Student Tasered at campus forum for John Kerry
- Thread starter JoePolitix
- Start date
If this sort of incident happened in a country not known to apparently be a democracy, american politicians would be banging on about lack of free speech and police brutality and so on.
What this incident highlights is that just about every accusation this country throws out towards other countries it is guilty of itself. If nations could be hypocritical, the US would win the golden gong for hypocrisy. It is a deeply violent nation with very violent coppers.
The man was simply speaking out democratically and airing his ideas and opinions and asking questions of his democractically installed politicians.
But in fact what we saw is that democracy and free speech is a complete sham in the US, and we also see yet another in a massively long line of examples of state violence.
What this incident highlights is that just about every accusation this country throws out towards other countries it is guilty of itself. If nations could be hypocritical, the US would win the golden gong for hypocrisy. It is a deeply violent nation with very violent coppers.
The man was simply speaking out democratically and airing his ideas and opinions and asking questions of his democractically installed politicians.
But in fact what we saw is that democracy and free speech is a complete sham in the US, and we also see yet another in a massively long line of examples of state violence.
Here is a take on the incident not so far covered by posters on this thread. I personally think this is the context in which americans ought to be discussing this incident.
"It is an iconic turning point and it will be remembered as the moment at which America either fought back or yielded. This violence against a student is different from violence against protesters in the anti-war movement of 30 years ago because of the power the president has now to imprison innocent U.S. citizens for months in isolation."
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/19/3949/
"It is an iconic turning point and it will be remembered as the moment at which America either fought back or yielded. This violence against a student is different from violence against protesters in the anti-war movement of 30 years ago because of the power the president has now to imprison innocent U.S. citizens for months in isolation."
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/19/3949/
Please do not misrepresent my views. That is not my thinking.8ball said:
Here again we have a clip where the taser is used to subdue a semi-detained, but still struggling suspect. Where there is a lawful reason to use force (and in this clip I have doubts about the original arrest) I can see an argument that the use of a taser may be less harmful / a lesser use of force than a physical fight to, for instance, get handcuffs on.
People seem to have a bit of a hysterical approach to the word "Taser", just like they do to "CS". At the end of the day it's just another weapon which can be used to properly assist in the proper use of force. What needs to be looked at is (a) the original use of (any) force and whether that is lawful and then (b) the options available and whether the use of the Taser is a reasonable and necessary choice in the circumstances of the case.
If this guy hadn't been Tasered but, instead, a few baton strikes and physical restraint had led to, say, a cut head, badly bruised arms / legs and perhaps a dislocated shoulder and a broken wrist (all pretty common injuries when attempting to handcuff a non-compliant prisoner) we would never have heard of it ... and yet that use of force could be properly considered more damaging than the Taser.
That is not true. It is anything but easy. It is one of the most common reasons for prisoners sustaining injury, often permanent. You should try it sometime.EddyBlack said:
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
Thanks. Even worse - the guy made it clear he was finishing up, then they cut the mike exactly as they nabbed him; it wasn't just about getting some madman to shut up. He was very reasonable and got some support from the audience when he persisted through the fucktards on his right trying to make his shut up.JoePolitix said:
Completely outrageous, and why the hell wasn't Kerry speaking out? Only about two people in the audience even bothered to stand up and ask what the fuck was going on. Most of the fucking neocon wannabes just sitting there rolling their eyes, until the prolonged bzzzts and some of them started getting a little concerned. He asked an inconvenient question of a powerful speaker so he deserved it, clearly. At least the fucking media aren't presenting it as justifiable.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
I don't know. The clips I've seen seem to edit out part of his speech.TAE said:POP-QUIZ: How long does he speak before the cops move in ?
I saw the whole video and he was not acting reasonable....he was acting like he was in some manic episode.ymu said:
well, he was taking up other peoples free speech timefela fan said:
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
No - he was at a meeting with a predominantly right-leaning audience who did not want him to insult their honoured and powerful guest. He was asking a very reasonable question about why Kerry conceded the election early when later analyses suggested he had won, and why Kerry was against invading Iran but unwilling to try and impeach Bush to stop it. He did get agitated because some neocon control freak tried to shut him up; some credit due to Kerry for indicating that he should be allowed to finish, shame he didn't follow through when the goons stepped in. He got applause for his question from a minority of the audience.Detroit City said:I saw the whole video and he was not acting reasonable....he was acting like he was in some manic episode.
well, he was taking up other peoples free speech time
For those who don't know how long he spoke for, the full video is linked just above this. (1:30 until they cut his mike and simultaneously nabbed him).
Ned Pointsman
Sells Tac to Bairns
fela fan said:
Ned Pointsman said:
An 'ting.
ymu said:
Exactly. I cannot understand Detective Boy’s point about the arrest being the right thing to do.
They tried to grab him initially for what? Asking Kerry about the revelations of discounted votes.
They wanted to shut him up and where in the wrong.
I don’t accept that tazers should be used this way. Added to the fact that they where in the WRONG, there where where lots of cops there who could have got the cuffs on him EASILY without resorting to this. I think tazers should only be used to disarm who are being violent or brandishing a non firearm weapon.
Moreover the guy is vindicated in the full video. They cut his mike and then grabbed him straight away. How can you possibly say they where right to arrest him Detective Boy? They wanted to shut him up even though he was asking good questions, and had been asked to speak. I’m quite aghast that anybody would defend this. I think this is a highly significant case of brutal repression of free speech. Fela Fan post 64. spot on.
He was excited is about all. I can imagine his adrenaline would have been going, particularly after the cops had earlier tried to grab him. He wasn't shouting, being aggressive or abusive, he hadn’t spoken for more than his ‘two minutes’.Detroit City said:
DexterTCN
Troy and Abed in the morning
If half a dozen policemen sitting on one student can't get cuffs on him they should be fucking sacked.
He wasn't being violent or threatening and it's interesting to see that some people here think he shouldn't be allowed to press strongly for explanations from a politician - and indeed some think the police response was proportionate or justifiable.
"Ooooh what if he'd had a gun"
He wasn't being violent or threatening and it's interesting to see that some people here think he shouldn't be allowed to press strongly for explanations from a politician - and indeed some think the police response was proportionate or justifiable.
"Ooooh what if he'd had a gun"
untethered
For industry & decency
I'm curious as to why there were police at the microphone.
Was there a likelihood that someone might say something illegal?
It's one thing to have security in the hall, especially for such a prominent speaker. Another entirely to hand control of the debate over to the police. Where was the chairman?
Was there a likelihood that someone might say something illegal?
It's one thing to have security in the hall, especially for such a prominent speaker. Another entirely to hand control of the debate over to the police. Where was the chairman?
Structaural
in Chatsubo
JoePolitix said:
That made my girlfriend cry.
JoePolitix
Gone
Great news. I love bringing joy to the world.
Structaural
in Chatsubo
Well not that link specifically - she saw it on the news yesterday and it really upset her. Fucking well out of order. See that fat white cop with a grin on his face just before the taser hit?
Structaural
in Chatsubo
untethered
For industry & decency
8ball said:
The chap was arrested for asking a question during a question and answer session in a political debate at a university.
That's the problem. Whether they tasered him, cuffed him gently or shot him in the face is ultimately neither here nor there.
Detroit City said:
Has your mind left it's skull? Politicians get heckled all the time, there was FUCK ALL odd that this person was doing to get himself ejected let alone tasered by cops who WERE UNDER NO THREAT whatsoever.
I was only 100% certain that tasers should not be standard issue. Now I'm 200% convinced.
untethered
For industry & decency
I'm sure someone here with a background in psychology can explain how the vivid nature of the tasering has had far more impact on people than the much less vivid fact that there were police officers guarding the microphone in a university debate.
95% of what has been written about this is taser - right or wrong?
I'm not a free speech fundamentalist. I believe that it is necessary to limit some kinds of speech in society. However, I believe these limitations should be set down in law by a democratic parliament, not constructed on the momentary whims of a police officer.
I very much doubt whether the same situation would have occurred had the student spoken for the same length of time about economic policy.
The most worrying part of all this is the point half way through the question where the student is interrupted by the police officer and how it clearly is acceptable to UF students that their debates are literally policed.
95% of what has been written about this is taser - right or wrong?
I'm not a free speech fundamentalist. I believe that it is necessary to limit some kinds of speech in society. However, I believe these limitations should be set down in law by a democratic parliament, not constructed on the momentary whims of a police officer.
I very much doubt whether the same situation would have occurred had the student spoken for the same length of time about economic policy.
The most worrying part of all this is the point half way through the question where the student is interrupted by the police officer and how it clearly is acceptable to UF students that their debates are literally policed.
Similar threads
- Poll
