Student Tasered in Front of John Kerry

[srqrebel]

So when Tasers are used to torture us civilians it's OK because the thugs are just doing their jobs; but when the thugs wind up on the receiving end, it is oh-so-unacceptable.

I get it.

I have gone from not paying any attention to supposedly "harmless" Tasers, to recognizing the Taser as a horrendous weapon that is used for brutally torturing unsubmissive "subjects" into submission.  There is absolutely nothing remotely acceptable about police wielding weapons of torture against our fellow citizens.  Anyone who supports their use deserves to experience one of those vile things first hand, like the Hallsville, MO police chief did -- and see if they continue to support the arming of known thugs with these weapons of torture.

Only the most brazen supporters of a police state would want police to be armed with weapons of torture.

I stand with Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" and General John Stark, "Live free or die; death is not the worst of evils". 
Personally, I would much rather be shot dead than forced into submission by brutal torture, whether or not there is any lasting damage -- and I do happen to value my life very much.

[kola]

Ol' Chief Fatass really made his point and proved the safety of the taser. ROFL!

that made my day.

I am now free to go..and enjoy my day.

Kola

[ladyattis]

As for the dangers of tasers: No shit. Electrical discharges that have a significant ampere will kill you; period and end of story. I know some folks in the PDs don't get that, but folks that have either dabbled in electrical stuff or are electrical engineers will tell you the dangers of such devices. Then again, we're talking about government officials, it's not like they're educated in real world issues.

-- Brede

[Braddogg]

Aloha, Fuzz, all that proves is that Kerry knew how to play the situation.  He let the heavies do their job while he got to be the good guy.  Even people who otherwise think he is pretty evil -- raise your taxes, supports the war in Iraq, support socialism -- are on his side.  The dude's a politician, and a pretty good one at times.

[EthanAllen]

There you go again, trying to pass off that he was tasered for being out of order at the microphone, rather than for struggling against police efforts to take him into custody.  If you keep missing the point, how is there going to be any change to the current state of affairs?

You and Braddogg have a point.  He wasn't tasered for being out of order at the microphone.  But, the actions that led to him being tasered were a direct result of him asking a question.  That's it!  If he had not asked a question (exercised his right to freedom of speech), the police wouldn't have decided to forcibly remove him and he would not have been tasered.  I don't understand how you can defend the cops in this instance.  Yes, he was obnoxious and spoke out of turn.  Yes, he resisted being restrained.  Why did they try to restrain him?  Because he asked a question.  Why did he try to resist restraint?  Because he felt his right to freedom of speech was being squashed.  Why is this ok with you? 

The police were probably under direct instructions to physically escort anyone out of the building who had their mic cut-off...that was apparently the signal.

The reason the mic was cut-off is because he was infringing on the individual equal rights of others to ask questions because he had a very long winded preface to the question and he asked three questions in a row (granted the issue - voting irregularities, impeachment/fellatio & skull & bones - were brought up in one book that he cited) and using profanity in an open public forum.

They should have let him stay to see if he was going to continue to ask questions or have Kerry answer or try to shout Kerry down. All they would have had to do is just warn him "you can stay to hear the answer but if you are disruptive in anyway we are going to physically escort you out and if you resist we may have to taser you".

End of story - the police were given the order to physically remove anyone whose mic is cut off - that is why they are standing right there next to it.

Someone had determined what the protocol was for what happens when the mic was cut-off and what the determination is for shutting off the mic.

[EthanAllen]

Why did they try to restrain him?  Because he asked a question.  Why did he try to resist restraint?  Because he felt his right to freedom of speech was being squashed.  Why is this ok with you? 

If he waited his turn (instead of cutting the other people waiting in line) and didn't get a chance to use the mic and ask his question, would his "freedom of speech" have been "squashed" by the end of the Q&A session?

This is similar to a heckler shout down a other questioner or the speaker on a podium. You are denying the rights of those who have a right to speak. In this case by having a long winded preface to the question and asking multiple questions the organizer of the event determined that he was infringing on other individual's equal right (a common right) to freedom of speech.

In that determination it is a rightful use of force to remove that person. I think it was done all wrong and the use of a taser is over the top, but if the order is to physically remove someone then you automatically take the chance of it escalating needlessly.

[EthanAllen]

Who's property? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Florida

Wasn't it also a public forum?  Meaning open to the public. 

This is a good point.  However let me ask you this hypothetical... I have a local rock band and I know that there will be national news crews etc at this even.  Would it be ok via freedom of speech for me and my band to walk in with generators and start playing one of our sets over powering anyone looking to speak with Kerry?  Let's even change the event around slightly to use a less repulsive key speaker... Let's say Ron Paul is speaking at the event and opening the floor to questions.  Again my band walks in with their own equipment and starts jamming away.  Are we free to do so because it's a public forum open to the public?

This is a very odd situation because Univ. of Florida is a collectively owned property (state) where the delegated authority can set the rules of behavior in a public forum yet freedom of speech is an individual common right (equally held by all) and as a natural right, precedes the very existence of governance. As a matter of fact governance as legitimate authority is set-up to protect our natural rights.

[Braddogg]

Well the solution to that conundrum, of course, is to abolish the state.

[EthanAllen]

Well the solution to that conundrum, of course, is to abolish the state.

And in an anarchistic world of all private property, in which I don't own any, where can I go to exercise my common individual right of freedom of speech which I had as a natural right prior to the state and prior to private property?

[Bald Eagle]

In reference to mvpel's "no one should be surprised," OK, but Mike, for the sake of everyone's sanity and nerves, could you make a small future attempt to clarify your stance and tone?

Yes indeed, I don't see any reason for the hands-on treatment to begin with, or why it was resorted to so rapidly especially given Kerry's green-light response, or why it had to be SO over-the-top.  I've seen people escorted out of rooms simply by being lightly shoved or simply herded by the sheer number of people escorting them out.  Then you can close the doors to the forum and further deal with the situation.

I still don't see how this kid's question was an infringement on anyone's "equal right" aside from his alleged shoving to the front of the line.  It's a Q&A session, and I'm sure Kerry's weasle-worded responses would have been far longer than the kid's question.  No one's going to tackle and tase Kerry for running at the mouth.  He's there to answer questions, the audience is there to ASK them. 

In any event, whatever the kid did, it didn't exactly warrant 8 cops dragging him out, throwing him to the ground and tasing him.  It's unnecessary, and unreasonable.  When people have arguments with me on my own property, I make a concerted effort to peacefully have them leave.  I don't decide to pull out a baseball bat, a knife, mace, or a gun within the first two minutes of the confrontation just because they're not complying with my explicit wishes in what I consider a timely manner.  If a (former) guest thinks they are being treated wrongly, I can address their concerns as I simultaneously herd them out of my house.  "OK, fine, let's talk about it outside," usually works.  So does, "If you don't leave, me and the 5 guys behind me will throw you out."  Throwing someone out doesn't necessarily involve beating the hell out of someone, unless they respond with actual violence - not just a little wiggling resistance. 

I don't often hear people talking about citizens who shot out-of-control cops and saying, "well, what did the cop expect?  He was giving an attitude to the citizen, and refused to limit himself to his legally-authorized jurisdiction and just authority.  If he would have just done what he was supposed to, he wouldn't have gotten shot." 

[Braddogg]

I have no interest in discussing Georgism.

[kola]

Ethan,

There was absolutely no valid reason to tase this Andrew kid.

7 fricken cops?

and what if this kid died? HUH?

In a few more years the fuckin sheeple will be saying it is ok to shoot someone.

desensitize the dumbasses and also make them belive all this is for "their safety".

yeah right.

Kola

btw,,I find it ironic to see the Taser company and the gooncops saying the tasers are safe yet we have other gooncops filing lawsuits after they were injured. They must have been on speed or coke huh?

btw the last I read stocks in tasers are dropping as more and more lawsuits are filed. Taser Co also has falsified their safety studies. (hey that is cool, Taser Co has the same benefits as Big Pharma. They get to test and do research on their own product. Real fricken fair.

sorry,,this topic has got be pissed off. I get pissed at what the goons are doing but I get more outraged at the non-thinking stooges that support the inappropraite use of this torture/compliance weapon which BTFW (by the fuckin way) is lethal. And yet the sheeple-stooges say "well the guy was all cranked up on meth and that is why he died from the taser." NO! He died because the taser was the catalyst that KILLED him. He would (most likely) not have died from the meth had he not been tasered! It is like me standing on one leg on the edge of the cliff. Then some stooge pushes me and I fall to my death. Hence, the rest of the stooges say the push didnt kill me and I died because I was already on the edge. Fuckin bullshit! It was the push that killed me. It was the push that was the cause of death. It is the same as a taser killing a meth-head,a crippled person or a person with cardiac disease. The taser was the accelerator, the catalyst, the final nail in the coffin, the deadly shove that pushed these victims over the edge. It is, ladies and gentlemen, plain and simple murder.  

Kola  

[CNHT]

...private property, in which I don't own any...

I find this hard to believe... 

[EthanAllen]

Ethan,

There was absolutely no valid reason to tase this Andrew kid.

I said it was way over the top. They should never have been given the instructions to physically remove anyone who has their mic cut off. Prior to the introduction of Kerry the organizer should have stood up and said what the ground rules were for asking questions (no long prefaces and no multiple questions) or handed out the ground rules upon entrance.

Presumably not having done that (it might be in the student handbook), they should have cut his mic off and then the expectation is that he would stop asking question (at that point he would have to shout). If he continued to ask questions not allowing Kerry to answer then the police have every right to remove him TO PROTECT THE COMMON RIGHTS OF ALL THOSE OTHERS WHO WANTED TO ASK.

If he resists while being asked to leave then they would escalate to physically removing him. If he resists that then they would escalate to arresting him. If he resists arrest what should they do?

[kola]

...private property, in which I don't own any...

I find this hard to believe... 

maybe he is homeless...that would be such a bad thing though as I have pondered over taking that route. It is a real nice way to vanish.  taxes? sorry, I am homeless.

Living on a boat has some advantages too.

Kola