I still think they took it way too far. The article said he *was* leaving, just not in a fashion deemed timely by the officers. Who decides that? And it wasn't just no ID no entrance at all, it was only after 11, and considering he was leaving when they grabbed he, you can assume he was there for some time before that. Even the news article that was linked said when they were doing the study on tasers, a 5 second jolt could keep somebody from regaining muscle control for 5-10 minutes. They shot hit several times and were threatening more when he didn't get up and start walking. You could hear several students asking for the Badge numbers of the officers. One of the officers directly threatened to taser a student that asked for their numbers. If you can convince yourself that he could whip out a weapon while in handcuffs, lying on the ground and overtake the 3-4? officers I saw, then there isn't any way to convince you otherwise. The way it looks, they even had one officer at the door who was keeping watch. The way he kept looking away leads you to believe he knew what was happening was wrong.

And about the frying the guy until he behaves like an angel, have you missed the number of deaths that have occured even from just being shocked once? I believe they should be fired and any future employers know about what they have did here. I know if I were the kid I'd make sure that was the case. If they found a job with a firm that respected it's reputation, I'd make sure the papers found out. But maybe it's just because I'm vengeful and don't like seeing people get away with shit like that.

I don't buy that excuse for one second. Seriously, how often do cops know the suspect they're dealing with and know everything on their person? They don't taser every suspect they come across though, so why this guy? He had shown no signs of aggression as far as I'm aware, so I don't feel that aggression was justified against him.



That's good and well, but I don't see how it applies to this situation at all. A guy hopped up on drugs fighting with the police obviously deserves to be met with aggression, and even shot if it comes to that. Was the student in the library acting aggressively and did the cops have any reason to believe that he would? I don't believe so, so I feel their actions were unjustified. As far preventing as a riot ensuing, from the video, the crowd seemed to be pretty tame until the kid started getting tasered.

I have a lot of respect for LEOs, and I want them to go home safe every night as much as everyone else, but they need to match their level of aggression to what the situation justifies. I know I certainly don't want to get pulled over for speeding, run my mouth to the cop because I'm unhappy with the situation, and get tasered on the off chance that I could be "a serial rapist armed to the teeth with a rap sheet miles long".

Yeah, regardless of whether the use of force against the uncooperative student was justified or not, the cop that threatened the student who was asking for the badge numbers was completely out of line, and possibly acting illegally.

Either way, I think the whole situation could have been handled better by both sides.

The students asking for badge numbers were making this unsafe. They were intentionally distracting the officers, so that only 1-2 were able to focus on the real problem. These cops had to make sure 1)a riot doesn't start 2)the guy doesn't hurt anyone else 3)he doesn't hurt himself 4)he doesn't hurt an officer. Kinda hard in the middle of all that with a riot about to start.

He may have been totally immobilized, but if I was a cop, I literally wouldn't bet my life on it. If everyone distracts the cops, he could just get up, walk out, rape someone, and then the university gets sued because the cops couldn't arrest one little non-violent person. Yes we know now that he was a student, but at the time he was just some unknown guy in a library who could be up to no good. The officer at the door who was keeping watch was probably looking at the crowd to make sure no one actually hurt the cops.

Resisting arrest is a crime simply because society doesn't want fights to break out. You comply with the officer, even if you know 100% it's not right, and you will get your day in court to settle things without violence. It's so you don't hurt officers, yourself, or anyone around you.

About the number of taser deaths. See how many of those deaths had drugs involved. Drugs tend to make people superhuman, but when tasered, tend to kill. What about the number of deaths caused by cops using their guns? Yet cops are still allowed to use them. The level of force dictates your probability of survival. And alas, guess who's actions dictated the level of force used? This leads us to the ever elusive life lesson that many college people have yet to understand, "Actions have consequences" If you yell at cops, you may get tased. If you punch a cop, you will get shot. Easy concept.

Cops don't know about everyone they interact with, so they have a plan to kill everyone they meet. Next time you get pulled over, watch how the cop is being polite to you. Want to know what they are thinking? They are figuring out all the possible ways to kill you if something goes bad. They can't taser everyone, but cops follow their handbook of departmental policy down to the letter and their departmental policy more likely than not probably says that if someone is passively resisting, use of taser is authorized. I know that some may not feel the taser was authorized but police departments have done studies out the wazoo and have found that tasering in passive agressive situations is always way better than getting in fights with people.

Again, they weren't tasering him because he wouldn't leave. They were tasering him because he was resisting arrest. That's why you wouldn't get tasered if you got pulled over and ran your mouth, because you aren't resisting arrest.

quoted for truth. IMO this guy was trying to get attention to possibly start a riot. if he was supposedly leaving peacefully they wouldn't have tasered him. university police dont just tazer somebody because they feel they're moving too slow. he clearly was trying to get people to start a riot "here is you fucking patriot act" isn't just an im pissed off at being tazered line. its a "i have an opinion and to draw attention to it im going to try and associate it with something else". he got what he deserved.

the only things i think that the police did wrong was not requiring other students to return to their seats. at my high school we had a policy where if you didn't return to your classroom when there was a fight, you could be suspended almost twice as long as those fighting. they may have overused the tazer, but the guy was acting for quite a bit of that.

As I recall from the video, no one was questioning the officers until they started tasering the subject. It seemed to me they were just gathering around watching the show, and that it was the act of using the taser that incited the crowd. Furthermore, the students have every right to ask the officers for the badge numbers if they feel the officers are acting out of line. In fact, I personally believe that it is their civic duty to do so. This whole situation could have been over in 1 min or less if they had just dragged the guy's ass from the building. Instead the OFFICERS allowed the situation to go on for longer than it needed to, and acted in a manner that incited the crowd.



I agree 100% and I touched on this earlier, but at the same time I don't believe that the act of resisting arrest itself justifies the use of a taser. Really, it doesn't concern me as to what the handbooks or the studies say. It's my personal belief that aggressive actions are not justified unless the subject is acting aggressively, or has shown intent to act aggressively.

Oh no doubt that the guy was acting like a douchebag and wanted the attention, but does that still justify the use of a taser? I don't think so. Unless this was by the book, I want to say that perhaps the officers weren't trained very well in dealing with demonstrations and crowd control. And if it was by the book, well then... that book scares the hell out of me.

The students do have a right to ask for badge numbers right until the officer tells you to sit your ass down. At that point, they are then ignoring the lawful commands of an officer and it is not their civic duty to get in the way. They can always go to the station later and file a complaint, which would be much safer than interfering with a police officer who is obviously busy. By the way, you don't need badge numbers or names. If you go to the department and tell them there were 4 officers tasering a guy in the library at this time on this day, they'll know exactly who was there. Dispatch tracks every officer, so there is no need for the students to play investigator right then and there. These students were just being stupid trying to play hero while the officers were in the middle of something dangerous, making the situation more dangerous. It may not look more dangerous, but it certainly isn't more safer with students doing that. Instead of trying to play hero, they should just file a complaint and let their supervisors rip them a new one. They could've done their civic duty safely.

Officers can not drag the guy from the building unless he is 1)cooperating fully or 2)immobilized so much that he won't hurt himself or those around him. The officers did not allow it to go on longer than it needed. This could've all been over in 0.2 seconds if they guy placed his hands behind his back like a man. Dragging his ass at the beginning is not an option in this situation. The crowd would've seen it as fighting and would've rioted. Besides hands on contact is way more dangerous for everyone than tasering.

I would classify "Here's your fucking patriot act!" as intent to act aggressively. The problem with never using force to place a non-violent resister under arrest is the fact that it could never end. The guy would just sit there for days and the cops couldn't touch him because he's not being violent. There are only so many cops and plenty of crime. In all honesty, cops just don't have the time to fuck around while crime is going on outside, otherwise citizens wouldn't be happy when there is a robbery across town because the cops were too busy fucking with this idiot. When you are under arrest, it means you are going to the station right now, not in 5 minutes, not when you feel like, and certainly not long enough for you to show signs of aggression if you haven't already.

You say that the officers probably weren't trained in crowd control. I'm willing to bet that this was actually by the book given that officers are allowed to use one level up of force. Regardless of the policy, I look at this way. In the end, there was no riot, every officer saw their kids that night, no one in the crowd got injured, and the original mission to remove the disruptive student was achieved. I don't know why you fear the book. As long as you use some form of common sense, you won't get tased.

i can almost understand one taser shock, but all i could see were yelling at him to get up and shocking him, obviously they didnt realize wtf they were doing. he was resisting with his mouth but other than that he looked quite immobile.

Watch the video again. No crowd gathered until they began using the taser. It's not clear what is happening before that point, but basically all you hear is "Don't touch me, don't touch me" "Stand up, stand up" "AHHHHH". The article never mentioned the subject acting aggressively in any manner. How can you justify using a taser in that situation?

Now, I would imagine that a confrontation such as this would normally go something like this... Attempt to place subject in handcuffs. If subject refuses, forcefully attempt to place subject in handcufs. If subject fights, use taser. It sounds like they skipped step 2, and possibly even step 1, and just jumped right to step 3. Again, notice that no crowd had developed before the taser was used, so the crowd was not a factor at that point.

Officers can drag a person from a building against their will, I've seen it done before with minimal effort by the officers. If the subject fights (not just sitting down, actually acts aggressively toward an officer), sure, taze his ass. Again though, there were no reports of aggression toward the officers. Sitting down is not acting physically aggressive, neither is bitching after being tazed. Furthermore, I never said officers should never use force of any kind on a non aggressive person, I said they should use appropriate force, and I said that they shouldn't use aggressive force unless the situation justifies such force.

I maintain that the officers are the ones that allowed the situation to get out of control. They are the ones that made the situation dangerous. And I do question whether they were trained in crowd control and demonstration situations. This situation got a lot more out of hand than it needed to, and not at the hands of the crowd, but at the hands of the officers, in my opinion. If in the very beginning when he wouldn't stand up, they had placed him in cuffs and hauled him out of the building, I don't feel there would have been any kind of situation. Hell, they would have been out of the building by the time most students knew what was going on. No one seemed to even care what was happening until they started tazing the guy.

And yes, I do fear the book that allows the police to taze someone that won't stand up.

As a side note, It's way past my bed time. I've enjoyed our discussion, and I'm sure you'll reply again, so hopefully we can pick this up at a later time. Good night.

I commend the cops. If I were a cop everytime the guy dropped the f bomb i would of tasered him till his hair started to smoke. There are a few things to note here.

1)A taser is used to immobalize, but only briefly. I have been fortunate enough to be on the receiving end of one and you lose control of all muscles for the duration that you are being tased. (i.e. Taser on; you no move) As soon as they let off the trigger you are good to go. A bit sore, but hardly immobile.

2) Tasers are adjustable. And i think when they are in the first room you can see one of the officers adjust his. I would assume he turns it up. As officers are trained to do, he tases, it doesnt work so he tases harder. This shows the officer does not want to unneccasarily hurt the guy. If he did that puppy would be full blast the first time.

C'mon cops have to do their job. The guy was just lucky he got a direct contact taser and not one of the ones that shoot the hooks into your chest. As earlier stated the guy wanted to create a scene. This is proven by him screaming "Here is you patriot act." He got what he wanted. The cops got what they wanted. Everyone is happy. If you cannot take the consequences, then do not make the move. He knew damn good and well he would be hit again if he resisted and it did not stop him.

Is this before or after he takes off the handcuffs, gets passed the officer at the door (which could possibly be distracted if he's lucky), and oh, manages to regain muscle control from the 2-3 times he'd already been tasered.

Seriously, did you watch the video?

handcuffing someone doesn't immobilize them. why would an officer feel the need to taser him if he was cooperating?

To the people asking what would have happened if the guy got away and hurt somebody else... he *wasn't* hurting anybody. He did not strike, nor attempt to strike the officers. He did not attempt to cause harm to anybody. With hands and arms visible, and not doing the above, justify the use of the taser so many times. As for the shouting, if I knew the cops were doing something wrong to me, you can be goddamn sure I'd be trying to get everybody's attention.

On that note, another taser video just showed up on the news. The cops tasered the guy and he fell down. They told him to put his hands up in the air, which he did. They then promptly tasered him again. Their excuse was that he put his hands into his pockets, which you can clearly see is not the case on the video.

You're right, it doesn't immobilize someone; however, my point was the odds of him actually getting out and raping someone WITH handcuffs on is highly improbable. I'd like to see someone try to rape a woman with their hands handcuffed behind their back. Not to mention that minor fact of him being t4s3r3d that you completely disregarded.