# UCLA Student Tasered by UCLA Police for not showing ID



## Chris (Nov 17, 2006)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3CdNgoC0cE

Use headphones, lots of 'F words, as you can imagine.


----------



## Chris (Nov 17, 2006)

http://www.nbc4.tv/news/10325914/detail.html



> He had been working at a computer in the back of the lab and had failed to produce a student ID during a random check performed by community service officers, the newspaper reported.
> 
> According to a UCLA police sergeant, the student was identified as Mostafa Tabatabainejad of Los Angeles.
> 
> ...


----------



## Drew (Nov 17, 2006)

That's fucked. 

I mean, if they thought he was some random guy off the street and a legitimate threat, and he was acting in a threatening manner, sure, that's one thing. Public safety is a understandable concern for a large university and a taser's a little extreme, but that's a legitimate option. 

But to tase a student in what was very clearly a nonvolent student protest? That's The Man shoving his foot up your ass solely to prove he can. 

What absolute bullshit.


----------



## Chris (Nov 17, 2006)

I've never been tazed, but I'd imagine it's a little hard to stand up afterwards.


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

He may not have needed to be stunned. I haven't watched the vid yet, but why not just show some UCLA ID? If you don't have it on you, say you dont, be escorted out, go get it, come back. Don't 'refuse' to to show it (If he had it on him) and don't refuse to leave. That's just asking for trouble.


----------



## Chris (Nov 17, 2006)

Watch/read. He was leaving.



> He had his backpack on his shoulder and he was walking out when the cops approached him. It was unnecessary."


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

> "Since, after repeated requests, he would neither leave nor show identification, the CSO notified UCPD officers, who responded and asked Tabatabainejad to leave the premises multiple times. He continued to refuse. As the officers attempted to escort him out, he went limp and continued to refuse to cooperate with officers or leave the building.



Even if he was finally on his way out, screaming for them to let go of his arm is a bit excessive.

Im not saying he should have been tazed, but leaving with his mouth shut would have resulted with not being tazed.

Well the UCLA police woman said that he refused to leave, and the student witness said he was cooperating and was on his way out.

Either way, the vid only starts showing him on his way out, yelling at the police to let go of his arm. 

Personally, that leads me to believe the Greenstein woman when she said he wasn't cooperating. But I could be wrong.


----------



## Drew (Nov 17, 2006)

Scott said:


> He may not have needed to be stunned. I haven't watched the vid yet, but why not just show some UCLA ID? If you don't have it on you, say you dont, be escorted out, go get it, come back. Don't 'refuse' to to show it (If he had it on him) and don't refuse to leave. That's just asking for trouble.



He was protesting what he and a number of other students considered an excessively totalitarian rule, near as I can tell. 

(I didn't watch the video either)


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 17, 2006)

I don't care what he did the police had no right to use a tazer. This is excessive force plan and simple. Tazers are awful things anyways. A guy in Toldeo died because of one not too long ago.

*Edit*: I'm with Drew, going limp and refusing to move is a nonviolent protest technique.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Do we really want to live in a country where mother fuckers get randomly stopped/searched and fucking tazed? 

I remember growing when I was a kid hearing fucking the Soviet Union was like this! Insane!


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

I dont disagree with a random check for Student ID. It's quick, and simple for both parties to comply with. Whoever is doing the rounds asks for id, student shows, everyone has a nice night.

In my opinion, both the student, and the officers could have handled that better. I don't want to be the only one here who isn't 100% behind the student, but I still think that the student was asking for SOME sort of action. I wouldn't have tazed him. There was like 2-3 cops initially. There is no reason why they couldn't literally drag him by the shoulders if they had to if he was protesting.

And I need to ask (Which no one can answer really) did the student have ID and refuse to show it, or did he not have it on him, and didn't want to leave in the middle of doing his research or whatever? 
If the latter, I can understand being pissed off after being forced to leave. but it's one of those situations where the student needs to stay calm. I know that all the students were made aware that the ID was needed in the library, and if they forget it and get caught, that sucks, but that's just common sense. You can't prove that you are part of the school, then you have to leave.

Now, if he had the ID on him, and just refused to show it for whatever reason, then he had it coming. Excessive or not.

Like I said, im not condoning the tazing, he didn't need to be tazed, and he should have just been dragged out.


----------



## Buzz762 (Nov 17, 2006)

I think this is just a case of the media looking for another police brutality story. That video doesn't show enough of the situation to actually understand what's happening, and the headlines and description and such influence your interpretation of the sounds you are hearing. The media may have also presented their interpretation of the video in such a way that would make it seem more interesting for ratings purposes.

/on the cops side.


----------



## Leon (Nov 17, 2006)

yeah, i'm with Mr Butterworth 

sure, the police went a little far, but i gather the kid was quite over-dramatic about the situation, and probably made it worse for himself. just show your ID! i think he fails to realize that he lives in a civil country, where there are rules to follow and abide by. if he wants to protest, there are venues for protesting. lying limp on a library floor is hardly the time or place for civil disobedience.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Buzz762 said:


> I think this is just a case of the media looking for another police brutality story. That video doesn't show enough of the situation to actually understand what's happening, and the headlines and description and such influence your interpretation of the sounds you are hearing. The media may have also presented their interpretation of the video in such a way that would make it seem more interesting for ratings purposes.
> .



This is ridiculous. Give us some credit for independent thought. The guy was tasered for essentially NOT SHOWING ID. 

There you go. He didn't show an ID. Those students in the video _certainly_ didn't seem to think the cops were in the right, and they were there. "We want your badge number." So there's something that's shown in the video where you can get a sense of what's happening.

Look, the guy is 1) Iranian (profiling, anyone?) and 2) NOT A CRIMINAL. I can't understand how people can overlook these simple fatcs. We're empowering our police to use violent force against us when we don't even stand in suspicion of a crime? (Since when does not showing an ID and wanting cops to keep their hands of of your person constitue a "crime"?)

Like I said before, this seems not like our beloved America, but like something out of the cold war Eastern Bloc countries. It's deplorable. There is NO justification for use of a taser in that situation. So what if the guy over-reacted? He's just a guy in a library who forgot his ID. They're the police. The onus of proof and restraint is on them, not on average people engaged in non-criminal activity.

When people even tacitly endorse this kind of non-sense, it's just oen more step in the erosion of our freedoms.


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> (Since when does not showing an ID and wanting cops to keep their hands of of your person constitue a "crime"?)



Ever since trespassing was made illegal?

On school property, if you can't prove you're a student, then they have to assume you're not a student, and escort you out.

I dont doubt he was a student. I know he was. But not having an ID on him where it is required, even if the cops believe he was a student, he would have to be seen as a trespasser.

I'm not disagreeing with the rest of your post Wolfy, I just have to point out that he could easily be seen as committing a crime.


----------



## Drew (Nov 17, 2006)

Scott said:


> And I need to ask (Which no one can answer really) did the student have ID and refuse to show it, or did he not have it on him, and didn't want to leave in the middle of doing his research or whatever?





chris's story said:


> "Since, after repeated requests, he would neither leave nor show identification, the CSO notified UCPD officers, who responded and asked Tabatabainejad to leave the premises multiple times. He continued to refuse. As the officers attempted to escort him out, he went limp and continued to refuse to cooperate with officers or leave the building.
> 
> Greenstein said Tabatabainejad encouraged others in the library to join his "resistance." She said a crowd gathered around the officers.



Nonviolent protest, pure and simple. Yeah, he was looking for a reaction, but tazing the guy was WAY out of line.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Scott said:


> Ever since trespassing was made illegal?
> 
> On school property, if you can't prove you're a student, then they have to assume you're not a student, and escort you out.
> 
> ...


Then escort him out, respectfully, like I said. Scott, here in America, we have little thing called "innocent until PROVEN guilty." The burden rests on the police. If they don't want him there, fine, respect his person and escort him out. There's a minimum of violence there. But to grab him and tase him? Fucking ridiculous. Over-reaction to the nth degree.

Besides, like I said previously, he happened to be middle Eastern. There's a whole concern regarding profiling right there. Did they request the ID of every student? And then the issue that now people have to show ID when requested. KGB? When I grew up, such a thing was almost unheard of!

This guy has a mondo lawsuit against UCLA, mark my words. One he will probably win.


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

Drew said:


> Nonviolent protest, pure and simple. Yeah, he was looking for a reaction, but tazing the guy was WAY out of line.





So he was protesting the fact that he didn't want to show his ID? And that he shouldn't have to show it?


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Scott said:


> So he was protesting the fact that he didn't want to show his ID? And that he shouldn't have to show it?



Maybe he was. Maybe he was protesting the fact they were throwing him out, when he was a paying student. Maybe he was protesting the fact that America is becoming a frigging police state.

Regardless, tasing the guy was way out of line. Before those damn things were so prevalent, police had to use their wits and muscle. Now? Fuckit, they just blast a jolt in your ass.

For the upteenth time, I'll relate this little story of taser abuse here in Toledo, like Eric alluded to.

_Jeffrey Turner stood in the street behind the closed Toledo Museum of Art for nearly 40 minutes before a security guard called police.
Almost four hours after the 41-year-old was approached by police on a suspicious-person call Monday night from the museum, he was dead.
City police shocked Turner five times with a Taser - a gun that administers 50,000 volts of electricity to subdue a person - after he refused to identify himself and did not comply with police instructions.
Once at the Lucas County jail, Turner, of 2115 Collingwood Blvd., ate a lunch before he began pounding on his cell in the booking area. Sheriff's personnel tried to restrain him, but he fought them and they shocked him four more times with a different Taser model. 
Minutes later, Turner was unresponsive and taken to St. Vincent Mercy Medical Center, where he died at 9:40 p.m._

The story fails to mention 1) the guy was just standing there. He committed no crime, and no official charges were filed against him, and 2) remember, they tased him a total of 9 times - and the last 4? He was handcuffed, in his cell. 

Oh, but wait. He was disruptive and he had been "tresspassing." I guess it's fine he was tased then.


----------



## Buzz762 (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Then escort him out, respectfully, like I said. Scott, here in America, we have little thing called "innocent until PROVEN guilty." The burden rests on the police. If they don't want him there, fine, respect his person and escort him out. There's a minimum of violence there. But to grab him and tase him? Fucking ridiculous. Over-reaction to the nth degree.



You are making seem as if they walked up grabbed him and immediately stun-drove him unprovoked. 

I also think that very people actually saw what happened until they started yelling because anyone in the library that late probably had some reason to be there (studying) and wouldn't have seen the entire situation either. 

Sure, the police acted a little harshly, but without knowing the entire situation as it happened, I will not jump on this "OMG POLICE BRUTATILITY" bandwagon everyone else is.


----------



## Metal Ken (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Maybe he was. Maybe he was protesting the fact they were throwing him out, when he was a paying student. Maybe he was protesting the fact that America is becoming a frigging police state.



With the increasing ammount of violence and crimes on school campuses, its a fine rule to randomly check ID especially at that time of night. If he was a paying student, he could have simply showed his ID and they wouldn't have needed to escort him out, or taze him.


----------



## Buzz762 (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Regardless, tasing the guy was way out of line. Before those damn things were so prevalent, police had to use their wits and muscle. Now? Fuckit, they just blast a jolt in your ass.



Before the tasers were so prevalent, they would beat the daylights out of people with their nightsticks. The taser is a vast improvement over that.


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Then escort him out, respectfully, like I said. Scott, here in America, we have little thing called "innocent until PROVEN guilty." The burden rests on the police. If they don't want him there, fine, respect his person and escort him out. There's a minimum of violence there. But to grab him and tase him? Fucking ridiculous. Over-reaction to the nth degree.



Innocent until proven guilty eh?Up North we never heard of such a thing. Hmm.. We should adopt that policy here in Canada.  


The Dark Wolf said:


> Besides, like I said previously, he happened to be middle Eastern. There's a whole concern regarding profiling right there. Did they request the ID of every student?



Honestly man, there is always profiling going on when a suspect isn't white, with short hair an a polo shirt on. Whenever something like this comes up, the race card is shown. Maybe racial profiling was going on, but maybe not. Maybe he was just a random student. It doesn't say anywhere that I can see that he was the one and only person ever randomly checked.

And yeah, it's a damn good chance that he was asked because of the way he looks. I got searched at the airport on my way to ontario, and im positive it's because of the way I look and my age. A black woman was checked aswell. You know what I did though? I spread my arms apart, and cooperated. The metal detector went off around my pocket, I pulled out a penny that was in there, and I was on my way.

The point is, to prove them wrong if they single you out for a search, or an ID check, or a traffic stop or whatever. Don't make a fuss about it and protest because you THINK that it all has to do with how you look, or how old you are, or where you're from, or whatever the hell else other people judge others on.

It doesn't say that when he was asked for ID that he was called a racial slur, or anything that would make it seem that he was being singled out because of how he looked. He was probably told something like "Can I see your ID please?" or "May I see some ID?" Or just a flat out "Show me your school ID" They may or may not have been polite about it. Either way, if he had ID he should have just showed it.

Tazzing excessive? Definately. Over-reaction? Absolutely. No question about it. But IMO, the student over reacted aswell if he just assumed that it had to do with profiling. Unless he was flat out, and clearly insulted because of who he is, then he handled it awfully.

Even then, take it up with a superior of the cops or something. Drink it off that night, start fresh in the morning. Petition if you want. Chain yourself to the library in protest. Just get out of the initial situation unharmed, and without pissing anyone off.


----------



## Leon (Nov 17, 2006)

i agree that the tasing was too much, but when he screamed, "here's your patriot act at work!" it seemed weird to me. almost like he had that waiting in his back pocket should anything happen to him.

Bob, care to psychologize?


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 17, 2006)

According to the video here, he was tasered 5 times. So getting zapped with tens of thousands of volts of electricity for not showing an ID is ok. Let alone having it done to you 5 times. This is the kind of shit that makes me sick. Unless he whipped out a knife or something, tasers were way over the line.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Scott said:


> Innocent until proven guilty eh?Up North we never heard of such a thing. Hmm.. We should adopt that policy here in Canada.


Exactly. Canada is fucking great about this sort of thing. That's why I mentioned it, you being the Canadian patriot you are. Remember that.



Scott said:


> It doesn't say that when he was asked for ID that he was called a racial slur, or anything that would make it seem that he was being singled out because of how he looked. He was probably told something like "Can I see your ID please?" or "May I see some ID?" Or just a flat out "Show me your school ID" They may or may not have been polite about it. Either way, if he had ID he should have just showed it.
> 
> Tazzing excessive? Definately. Over-reaction? Absolutely. No question about it. But IMO, the student over reacted aswell if he just assumed that it had to do with profiling. Unless he was flat out, and clearly insulted because of who he is, then he handled it awfully.
> 
> Even then, take it up with a superior of the cops or something. Drink it off that night, start fresh in the morning. Petition if you want. Chain yourself to the library in protest. Just get out of the initial situation unharmed, and without pissing anyone off.



You ever hear of civil disobedience, Scott? With this line of thinking, Rosa Parks should have went to the back of the bus. 



Buzz762 said:


> Before the tasers were so prevalent, they would beat the daylights out of people with their nightsticks. The taser is a vast improvement over that.



1. Back that up with evidence. From what I remember, being 32 and all, before these tasers were so common, the cops would just pick you up and haul your ass out of there. Nightsticks? Please. Those left obvious marks, which means the cops might obviously lose their jobs. But the taser, marketed as a 'less than lethal' alternative, is used FAR more excessively. HERE'S my proof. I back my assertions up. 

Here's an update to the original story. Guess what? He claims profiling. And to top it off, he's a US Citizen, born and bred. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15765622/


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

Multiple tazing was definitely a dumb fucking thing to do. In ANY situation, even where a taze is warranted, I don't think more than one taze should happen, unless they provoke it.

But if you taze someone, and they just sit there on the ground, the cops should assume that they are in shock, or in pain or whatever because of the initial taze, and drag them to the cop car, or wherever. 

It reminds me of that vid of the woman getting pulled over and tazed, and the cop said "We've been tazed before, it's not that bad" They should never (IMO) assume that it "isn't that bad" for each individual, and taze them multiple times.


----------



## Chris (Nov 17, 2006)

If the guy's name was "Mike Jones" instead of Tabatabainejad, do you think they'd have tazed him?


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Exactly. Canada is fucking great about this sort of thing. That's why I mentioned it, you being the Canadian patriot you are. Remember that.



Alright, I thought you were taking a shot at me or something. Apologies.



The Dark Wolf said:


> You ever hear of civil disobedience, Scott? With this line of thinking, Rosa Parks should have went to the back of the bus.



That's a bit different in my opinion. Rosa parks was told "You're black, thus you have to sit at the back of the bus" The cop in this situation didn't say "You're middle eastern, you have to show me some ID"


----------



## Leon (Nov 17, 2006)

Chris said:


> If the guy's name was "Mike Jones" instead of Tabatabainejad, do you think they'd have tazed him?



it's sucks, because what you're aiming at is correct. it was a man of Middle Eastern descent that was tased, and not anyone from any other ethnic heritage. however, what also sucks but is true, is that this student should have known that he'd be a target. he should have had his ID ready. does that sound unAmerican? of course it does. i'm not arguing that. i'm just saying that it's the current reality.


----------



## JJ Rodriguez (Nov 17, 2006)

If he was yelling at the cops to get their hands off of them, maybe he was getting worked up and possibly violent (I havn't watched the video either). If someone is worked up and possibly a threat, I totally agree with tasing. However, if he did just drop to the ground, then the cops could have drug him out. There seems to be 2 stories, him shouting at the cops telling them to get their hands off, and the "passive resistance" story. It all hinges on his reaction. If he's yelling and getting angry, then that to me would seem threatening.


----------



## Chris (Nov 17, 2006)

Leon said:


> i agree that the tasing was too much, but when he screamed, "here's your patriot act at work!" it seemed weird to me. almost like he had that waiting in his back pocket should anything happen to him.
> 
> Bob, care to psychologize?



Well, he's a college student, and a UCLA student. UCLA has always been a politically-minded school, and students nowadays are a lot more involved with current events than say, ten years ago.


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

Chris said:


> If the guy's name was "Mike Jones" instead of Tabatabainejad, do you think they'd have tazed him?



Don't know. Neither do you, and neither does the victim in this case. If I was the cop, maybe I wouldn't have tazed this subject, but would have tazed a white guy, or a black guy, or a chick or whatever. Maybe I wouldn't have tazed any of them, or maybe I would have tazed them all.

It's all assumptions. In cases like this, it is assumed that it was a racial thing, because that kind of thing does happen alot, and that's a horrible thing.

But why can't it be assumed that the cop just over reacted and made a bad decision in a stressful situation, instead of using excessive force BECAUSE of the colour of his skin?


----------



## Leon (Nov 17, 2006)

Chris said:


> Well, he's a college student, and a UCLA student. UCLA has always been a politically-minded school, and students nowadays are a lot more involved with current events than say, ten years ago.



yeah, i'm kinda thinking the same thing. only, i'm proposing that, rather than being ready with his ID, he was ready to be a poster child / matyr / etc.

in essence, i don't think he was without fault.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Scott said:


> Alright, I thought you were taking a shot at me or something. Apologies.
> 
> That's a bit different in my opinion. Rosa parks was told "You're black, thus you have to sit at the back of the bus" The cop in this situation didn't say "You're middle eastern, you have to show me some ID"


#1. You don't need to apologise to me ever, bro.  Fuck that. Cuss me out and argue. I like that shit. I'm Irish. (I almost never take shots at people, either. I'm just a contentious prick who liks to argue. Oh, and I fucking love Canada. Hence, the comment.)

#2. They didn't SAY it. But their actions seem to maybe indicate it regardless. It's tough to prove, but there's enough there that they're filing suit for FEDERAL civil rights violations. In my personal opinion,. I think they got a monster whopper of a case.

Leon - if you make a political, non-violent statement, how the hell are you "at fault"? Gandhi 101, bro. Fault indicates he was wrong. Legally speaking, to borrow my earlier example, Rosa Parks was "at fault." But c'mon.

And everyone, please realize, the students who are there, on the video, seem greatly upset by the POLICE'S actions, not the student's. The police.


----------



## Drache713 (Nov 17, 2006)

Here's my personal take on it...

Yes, kid should have had his ID. Yes, said kid probably overreacted. But if he was just passively and nonviolently protesting by refusing to move, that does NOT warrant tazer use, in almost any situation. Even if he was violently resisting or protesting, shouldn't the police try every means of stopping him BEFORE resorting to tazers?

For me, racial profiling isn't the main thing here. I'm sure it factors in, but I don't see it as the main issue.

Also, it would have been one thing if the guy was tazed just once. But he was tazed, what, 5 times? That's straight into fucking excess.

Yeah, kid shoulda had his ID. I'm sure at a school as big as UCLA though that the chances of a student forgetting their ID is much higher, so it is probably somewhat of a common incident.

My main points are that yes, the guy shoulda had his ID. But the cops had NO fucking right to take it as far as they did. One of the cops even threatened to taze another student for protesting their actions and demanding his badge number. Since when did we resort to the last alternative first before trying all other possible solutions?


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

^ My point exactly whenever I hear of this kind of BS.


----------



## Dive-Baum (Nov 17, 2006)

Listen, from what I read, the random ID checks are standard occurances. He was asked to produce it and did not comply. He was asked to leave and would not do so. The cops showed up and the guy was still acting indignant, they got him out of there. They should not have tazed him repetedly like that but maybe next time the guy will listen. Being in the computer lab, let alone a University is not a right, it is a privelidge.You have to play by the rules. Public safety must be a primary concern here. That's the world we live in now.


----------



## Chris (Nov 17, 2006)

Leon said:


> yeah, i'm kinda thinking the same thing. only, i'm proposing that, rather than being ready with his ID, he was ready to be a poster child / matyr / etc.
> 
> in essence, i don't think he was without fault.



Agree. 

I think 3/4 of the time I spent in the library when I was in college I didn't have my ID on me either.


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> #1. You don't need to apologise to me ever, bro.  Fuck that. Cuss me out and argue. I like that shit. I'm Irish. (I almost never take shots at people, either. I'm just a contentious prick who liks to argue. Oh, and I fucking love Canada. Hence, the comment.)





The Dark Wolf said:


> #2. They didn't SAY it. But their actions *seem* to *maybe* indicate it regardless. It's tough to prove, but there's enough there that their filing suit for FEDERAL civil rights violations. In my personal opinion,. I think they got a monster whopper of a case.


That's the thing though. I agree, that it's enough to make a case of it. But like you said. Innocent until proven guilty. 


Edit: God damnit I take too long to post a reply.


----------



## Chris (Nov 17, 2006)

Dive-Baum said:


> Being in the computer lab, let alone a University is not a right, it is a privelidge.You have to play by the rules. Public safety must be a primary concern here. That's the world we live in now.



I agree to a point. There are certainly means that they should have taken to determine if he was a student or not that. Keep in mind he's paying a goodly amount of money to attend UCLA, and I think that buys him a little bit of courtesy. Something like:

"Do you have your ID?"
"No"
"Are you a student here?"
"Yes"
"Hang on while we look you up in the system."

It's UCLA, not some down and out community college. I went to a state school for my BS and even there I could look myself up on the internal website, and this was in 1995.

Yeah, the whole thing could have been handled better, but if I'm a student at a 25k a year school, I'd expect a little leniency for something that trivial.


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 17, 2006)

Dive-Baum said:


> Listen, from what I read, the random ID checks are standard occurances. He was asked to produce it and did not comply. He was asked to leave and would not do so. The cops showed up and the guy was still acting indignant, they got him out of there. They should not have tazed him repetedly like that but maybe next time the guy will listen. Being in the computer lab, let alone a University is not a right, it is a privelidge.You have to play by the rules. Public safety must be a primary concern here. That's the world we live in now.



Maybe next time the guy will listen? Maybe next time it will be at a school that doesn't have thugs for cops. Maybe next time the university will have a better policy on use of tasers.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Dive-Baum said:


> safety must be a primary concern here. That's the world we live in now.



I disagree with that line of thinking in the strongest posssible terms.

We surrender all our rights because our government fell asleep and some nutjobs crashed planes into buildings? More people die each week from smoking, driving, drinking, fast food, whatever, than did on 9/11, and we still give people the freedom to do so.

That rationale is 1984 in a nutshell. The world isn't so drastically different. It's safer! And not because of Gestapo police actions. But because of the advance of technology, knowledge, and _respect for human rights_. There was a study released recently that showed the odds of getting killed by a meteor were greater than being killed by a terrorist. Do we make anti-meteor bunkers mandatory now?

Read it. It's very telling. (Again, I'm backing up my assertions.)


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> I disagree with that line of thinking in the strongest posssible terms.
> 
> We surrender all our rights because our government fell asleep and some nutjobs crashed planes into buildings? More people die each week from smoking, driving, drinking, fast food, whatever, than did on 9/11, and we still give people the freedom to do so.
> 
> ...



IMO, you're over thinking this situation. It has nothing to do with terrorism, or safety (Well maybe safety) 
The way I see the whole ID thing, is that you pay to go to the school.

You give them money, they give you access to their facilities (Library)

To prove that you paid the money, they give you a ID badge and number.

ID is basically a permission slip to use the facilities on the privately owned campus. This isn't a local library or anything.

In this case, the student couldn't/wouldn't prove that he had permission to use the facilities. Thus, he had to leave.

I don't see why the likelihood of getting killed by a terrorist has to factor in. Even though I know you were only responding to the safety comment.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Scott said:


> IMO, you're over thinking this situation. It has nothing to do with terrorism, or safety (Well maybe safety)
> The way I see the whole ID thing, is that you pay to go to the school.
> 
> You give them money, they give you access to their facilities (Library)
> ...


I _was_ responding to the safety issue. If it's going to be brought up, it needs addressed.

But this whole argument of _yours_ goes right back to the fact of the poor shmuck gatting tased 5 times for what is essentially a nonsense infraction, and how ridiculous that is.


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

Yeah. Like I've said many times, tase=nono.
However, some sort of response was called for. Just not tasing.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Scott said:


> Yeah. Like I've said many times, tase=nono.
> However, some sort of response was called for. Just not tasing.



 Police go through extensive training, at 1. mucho time investment, and 2. a hefty cost.

Since they deal with peoples' issues on a daily basis, you'd think _somewhere_ in that training they'd be better equipped for conflict resolution than to fucking go Spark-O-Matic on people's ass at the drop of a hat.


----------



## Cancer (Nov 17, 2006)

ohio_eric said:


> Unless he whipped out a knife or something, tasers were way over the line.




No, shooting you in the skull with a pistol is way over the line, the chance of survivability after being tased is much higher I would imagine. 

I understand the concept of civil disobedience, but IMO this was a silly childish exercise of it. Why not save your energy for something important, like feeding the homeless at a shelter, or involving yourself in an "organized" protest. Refusing to show ID, in a place where the rules are clearly stated, is akin to saying no to your parents when they ask you to cut the grass, only now instead of not getting your allowance, your get asked to leave, don't leave you get tased.

Personally, I would have staged a protest to not use the library until the rule was changed, if it bothered him so much. As it is right now, the library will probably change it entry rules so that you can only enter the building with ID, making what was a public resource private, which only benefit those with the resources (re:money) to use it.

This guy IMO, was a spoiled brat with the chip on his shoulder, trying to stir the pot by using a "Jackass"-level style stunt.

Fucking asshole, I'm glad they tased him.


----------



## Scott (Nov 17, 2006)

psyphre said:


> This guy IMO, was a spoiled brat with the chip on his shoulder, trying to stir the pot by using a "Jackass"-level style stunt.
> 
> Fucking asshole, I'm glad they tased him.








Yeah...you're in for it.
[action=Scott]steps aside.[/action]

I'm grabbing a coffee


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

psyphre said:


> Fucking asshole, I'm glad they tased him.



You're GLAD they tased him? Fucking GLAD?

Let me direct you to some important reads.

HERE

HERE

Scott...  What can I say?


----------



## Cancer (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Leon - if you make a political, non-violent statement, how the hell are you "at fault"? Gandhi 101, bro. Fault indicates he was wrong. Legally speaking, to borrow my earlier example, Rosa Parks was "at fault." But c'mon.



Perhaps I need to read your earlier quote but, to me , these two cannot be compared. Rosa was required to sit in the back of the bus because she was black, but everybody at the UCLA library needed id to be there. The first rule targets blacks, the second targets everyone.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

psyphre said:


> Perhaps I need to read your earlier quote but, to me , these two cannot be compared. Rosa was required to sit in the back of the bus because she was black, but everybody at the UCLA library needed id to be there. The first rule targets blacks, the second targets everyone.



But the _enforcement_ of the issue targeted him.

For me, the issue ain't even about the guy. Fuck the guy. The issue is about #1. the fact dude is in no way, shape, or form, a criminal. Or even a suspected criminal. And #2 the police use of violent force in such a situation. An ancillary issue is the need for IDs everywhere one goes anymore, and the potential fact that he may have been targeted SOLEY based on his ethnicity.

Bullshit all around, and there ain't no fucking way in Hell I'm personally "glad" about it.

Saddest thing of all for me is I just knew there'd be people who came out in defense of it. Seems like no matter what cops do, someone will defend their crooked actions. Fuck, anyone remember Amadou Diallo?


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 17, 2006)

psyphre said:


> No, shooting you in the skull with a pistol is way over the line, the chance of survivability after being tased is much higher I would imagine.
> 
> I understand the concept of civil disobedience, but IMO this was a silly childish exercise of it. Why not save your energy for something important, like feeding the homeless at a shelter, or involving yourself in an "organized" protest. Refusing to show ID, in a place where the rules are clearly stated, is akin to saying no to your parents when they ask you to cut the grass, only now instead of not getting your allowance, your get asked to leave, don't leave you get tased.
> 
> ...



First off tasers have killed and done some pretty some serious damage. So they are best left for serious incidents not kids refusing to produce ID. There were several other options available to the police and they still used the taser 5 times. 

Second I am never happy to watch the police use escessive force. It violates people's civil rights and makes us all less safe because when we allow excessive force our rights get a beating as well. Always remember the quote, "Violence is the diplomacy of the incompotent."

The bottom line is this, the police overreacted. I don't know and don't care why he refused to produce ID. The police did not need to use a taser on him. It was awful and inexcusable.


----------



## Chris (Nov 17, 2006)

ohio_eric said:


> The bottom line is this, the police overreacted. I don't know and don't care why he refused to produce ID. The police did not need to use a taser on him. It was awful and inexcusable.


----------



## Cancer (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> For me, the issue ain't even about the guy. Fuck the guy. The issue is about #1. the fact dude is in no way, shape, or form, a criminal. Or even a suspected criminal. And #2 the police use of violent force in such a situation. An ancillay issue is the need for IDs everywhere one goes anymore, and the potential fact that he may have been targeted SOLEY based on his ethnicity.
> 
> Bullshit all around, and there ain't no fucking way in Hell I'm personally "glad" about it.
> 
> ...



...Because he didn't have ID. If he had ID, and was reaching them to show them when this happened, then I could see "abuse of power", or "use of violent force". Maybe the guy had a point to make, my point is, he made it poorly.


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 17, 2006)

How should he have made his point then? Assuming he was trying to make one.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Maybe he did. I wouldn't do the same thing in his shoes.

But like Eric said, so what? He wasn't a criminal, he wasn't a threat. What, was he gonna brain the cops with his napsack? 

Being glad he got assaulted, hell, being glad we live in a time and place when police would even _consider_ doing such a thing, well... a big  for me.


----------



## Leon (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Saddest thing of all for me is I just knew there'd be people who came out in defense of it. Seems like no matter what cops do, someone will defend their crooked actions. Fuck, anyone remember Amadou Diallo?



i remember this like it was yesterday:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_Cincinnati_Riots

in this case, the kid ran from the cops. shooting him was 100% the wrong thing to do. but you can't tell me that the kid, in his act of running away, wasn't at some fault. not fault enough to cost him his life, but, you know what i mean! 

you can even give it a crooked-cop spin, too. the kid's running away gave the cop perfect excuse to shoot him down. personally, i can't stand spin. i'm a scientist, i want facts!


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Yeah, but Leon, since the police wield the right to employ state-sanctioned violence, the burden of sensibility and restraint _has_ to fall on them. Individuals in these situations, well, we empower the police to _protect and serve_ the individual. They shoudl rightfully get the benefit of the doubt in these situations, even if they are wrong.

Look, I see it this way. If they can do it to anyone, well, what's to stop them from doing it to me? What if I'm at a protest or something... hell, something Bush did, there ya go. Some Bush policy. And I'm oops, in a non-designated protest area, or some other Orwellian nonsense. I should be tased, shot? People wiould surely hop on the net and say "Fuck him! I'm glad they shot him. He shouldn't have been in a non-designated area, the dumb ass."

Where does it stop?


----------



## Cancer (Nov 17, 2006)

ohio_eric said:


> How should he have made his point then? Assuming he was trying to make one.



I can't speak for him, but if *I* (assuming the issue was the use of id's to use the library) cared about the student body use of the library I would have started a petition to change the library policies, escalating to addressing the board of trustees about policy and offering them reasons as to why it should be changed. If that didn't work I would have organized a boycott of the library....


..and this didn't work I would have flown a small plane into it....  i'm kidding.



On a personal, more realistic level, if it bothered me that much, I would have used a different library, but thats just me.


----------



## Metal Ken (Nov 17, 2006)

psyphre said:


> I can't speak for him, but if *I* (assuming the issue was the use of id's to use the library) cared about the student body use of the library I would have started a petition to change the library policies, escalating to addressing the board of trustees about policy and offering them reasons as to why it should be changed. If that didn't work I would have organized a boycott of the library....
> 
> 
> ..and this didn't work I would have flown a small plane into it....  i'm kidding.
> ...



Exactly. He should have just popped out his ID and we wouldn't be discussing any of this.


----------



## Cancer (Nov 17, 2006)

Chris said:


> If the guy's name was "Mike Jones" instead of Tabatabainejad, do you think they'd have tazed him?



Hard to say, since he has no ID and they may not have known his name.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Metal Ken said:


> Exactly. He should have just popped out his ID and we wouldn't be discussing any of this.



But that's not the issue. Maybe he should (but then again, maybe he shouldn't. College campuses have been hotbeds of dissent for years and years.) That's debateable.

What isn't is the police responce. Hey Ken... how about Kent State?



psyphre said:


> Hard to say, since he has no ID and they may not have known his name.



That's a blatant distortion of Chris' post. He was speaking about the guy's ethnicity and you know that.


----------



## Kevan (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Where does it stop?


 It stops when people obey the laws.

The rules clearly state, "To use the facilities you must show your student ID to a CSO when asked."
If you do not show your ID, you will be asked to leave. If you do not leave, you will be forcibly removed.
This is called TRESPASSING. It is illegal, even in the Republic of California. If you trespass, you are BREAKING THE LAW.
When you break the law, you go to jail.

Everything after that is ex post facto.

You'd think college kids would be smarter.

Was the tasing excessive? Debatable.
Since the little girl...oops...boy screamed "DON'T FUCKING TOUCH ME!" as they were trying to do their JOB, what other options do the police have? They have to maintain security at the campus and this person was hindering them from performing that duty (no matter what his motives were). 
Bad news, my man: In order to be forcibly removed, as your non-verbal actions have indicated you would prefer, we're gonna have to touch you. Here...I'll use some Purel first...

Personally, I would have grabbed a big ol' laundry bag, slid it under his ass and zipped him up in it, hauled him to the edge of the campus property, set him down and unzipped it.

"Not touching you! Not touching you!"...now go get your fucking ID.


----------



## Leon (Nov 17, 2006)

if you're in an area where it is posted, or at least, well known to be a non-designated area of peaceful congregation, then sure, move your ass or someone will ask you to move your ass . if you're shot, that's outright excessive, sure . if you got tased... well, i'd guess that not many cops know about the full extent of taser injuries, and assume it's not going to irrepairably damage the victim's body. instead of calling them corrupt or trigger happy, perhaps we should call them dumb and ignorant 

i agree about the responsibilities of the police force. there are indeed times when the cops should be brought down (in the case of Cincinnati police officer Steven Roach) due to repeated behavoirs, abuse of authority, etc. but, you're attributing the actions of many other officers to this one case, before much is known (i assume the story is very recent).


as far as needing a college ID to get into a college facility... i pay my tuition, out of my wallet via some beefy loans. i'll be damned if someone NOT paying tuition is going to hog a computer that i'm paying for . i'd actually like to have a more rigorous approach to the labs and such on my campus (BGSU) and at UC. card swipe readers! green light, you can enter. red light, go find another lab


----------



## Cancer (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> But that's not the issue. Maybe he should (but then again, maybe he shouldn't. College campuses have been hotbeds of dissent for years and years.) That's debateable.
> 
> What isn't is the police responce. Hey Ken... how about Kent State?
> 
> ...



One could argue that Kent State is the REASON why tasers are used, as opposed to allowing cops (who tend to do security at public universities ..at least the ones in Baltimore) carry the standard sidearms.

As for the "blatant distortion", of course it is. But isn't it just as bad to assume that an iranian man couldn't be named "Mike Jones"?


----------



## Metal Ken (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> But that's not the issue. Maybe he should (but then again, maybe he shouldn't. College campuses have been hotbeds of dissent for years and years.) That's debateable.
> 
> What isn't is the police responce. Hey Ken... how about Kent State?



I fail to see how Kent State is even relevant. And i agree that the response is excessive. Taze him once and throw his ass outside. 

And for Student ID situations, i agree with Leon. When i was at the college i was at before, i just left my ID in my wallet. And thats what i plan to do at UF. Hell, at FSU, the ID card can be linked to a bank account and used as a ATM card as well as ID card so you only need one card. (even the soda machines there take the ID cards for payment). So there's really no reason not to be carrying one.


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 17, 2006)

Actually Kent State was NOT the police. It was the National Guard. It was at the height of the Vietnam protest era and the Guard was called in to keep control of theprotestors . The National Guard was edgy after just broken up a nasty strike, something set someone off and 4 people were killed.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Kevan said:


> It stops when people obey the laws.


And when said laws target you because of your ethnicity? Newsflash... Rosa Parks was "breaking the law."



Kevan said:


> Since the little girl...oops...boy screamed "DON'T FUCKING TOUCH ME!"


 Yeah, insulting the guy is a great way to further the debate, dude. Literally add insult to injury. I bet the UCLA police force is hiring. 



Kevan said:


> Personally, I would have grabbed a big ol' laundry bag, slid it under his ass and zipped him up in it, hauled him to the edge of the campus property, set him down and unzipped it.


And that's a _way_ more fucking logical response, instead of tring to trun a guy into Thomas Edison's Test Toy. I agree with this.



Metal Ken said:


> I fail to see how Kent State is even relevant. And i agree that the response is excessive. Taze him once and throw his ass outside.


It's relevant because it's another clear example of abuse of power. You think we'd have learned.

Eric, I know it was the National Guard. But they were acting in a police capacity.


----------



## Metal Ken (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> And when said laws target you because of your ethnicity? Newsflash... Rosa Parks was "breaking the law.



An unjust law. there's nothing unjust about cracking down on unsanctioned use of the library.


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 17, 2006)

My Hero The Dark Wolf said:


> Eric, I know it was the National Guard. But theyr were acting in a police capacity



I know was just making sure the facts were straight. I'm a stickler like that.


----------



## Metal Ken (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> It's relevant because it's another clear example of abuse of power. You think we'd have learned.



Its a completely different situation. Its like comparing apples and oranges.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Metal Ken said:


> An unjust law. there's nothing unjust about cracking down on unsanctioned use of the library.


Hello. WHen they target you because of your ethnic background?

Look, maybe they did, maybe they did. We'll know in a few weeks if the federal judge throws the case out. Mu guess? Uh uh. It's gonna go all the way.

If that's the case, than the execution (like I alread said) of the law is unjust.


----------



## Metal Ken (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Hello. WHen they target you because of your ethnic background?
> 
> Look, maybe they did, maybe they did. We'll know in a few weeks if the federal judge throws the case out. Mu guess? Uh uh. It's gonna go all the way.
> 
> If that's the case, than the execution (like I alread said) of the law is unjust.



How is there proof that he was targeted because of that? he says he was, they say he wasn't. it isn't clear.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Metal Ken said:


> Its a completely different situation. Its like comparing apples and oranges.



Nonsense. In both examples, we have the police (or acting police) completely over-reacting to a situation. The police have a mandate to ensure public order. Protesters, whatever their stripe, can disrupt that. But using the appropriate force to the situation is crucial to them fulfilling that duty in a proper manner.

Besides, apples and oranges are far mroe similar than apples and a fucking taser, to borrow your simile. They're both fruit. This is police abuse. Either case. Unless you're saying you support what the police did?



Metal Ken said:


> How is there proof that he was targeted because of that? he says he was, they say he wasn't. it isn't clear.



Dude, he's filing suit in Federal Court for civil rights violations! Right there! At this point, it's his to prove, and that's why I said we have to wait and see. But if the judge doesn't throw it out, guess what? That means it is entirely possible he WAS targeted for his ethnicity.

What proof is there they WEREN'T? And how does that invalidate the premise that the police response was way overboard? Maybe even illegal.


----------



## Leon (Nov 17, 2006)

i guess i tend to give cops the benefit of the doubt, which there is plenty of in this case. innocent until proven guilty goes both ways.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Leon said:


> i guess i tend to give cops the benefit of the doubt, which there is plenty of in this case. innocent until proven guilty goes both ways



Fine. I agree.

But that doesn't validate their tasing the guy 5 times! At the end of the day, that's the real issue.


----------



## Metal Ken (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> Nonsense. In both examples, we have the police (or acting police) completely over-reacting to a situation. The police have a mandate to ensure public order. Protesters, whatever their stripe, can disrupt that. But using the appropriate force to the situation is crucial to them fulfilling that duty in a proper manner.
> 
> Besides, apples and oranges are far mroe similar than apples and a fucking taser, to borrow your simile. They're both fruit. This is police abuse. Eitehr czse. Unless you're saying you support what the police did?



Man, you're typing's shot. Pounded down a few today?  

What I'm getting at is one's a riot situation and one is a single person. lethal force was involved in one and not the other.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Metal Ken said:


> Man, you're typing's shot. Pounded down a few today?
> 
> What I'm getting at is one's a riot situation and one is a single person. lethal force was involved in one and not the other.



But *both* are examples of excessive force.

BTW, my typing always sucks. I'm fast, but sloppy. I typically edit afterwords (habit). Since you're posting so fast, you're seeing the wizard behind the curtain, as it were.


----------



## Leon (Nov 17, 2006)

consider another example: if a few long haired Irishmen all-of-a-sudden went berserk in downtown Toledo, enough to instill fear into the people, would you not expect some extra looks? any intelligent man with any sense would know the situation, would know that other people may not have the same broad view of the world as him, and would carry his ID to avoid any incident that would impede his success as a student (or, as a long haired Irishman ).

we can run circles around the ethnic issue all day, but i think it comes down to the fact that we're dealing with the salt of the earth. you know, morons .




entry into the police force doesn't require knowledge of a second language, other cultures, quantum physics, etc. they looked twice, asked for an ID, and were met with resistance.

sure the ends do not justify the means, but we're not talking about sending guys to concentration camps, a la those of Japanese heritage during WWII.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

I never said we were.

But we're back at the crux of the issue. It doesn't make it right, and guy may certainly have a case. For me personally, I am very uncomfortable with the police responding in such a way. In fact, I find it very upsetting.

Like I said, the guy? Not the real issue. Fine, everyone has their opinion on him and his actions.

My concern is the POLICE. Call me the fucking ss.org ombudsman. The watchdog. But I get real nervous when I hear of official responses to dubious situations to be so extreme. I've listed tons of examples throughout my posts in this thread.


----------



## Leon (Nov 17, 2006)

skepticism rules 

but, i still think it's kind of a silly law to have exercised civil disobedience over. add to it that we don't see video of the kid either being A) over dramatic and getting on his soap box, or B) simply failing to have his ID on him, i can't form much of an opinion, other than it was a difficult situation handled badly by both parties.


----------



## The Dark Wolf (Nov 17, 2006)

Leon, you are a shining beacon of rationality, Sir.


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 17, 2006)

OK here's a few updates. I saw this on Countdown tonight.

The student who was tasred has claimed, through his attorney, the following. 

He didn't present his ID because he felt singled out because of his ethnicity.

He went limp when the cops grabbed in an attemp to prevent violence. 

He screamed and carried on as he did when the cops started in to draw attention in an attempt to lessen the oppurtunity for the cops to damage.


----------



## Kevan (Nov 17, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> And when said laws target you because of your ethnicity? Newsflash... Rosa Parks was "breaking the law."


You can stop playing the ethnicity card. The simple fact remains: No ID; no library. Simple.
In relation to Rosa Parks:
That was on a PUBLIC bus (more than 40 years ago, and the laws have since been changed). The taser incident happened at a PRIVATE university.



The Dark Wolf said:


> Yeah, insulting the guy is a great way to further the debate, dude. Literally add insult to injury. I bet the UCLA police force is hiring.


Take the humor. Please. My gift to you. It's a fucked situation that could have been handled better- by BOTH sides.

And, you DO NOT want me as a cop. I don't profile; I'd bust EVERYONE for even the slightest infraction. No turn signal? Lose your license for a year. There'd be a fuckin' paper shortage due to all the citations I wrote. 
I don't give a fuck if you're black, white, yellow, pink, blue...doesn't matter to me. Commit the crime; do the time (or pay the fine). I'd make the LAPD look like complete slackers. Trust me- you don't want me as a cop.




The Dark Wolf said:


> And that's a _way_ more fucking logical response, instead of tring to trun a guy into Thomas Edison's Test Toy. I agree with this.


I also think that envoking or staging a non-violent protest at 11:30PM on a Tuesday night is....well...not really good timing.


----------



## Cancer (Nov 18, 2006)

The Dark Wolf said:


> I never said we were.
> 
> But we're back at the crux of the issue. It doesn't make it right, and guy may certainly have a case. For me personally, I am very uncomfortable with the police responding in such a way. In fact, I find it very upsetting.
> 
> ...



I'm curious. Given what happened, in your opinion, how should the police have handled it, and lets start from the point where the guy obviously did not have ID, and obviously wasn't leaving.


----------



## Scott (Nov 18, 2006)

150lb man vs. 3 (?) guards.

Physically removing him wouldn't be that hard IMO.


----------



## Mastodon (Nov 18, 2006)

Scott said:


> 150lb man vs. 3 (?) guards.
> 
> Physically removing him wouldn't be that hard IMO.



Uhh...not if he was kicking and flailing around. In which case, he would have had to have been disabled (tazed) to remove him.

This guy should have just shown his ID. There was no good reason not to.


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 18, 2006)

He wasn't kicking and flailing. He went limp. Carrying him out would have been easy.


----------



## Scott (Nov 18, 2006)

^Exactly. Even if he was flailing around, 3 guards could still remove him without tasing him.

But yeah, I agree with the fact that he should have showed ID. Refusing to do so because he _felt_ singled out is just as dumb as the guards tasing him.


----------



## Kevan (Nov 18, 2006)

ohio_eric said:


> He wasn't kicking and flailing. He went limp. Carrying him out would have been easy.


Yeah, but he was screaming like he had 3rd degree sunburn whenever the cops touched him.

I still like the duffel bag method.


----------



## ohio_eric (Nov 18, 2006)

Wasn't the screaming from the fact the cops were using a taser? I've never been tasered but I'm reasonably sure they hurt.


----------



## Kevan (Nov 18, 2006)

Roll back further in the video....pre-taser. Listen for the "GET YOUR FUCKING HANDS OFF ME!!!'" that the guy says a bunch of times while the cops were attempting to escort him out for not playing by the rules.

If I was the escorting officer, I would have charged him with disturbing the peace and loitering as well. I mean....11:30PM....Tues. night...in a fuckin' library? Come on. Protest elsewhere. Others are trying to get an education.

I told you guys I'd make a terrible cop.


----------

