what he was aiming for and by tasering him they let him acheive that.


In short, I don't see why you should tackle, arrest, and taser a guy because he wanted to ask a question to the speaker that the speaker openly said was an important question and worthy of answering.

Amen.

[Timothy]

If they threatened to shoot him in the head and he refused to comply, would he have still gotten what he deserved?

Even though I don't 100% agree with you on this situation, I have to say that sounds like a line from a song/poem. It's a very powerful statement. :)

[Mark]

If they threatened to shoot him in the head and he refused to comply, would he have still gotten what he deserved?

That's an extreme way of putting things, and completely irrelevant to this situation. Tasers are used to subdue people, guns are used to kill people. The only time guns are used by the police are when someone is at risk of killing a police officer. What kind of asinine comparison is this?


People can't get away with anything just because they warned them first, I don't think. If I told you that, if you replied to this message, I'd track you down and kill you, then did so I doubt everyone would say "He was warned so he got what he deserved".Of course they can't, but do you not understand the situation? The guy was being physically abusive of the police and showing increased signs of agitation and aggression. He was told to comply with the police officers and allow them to escort him out of the building, but he tried to break free and started shoving at and resisting the police officers.

I'm not sure if you're completely aware of standard police procedure, but tazing is used after repeated attempts to try and make a suspect comply with police orders are refused and hostility increases. Tazing happens in other situations when people won't get out of their cars after getting pulled over, or in other situations where aggression seems to be on the rise.


In short, I don't see why you should tackle, arrest, and taser a guy because he wanted to ask a question to the speaker that the speaker openly said was an important question and worthy of answering.Kerry obviously thought the question was a half-baked question (who wouldn't think that about some conspiracy theory about his involvement in a secret society?), but wanted to save face by showing he could calmly answer the belligerent idiot's question.

They tazed him because he refused to comply with their orders that he allow them to remove him from the room. He was threatened with the tazing (which in many cases is not announced) after he refused to comply.

He had what was coming to him, and he wanted it.

I wish they hadn't tazed this idiot so he wouldn't of gotten the attention he's getting.

[minuteforce]

i heard kerry trying to keep the forum going and trying to divert attention and avoid the whole fiasco.

he didn't try that hard. ha. :D

[Tom]

If they threatened to shoot him in the head and he refused to comply, would he have still gotten what he deserved?

Your comparing subduing to killing a person?



In short, I don't see why you should tackle, arrest, and taser a guy because he wanted to ask a question to the speaker that the speaker openly said was an important question and worthy of answering.

you tackle, arrest and taster a guy when they are being physically abusive, repeatedly swearing and shouting at the police, screaming and shouting for attention and resisting arrest after numerous times of trying to get him to co-oporate.

The fact is, they tasered him to subdue him to get him outside, if they had lifted him, he would have kicked and screamed.

[Luke]

Your comparing subduing to killing a person?

you tackle, arrest and taster a guy when they are being physically abusive, repeatedly swearing and shouting at the police, screaming and shouting for attention and resisting arrest after numerous times of trying to get him to co-oporate.

The fact is, they tasered him to subdue him to get him outside, if they had lifted him, he would have kicked and screamed.

Sorry but I've seen one cop in this country deal with a worse situation without the use of any weapon. There are 7 or 8 of them in this instance.

[Tom]

Sorry but I've seen one cop in this country deal with a worse situation without the use of any weapon. There are 7 or 8 of them in this instance.

Yeah but this isn't our police force.

Also i've seen worse incidents too, without the use of a weapon, but that still doesn't mean the force used by the American campus police was wrong in anyway.

[Timothy]

Sorry but I've seen one cop in this country deal with a worse situation without the use of any weapon. There are 7 or 8 of them in this instance.

Key-word: cop. These aren't cops, they're campus security guards, their training borders on non-existent. I have stated this before ad nauseum. You've got to step into their shoes for a moment. You could a) try to drag some flailing guy to your car and risk getting kicked or scratched. Or you could b) safely (I cannot stress this word enough) incapacitate him with a tool that is made to SAFELY incapacitate someone. A lot of you have made these HANDFUL of taser-related deaths go to your head to the point where you are blowing this way out of proportion. Lots of people have died in swimming pools... does
that mean they're floating-coffins of death? Absolutely not. It's just circumstance.

[Luke]

I completly overlook the fact that they're campus security simply because of the number of them there were. If they worked as a team then half the shit that went down probably wouldn't have. There's strength in numbers. Of course the only time they demonstrated that was when they were holding the guy down.

And I can emphasise with the security personnel but in the heat of the moment they need to be thinking tacticly and professionally and they didn't demonstrate either.

[Mark]

I completly overlook the fact that they're campus security simply because of the number of them there were. If they worked as a team then half the shit that went down probably wouldn't have. There's strength in numbers. Of course the only time they demonstrated that was when they were holding the guy down.

And I can emphasise with the security personnel but in the heat of the moment they need to be thinking tacticly and professionally and they didn't demonstrate either.

I guess you just don't understand standard police procedure. They were trained to do this.

The fact of the matter is that despite there being 6 to 7 campus security trying to get control of him, he was still wriggling around and trying to get away, despite acknowledging that he could hear and understand their orders. They were having a tough time keeping him still so they could cuff him. In times like this, where the suspect is out of control, belligerent, abusive, and just plain disorderly, tazing is the safe mode of getting control over the person, and is the taught way to handle a suspect by the police academy.

[Timothy]

I completly overlook the fact that they're campus security simply because of the number of them there were. If they worked as a team then half the shit that went down probably wouldn't have. There's strength in numbers. Of course the only time they demonstrated that was when they were holding the guy down.

And I can emphasise with the security personnel but in the heat of the moment they need to be thinking tacticly and professionally and they didn't demonstrate either.

I understand the whole strength in numbers argument, and to be honest, your point is valid. At the same time, though, they didn't abuse the taser, they used it to subdue someone who could have made the situation even worse. I just can't help but think of what would have happened had they not stopped him when they did. The whole struggle probably would have went on for a long time with someone truly getting hurt. This guy was obviously trying to start some shit. He was trying to get the other students involved which could have escalated into a full-scale riot. Then some people would have truly been hurt or, even worse, killed.

With that said, I'm not immune to police brutality. Just today, some police car video surfaced of a cop tasering a drunk women repeatedly, while she was handcuffed. This was a case of abuse, and I just don't see this incident at FSU fitting that tag.

[esaul17]

I used the gun analogy to show something: just because you warn someone of what you're going to do if they disobey, that doesn't give you the right to do it. I was just showing that the argument of "well, he was warned!" is not enough to make it right on it's own. I used an extreme example to point out the flaws in that particular train of reasoning. It is a pretty typical method of exposing holes in the logic of an argument.

And, if the campus cops had that little training, why even have them there, really? I mean, it seems to kind of defeat the purpose.


Thirdly, I just can't get past the fact that Kerry had told them not to take him, but they did anyway. It seems that if anyone should have been able to let him stay, Kerry would be that person.

I do think it is obvious that this guy wanted to cause a scene. The fact that 7 campus police tackled him to the ground and tazered him seemed to only make that scene. It was a horrible way to handle the situation.


And, really, I still just don't know how seven campus police, even with minimal training, had to electrocute a guy to get him out of the building. Didn't we go for centuries without tasers? It just seemed like laziness at best to me, and at worst a chance for them to try out their new toy.

[Mark]

I used the gun analogy to show something: just because you warn someone of what you're going to do if they disobey, that doesn't give you the right to do it. I was just showing that the argument of "well, he was warned!" is not enough to make it right on it's own. I used an extreme example to point out the flaws in that particular train of reasoning. It is a pretty typical method of exposing holes in the logic of an argument.

WHAT?!

That's a terrible example, and terrible attempt at disproving a completely valid point.

What you neglect to mention is that the thing the officers warned him about was the prescribed, appropriate action and that he did deserve it for his disorderly and abusive conduct. The officers are equipped with tasers for a reason: to use when trying to get control of an out of control situation like this.

What you used was an illegal situation to try and disprove a legal occurrence.

I don't understand how something like that can be twisted so out of perspective. That was a blatant grasp for straws.


And, if the campus cops had that little training, why even have them there, really? I mean, it seems to kind of defeat the purpose.Because the event was on campus and they have adequate training by the academy?

[Dedicated]

I understand the whole strength in numbers argument, and to be honest, your point is valid. At the same time, though, they didn't abuse the taser, they used it to subdue someone who could have made the situation even worse. I just can't help but think of what would have happened had they not stopped him when they did. The whole struggle probably would have went on for a long time with someone truly getting hurt. This guy was obviously trying to start some shit. He was trying to get the other students involved which could have escalated into a full-scale riot. Then some people would have truly been hurt or, even worse, killed.

I'm gonna draw attention to this because if the police hadn't tried to detain the guy for no reason then none of this would have happened in the first place.

[Timothy]

I'm gonna draw attention to this because if the police hadn't tried to detain the guy for no reason then none of this would have happened in the first place.

You could also go farther back and say that the guy should have left the podium when his time was up. I know what your going to say "if Kerry would have answered his question..." Here's my reasoning. John Kerry is a politician. What does a politician do when he doesn't want to answer a tough question?
He dodges it. So who's to say that this guy would have been satisfied with Kerrys answer? The truth is, this guy was trying to disrupt this event and he did.

[Luke]

I'm gonna draw attention to this because if the police hadn't tried to detain the guy for no reason then none of this would have happened in the first place.

Amen.

Kerry didn't seem to have a problem with the quiestions at all.

[Dedicated]

You could also go farther back and say that the guy should have left the podium when his time was up. I know what your going to say "if Kerry would have answered his question..." Here's my reasoning. John Kerry is a politician. What does a politician do when he doesn't want to answer a tough question?
He dodges it. So who's to say that this guy would have been satisfied with Kerrys answer? The truth is, this guy was trying to disrupt this event and he did.

I remember hearing Kerry say that he would answer the guys question?

That and from what I've gathered, the police wouldn't let the guy get a full question out anyway. I feel that no one else in the place was bothered by the guy asking questions as they were probably curious as well. If they were bothered, I'm sure one of them would have stood up and confronted the guy.

[Timothy]

I remember hearing Kerry say that he would answer the guys question?

That and from what I've gathered, the police wouldn't let the guy get a full question out anyway. I feel that no one else in the place was bothered by the guy asking questions as they were probably curious as well. If they were bothered, I'm sure one of them would have stood up and confronted the guy.

Just 'cause he said he would answer him, doesn't mean he would. I can't speak for the rest of the world, but politicians in the U.S. have a habit of going off on completely unrelated subjects, or answering so vaguely that you don't know what the fuck their talking about! :lol:

The guy tried to ask multiple questions and went well beyond his alloted time-limit. What were they supposed to do, just let him ask away willy-nilly?
It wouldn't have been fair to everybody else. It wasn't like they just rushed in and started tasering the guy. They asked him to leave and he refused. He doesn't own that place. If you told someone to leave your home and they wouldn't I imagine you'd be pretty pissed (and rightly so).

As far as the other students being bothered, they were laughing at the guy
as he was being dragged away. Nobody even gave a shit until he started getting tasered, and that only appeared to be a handful of people at best.

[Dedicated]

The guy tried to ask multiple questions and went well beyond his alloted time-limit. What were they supposed to do, just let him ask away willy-nilly?
It wouldn't have been fair to everybody else. It wasn't like they just rushed in and started tasering the guy. They asked him to leave and he refused. He doesn't own that place. If you told someone to leave your home and they wouldn't I imagine you'd be pretty pissed (and rightly so).

As far as the other students being bothered, they were laughing at the guy
as he was being dragged away. Nobody even gave a shit until he started getting tasered, and that only appeared to be a handful of people at best.

I probably wouldn't get 7 people I know to jump on the person and taser them, that's for sure :P


Not sure about the people you know, but that cheering is the general reaction anyone I know gets when they do anything which may piss of the authorities. Mainly 'cause people understand how things like this can happen and are pleased when things don't go the way the police have planned. Hell, I would have been cheering for the guy if I were there.

[Gitsnik]

1) Of course they can't, but do you not understand the situation? The guy was being physically abusive of the police and showing increased signs of agitation and aggression. He was told to comply with the police officers and allow them to escort him out of the building, but he tried to break free and started shoving at and resisting the police officers.

2)I'm not sure if you're completely aware of standard police procedure, but tazing is used after repeated attempts to try and make a suspect comply with police orders are refused and hostility increases. Tazing happens in other situations when people won't get out of their cars after getting pulled over, or in other situations where aggression seems to be on the rise.

3)Kerry obviously thought the question was a half-baked question (who wouldn't think that about some conspiracy theory about his involvement in a secret society?), but wanted to save face by showing he could calmly answer the belligerent idiot's question.

1) Well sane cops would have thrown him on the ground, handcuffed him and dragged him away. How hard is that when you're 7 against 1?

2) The american way of peace keaping...

3) Errr... I think a lot of people would like to know the truth about that.

[Mark]

1) Well sane cops would have thrown him on the ground, handcuffed him and dragged him away. How hard is that when you're 7 against 1?

2) The american way of peace keaping...

I believe you just answered your first point with your second point. It's how they're trained.

I sense some anti-American hostility all throughout this. I'm a Canadian and not shy to criticize some things their country does, but it doesn't prevent me from thinking about this situation objectively.


3) Errr... I think a lot of people would like to know the truth about that.

Lots of conspiracy theorists out there, yep.

Regardless, do you really think he was expecting an answer from Kerry, or do you think he was just trying to put that subject out there? Objectively, now.

[Derek The Infamous]

I can't believe this thread is still going on. Who cares about this kid. There are far more important topics in the world to discuss than some idiot who didn't know when to shut up, and thus got everything he deserved.

[Timothy]

I sense some anti-American hostility all throughout this. I'm a Canadian and not shy to criticize some things their country does, but it doesn't prevent me from thinking about this situation objectively.

I sense a lot of that as well. It seems like righteous indignation only spreads
to the U.S. Does America have a lot of problems? Yes, and I'll be the first to call our government out on it's bullshit, but anti-Americanism is such an easy way
of writing us off. It's such a cop-out.

[Luke]

I sense a lot of that as well. It seems like righteous indignation only spreads
to the U.S. Does America have a lot of problems? Yes, and I'll be the first to call our government out on it's bullshit, but anti-Americanism is such an easy way
of writing us off. It's such a cop-out.

You know what, if everyone is so damn worried about Anti-Americanism then why don't you do something to help change people's opinions because to be perfectly honest I'd say a large part of it is completly justified. Yes your government is to blame for several of your problems and turning most of the world against the US but may I remind you that the majority voted this government in - Twice.

[Chris.]

You know what, if everyone is so damn worried about Anti-Americanism then why don't you do something to help change people's opinions because to be perfectly honest I'd say a large part of it is completly justified. Yes your government is to blame for several of your problems and turning most of the world against the US but may I remind you that the majority voted this government in - Twice.

So obviously everyone in this country deserves to be scrutinized because of the choice of a majority derived from a screwed up electoral process. Yeah that seems reasonable.

[Timothy]

You know what, if everyone is so damn worried about Anti-Americanism then why don't you do something to help change people's opinions because to be perfectly honest I'd say a large part of it is completly justified. Yes your government is to blame for several of your problems and turning most of the world against the US but may I remind you that the majority voted this government in - Twice.

I wasn't even old enough to vote in either of those elections so I'm not a part of that. It's just that I sense a hint of elitism whenever I hear people talking about the U.S. As far as I can remember, the whole world has always hated the U.S. Some of it justified, some of it hyperbole. The point I'm trying to make is how is it relevant to this issue? Are you trying to say that if Bush wouldn't have been reelected, there'd be no police brutality? It just gets a little old whenever something happens to hear "well that's America for you." It's not that simple. Every country has it's pros and cons. A lot of Iranians voted for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Does that mean that they're all delusional nut-jobs? Fuck no! Generalizations of Americans based off of the performance of their president is ignorant and stupid. You can't paint us all with the same brush.

[Luke]

So obviously everyone in this country deserves to be scrutinized because of the choice of a majority derived from a screwed up electoral process. Yeah that seems reasonable.

Did I say that? No I didn't.

I think what I said may have been a little extreme and I apologise. I was basing what I said off of a majority (the majority being the ones who voted bush in). But you have to understand it's difficult, particularly in the UK not to think negative things about America simply because we got dragged into involvement with both the Afgan and Iraq conflicts even though the majority of the UK didn't want to go to war. It's exactly why over the past 5 years this country's government has lost a considerable amount of creadibility not only from it's citezens but in the world because now we're seen as America's bitch and that's dragged the UK down with America's stereotypes.

I apologise for making a generalisation though. It's just an extremely touchy subject for me. The fact is that America is probably my favourite place to go in the world because some parts are beautiful and have some really cool people in it. However when I go to Florida I'd like it if I wasn't practicly ordered to salute the troops and sing the fucking national anthem when I'm trying to watch Shamu. :lol:

[Chris.]

Did I say that? No I didn't.

I think what I said may have been a little extreme and I apologise. I was basing what I said off of a majority (the majority being the ones who voted bush in). But you have to understand it's difficult, particularly in the UK not to think negative things about America simply because we got dragged into involvement with both the Afgan and Iraq conflicts even though the majority of the UK didn't want to go to war. It's exactly why over the past 5 years this country's government has lost a considerable amount of creadibility not only from it's citezens but in the world because now we're seen as America's bitch and that's dragged the UK down with America's stereotypes.

I apologise for making a generalisation though. It's just an extremely touchy subject for me. The fact is that America is probably my favourite place to go in the world because some parts are beautiful and have some really cool people in it. However when I go to Florida I'd like it if I wasn't practicly ordered to salute the troops and sing the fucking national anthem when I'm trying to watch Shamu. :lol:

It wasn't what you said but that's what I felt like it implied.

I never supported the election of Bush, but when he was elected I was way too young to vote. I do see where you are coming from, but a lot of the US now regrets having Bush in office and has finally seen what they did to this country by electing him.

However this is off topic :lol:

[Mark]

It's also prudent to mention that a small portion of eligible voters voted in the 2004 election, so you're talking about one-fifth of the American population who voted for Bush.

And Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000. :lol:

[Chris.]

It's also prudent to mention that a small portion of eligible voters voted in the 2004 election, so you're talking about one-fifth of the American population who voted for Bush.

And Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000. :lol:

Hence why the electoral process is screwed up. :lol:

[Anya]

In a way I think both the police and the kid at UF were both wrong. I don't think the should have escorted him out of there, he did have a right to free speech, but since they did escort him out of there I really don't think he should have made such a scene. He acted like an attention whore, and it was annoying. They both have there pro's and con's really. As for the whole taser thing, I think it was just the police's last desperate attempt to control him, and I think he deserved it for how ridiculous he was acting. He could've handle it more maturely. The police also could've allowed him to answer his question though, I mean Kerry WAS willing to answer it but they just cut in.

*shrugs*

[Dr. Faust]

Wow, student gets tasered. Big deal, there are much worse acts of police brutality in the world.

[minuteforce]

kerry was trying to swerve around it, the way i see it. :rolleyes: he was trying to act as if nothing was wrong.

[heshboy]

Is it wrong for me to laugh at the topic title?


because I did >_>

[esaul17]

Wow, student gets tasered. Big deal, there are much worse acts of police brutality in the world.

That is like saying you shouldn't care if a police officer shoots you in the arm because they could have shot you in the head, and have done so to others in the past.

[Chris.]

That is like saying you shouldn't care if a police officer shoots you in the arm because they could have shot you in the head, and have done so to others in the past.

Nice try, but that's still a completely different scenario and the analogy isn't logical.

[Timothy]

Did I say that? No I didn't.

I think what I said may have been a little extreme and I apologise. I was basing what I said off of a majority (the majority being the ones who voted bush in). But you have to understand it's difficult, particularly in the UK not to think negative things about America simply because we got dragged into involvement with both the Afgan and Iraq conflicts even though the majority of the UK didn't want to go to war. It's exactly why over the past 5 years this country's government has lost a considerable amount of creadibility not only from it's citezens but in the world because now we're seen as America's bitch and that's dragged the UK down with America's stereotypes.

I apologise for making a generalisation though. It's just an extremely touchy subject for me. The fact is that America is probably my favourite place to go in the world because some parts are beautiful and have some really cool people in it. However when I go to Florida I'd like it if I wasn't practicly ordered to salute the troops and sing the fucking national anthem when I'm trying to watch Shamu. :lol:

It's just a misunderstanding I guess. No worries. :)

[esaul17]

Nice try, but that's still a completely different scenario and the analogy isn't logical.

No, it is a fine analogy. Just because there are worse situations out there and possible, it does not mean that we should not care about the less negative ones.

That is how such things end up becoming "okay".

[Mark]

No, it is a fine analogy. Just because there are worse situations out there and possible, it does not mean that we should not care about the less negative ones.

That is how such things end up becoming "okay".

I don't think you get this whole "analogy" thing.

You use the super-violent, implausible, yet infallible example to try and prove a point when in reality it has little relevance to the actual original point. Because in reality, who's going to argue against getting shot?

Taser: Harmless, temporary incapacitation.
Gunshot: Harmful, permanent damage, potential for death.

Too extreme.

[Timothy]

I don't think you get this whole "analogy" thing.

You use the super-violent, implausible, yet infallible example to try and prove a point when in reality it has little relevance to the actual original point. Because in reality, who's going to argue against getting shot?

Taser: Harmless, temporary incapacitation.
Gunshot: Harmful, permanent damage, potential for death.

Too extreme.

Agreed. You have to keep analogies firmly based in reality. Who the fuck asks
you "where do you want to be shot?"

[esaul17]

I don't think you get this whole "analogy" thing.

You use the super-violent, implausible, yet infallible example to try and prove a point when in reality it has little relevance to the actual original point. Because in reality, who's going to argue against getting shot?

Taser: Harmless, temporary incapacitation.
Gunshot: Harmful, permanent damage, potential for death.

Too extreme.

I think you are missing the point. If a certain augmentative form is plausible, it has to work in all situations. Logic doesn't sometimes work, and sometimes not. Either the form is valid or it isn't. If the form is invalid, while it does not mean your point is wrong, it does mean that that particular argument is not a valid support of it.

An extreme example is meant to make obvious the flaw in the form of your argument. It does this.

You might be right, but at this point all you have to really support your point of view is your opinion, and the opinions of others that think like you.

EDIT: also, I am not saying I proved you wrong, just that you have yet to prove yourself right.

[Gitsnik]

1)I sense some anti-American hostility all throughout this. I'm a Canadian and not shy to criticize some things their country does, but it doesn't prevent me from thinking about this situation objectively.

2)Regardless, do you really think he was expecting an answer from Kerry, or do you think he was just trying to put that subject out there? Objectively, now.

1)Yes I suppose I got a bit too excited about that, sorry.


2)No I suppose not (and if Kerry would have answered the question he probably would have denied it) but that still doesn't explain the tasering.

[Mark]

I think you are missing the point. If a certain augmentative form is plausible, it has to work in all situations. Logic doesn't sometimes work, and sometimes not. Either the form is valid or it isn't. If the form is invalid, while it does not mean your point is wrong, it does mean that that particular argument is not a valid support of it.

An extreme example is meant to make obvious the flaw in the form of your argument. It does this.

How can you refer to an outlying, irregular, implausible situation to try and poke holes in the logic of an everyday occurrence? Again, this is a grasp at straws, and I'm not the only one who's called you out on this.

What exactly is my argument? I believe that's the question you should be asking yourself. You're assuming that I'm saying that if you warn someone before you do something and they don't react, that it's fine to follow through with the action, when in fact it was not what I meant.

Now I've already addressed this, and I don't like to talk in circles. This is a waste of time if you're going to continue to use superlatives to put across a point.


EDIT: also, I am not saying I proved you wrong, just that you have yet to prove yourself right.

There is no right or wrong in this. I think you've got the wrong impression. My opinion is that they took the right corrective action. You think it was excessive. Okay, that's fine. But the way in which you choose to prove your points, by using outlying situations as some sort of basis, is flawed and highly inconclusive. And again, I'm not the only one who has called you on this.

[Timothy]

I think you are missing the point. If a certain augmentative form is plausible, it has to work in all situations. Logic doesn't sometimes work, and sometimes not. Either the form is valid or it isn't. If the form is invalid, while it does not mean your point is wrong, it does mean that that particular argument is not a valid support of it.

An extreme example is meant to make obvious the flaw in the form of your argument. It does this.

You might be right, but at this point all you have to really support your point of view is your opinion, and the opinions of others that think like you.

EDIT: also, I am not saying I proved you wrong, just that you have yet to prove yourself right.

It's kind of hard to say there is a "flaw" in someone's argument, when the situation is so subjective. The truth of the matter is opinions vary on the
subject, which completely overrules the idea of a bullet-proof argument. The
way you use extreme examples to write off this situation does come across
as a desperate act. Anybody can sit here and use some off-the-wall situation to invalidate an argument, but it's completely unjustified and takes a simple
case of "should they or shouldn't they" situation and turns it into some
idealogical battle.

Once again, this situation is completely subjective, and debating over trivial
plausibilities gets us nowhere. No one's right, no one's wrong, it's just an opinion.

[esaul17]

How can you refer to an outlying, irregular, implausible situation to try and poke holes in the logic of an everyday occurrence? Again, this is a grasp at straws, and I'm not the only one who's called you out on this.

What exactly is my argument? I believe that's the question you should be asking yourself. You're assuming that I'm saying that if you warn someone before you do something and they don't react, that it's fine to follow through with the action, when in fact it was not what I meant.

Now I've already addressed this, and I don't like to talk in circles. This is a waste of time if you're going to continue to use superlatives to put across a point.



There is no right or wrong in this. I think you've got the wrong impression. My opinion is that they took the right corrective action. You think it was excessive. Okay, that's fine. But the way in which you choose to prove your points, by using outlying situations as some sort of basis, is flawed and highly inconclusive. And again, I'm not the only one who has called you on this.

It is odd how I outright said I was not trying to prove my points, yet you ignore that and tell me that I didn't actually prove them. Of course it is inconclusive, as I didn't try to conclude anything other than the fact that saying they warned the person made it okay is not a valid justification.

You seemed to say that because he was warned, he deserved what he got. I just said that a warning is not enough to provide justification. I used an example to show this.

This is a subjective manner, yes, but you can still back up your opinion with something other than...more opinion. You seem to be relying on an appeal to popularity (by telling me multiple times how other people agree with you)- something that is a logical fallacy.

If you are now saying that you do not believe the warning is the reason for the justification, than I have no qualms with you. When you originally wrote it, I got the impression that you were using it however. That is why I disagreed. Not to prove that the tasering was wrong (I think it is, but am not trying to prove that here), but to show that the argument (I at least thought) you made was invalid.

I am sorry if this is all the product of me misunderstanding your position.

[Mark]

I am sorry if this is all the product of me misunderstanding your position.

Yep, that's pretty much what it all boils down to. ;)

On a lighter note: http://gocrazydonttazeme.ytmnd.com/ :lol:

[esaul17]

Yep, that's pretty much what it all boils down to. ;)

On a lighter note: http://gocrazydonttazeme.ytmnd.com/ :lol:

Okay. No hurt feelings?

And :lol: to the YTMND