UCLA student gets tasered for not having student ID card in the library!

probe

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

He was zapped five times on Tuesday with a stun gun because he didn't have his ID papers.

What is the world coming to?

.probe

Manic Moran

Hey, library rules...

Seriously, this is being discussed in depth on an American board I'm on, I'll check into the ongoing discussion when I get home. Part of the problem with the video is it doesn't show how the whole thing started, and I doubt there was immediate co-operation with no attitude from the student. There can be some complete idiots out in the world. Take the video where the cop instructs repeatedly "Get out of the car, or I will Tase you." Of course, after three or four commands are ignored... "Zzap". Cue complaints of police brutality, when the complete video shows she was being an idiot.

It is, however, a concern of mine that because tasers are advertised as less-lethal, they're used possibly a little overly frequently. They're not as terminal as a pistol, and neither do they usually cause as much physical harm (or look as bad) as a batoning. If there are enough cops there, they can just sit on him/manhandle him, etc. The taser can be used as a 'crutch', which is something I think should be an option used more lightly.

On the other hand, all cops who are armed with Tasers get tased themselves so that they know what the person on the receiving end is going through.

Greenstein said a Community Service Officer employed by the library was performing a nightly check to ensure that all patrons using the library after 11 p.m. were authorized to be there.

"This is a longstanding library policy to ensure the safety of students during the late-night hours," Greenstein said. "The CSO made an announcement that he would be checking for university identification. When a person, who was later identified as ... Tabatabainejad, refused to provide any identification, the CSO told him that if he refused to do so, he would have to leave the library.

"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.

"The officers deemed it necessary to use the Taser in a 'drive stun' capacity," she said in the statement. "A Taser is used to incapacitate subjects who are resistant by discharging an electronic current into the subject in one of two methods: via two wired probes that are deployed from the Taser, or in a 'drive stun' capacity by touching the subject with the Taser. In this incident the student was not shot with a Taser; rather, officers used the 'drive stun' capability.

NTM

Victor

I've not seen the video.

Manic Moran wrote:

On the other hand, all cops who are armed with Tasers get tased themselves so that they know what the person on the receiving end is going through.

The problem there being, that the, eh, victim is a medical unknown to the officer.

That said, many tazer victims that one see on the internet seem to deserve it.

andrew163

/me glues his student ID card to his head

A Dub in Glasgo

Manic Moran wrote:

On the other hand, all cops who are armed with Tasers get tased themselves so that they know what the person on the receiving end is going through.

Do they do that with truncheons and guns as well?

hmmm

That's unbelievable. It shows what happens to some people when you give them a badge and a cap.

Manic Moran

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Do they do that with truncheons and guns as well?

I wouldn't be surprised if they get a bit of a clout with the baton in training, but I get the feeling you're being facaetious with the gun.

NTM

BaZmO*

Manic Moran wrote:

but I get the feeling you're being facaetious with the gun.

No waaayy!?!?!

What's that about Americans not getting sarcasm...

I watched the video, couldn't really see too much but you could definitely hear the guy being told over and over agian to get up or he would be tasered.
Now I don't think you need to be a brain surgeon to work out that if a group of police officers were trying to remove you from somewhere that you weren't supposed to be and they repeatedly stated that you were gonna be tasered if you didn't co-operate, they were actually gonna taser you.

There seemed to be enough police there to just carry him out rather than resort to using the taser which in turn leaves them open to critiscism.


edit- Just reading up a bit about the incident and would the guy's name (Mostafa Tabatabainejad) shed a little light on why he treated so forcefully?

RedPlanet

Ok i haven't watched the video but what i don't like is the concept that violence is an acceptable response to passive resistance.
If the guy is passively sitting there, or "going limp" like you often see with sit-down protests, it's not acceptable to me, for someone (cop) to come over and commit violence on them.
Manhandle them, drag them off the road, fine; but don't pepper spray their eyes or taser them.
It's like, torture or something.

BaZmO*

RedPlanet wrote:

Ok i haven't watched the video but what i don't like is the concept that violence is an acceptable response to passive resistance.
If the guy is passively sitting there, or "going limp" like you often see with sit-down protests, it's not acceptable to me, for someone (cop) to come over and commit violence on them.
Manhandle them, drag them off the road, fine; but don't pepper spray their eyes or taser them.
It's like, torture or something.

I don't agree with it either but if a cop said to you, "Get up or I'll Taser you" what would you do?

Hobbes

I've watched the video and I have done some checking up on it.

1. The guy was asked for his ID card before he would be allowed enter the library (understandable).

2. He didn't have an ID card but refused to leave the premises. The orderly calls the cops.

3. Cops showed up. While campus cops they are sworn in actual police. For anyone who has never been to the US before they have cops for everything. Normally goes.
- State Trooper.
- State Police (same?)
- City Police
- Mall Police
- Campus Police
Or something like that.

4. The cops asked him to leave the premises and he refused.

5. The cops attempted to remove him and he started screaming get your hands off me.

6. Once they had a hold of him he said "I am leaving" but didn't. He then proceeded to go limp to stop them removing him.

7. Pulling him he started trying to break free from them (resisting) at which point they tasered him. They also warned him after this point that they would tazer again.

Now after that point it could be that they were a bit excessive but the guy certain was causing a scene.

hmmm

The student newspaper is reporting a different story

1. He was asked to leave when they did an ID check and refused saying he was in the middle of something.
2. The police returned 20 minutes later, at which point he started to leave (he had left his chair and was walking).
3. The police officer grabbed him by the arm. He shouted at the police officer to leave him alone. At no other point during the episode did he show physical resistance.
4. The police tasered him - he started screaming. A student asked the officer for his badge number, at which point he was threatened with the taser (beginning of video)
5. They repeatedly told him to stand and repeatedly tasered him (you can see this on the video). From all accounts, a tasering causes your nervous system to collapse for a few minutes, so either he was disobeying or he was unable to stand.
6. They eventually grew bored with torturing him and dragged him out. They tasered him a few more times in the lobby for good measure.

That's the land of freedom for you..

robinph

BaZmO* wrote:

I don't agree with it either but if a cop said to you, "Get up or I'll Taser you" what would you do?

If they had yet to taser me then I might contemplate getting up and getting the hell out of there before they did. But that video seemed to show that they had just tasered him and then immediately told him to get up again afterwards, at that point I suspect I would find lying on the floor for a bit to be the best option until I could figure out which way was up again as trying to stand may result in me falling down again without their help.

tallus

I'm glad I dont live there stateside, and certainly not anywhere near LA. The cops there seem to like abusing people.

RedPlanet

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-ucla17nov17,1,4599352.story?coll=la-headlines-pe-california&ctrack=1&cset=true
A couple of accounts are given here.
The student in question believed he was being singled-out for racial profiling.

Sparks

BaZmO* wrote:

I watched the video, couldn't really see too much but you could definitely hear the guy being told over and over agian to get up or he would be tasered.
Now I don't think you need to be a brain surgeon to work out that if a group of police officers were trying to remove you from somewhere that you weren't supposed to be and they repeatedly stated that you were gonna be tasered if you didn't co-operate, they were actually gonna taser you.

According to the article, by that point he'd been tasered for over five seconds, which is enough to produce nearly fifteen minutes of inability to stand or coordinate your movements very well. In other words, they rendered him unable to stand, then repeatedly punished him for not being able to stand.

r3nu4l

Okay, purely from reading accounts posted here and viewing the video:

After we first see him get tasered, he is well enough to scream obscenities at them and understand their commands, so his nervous system (i.e. his brain!) is functioning well. At this point he has the chance to say 'I'm trying to stand up but my legs won't work for me. Please give me a minute.' He does not do this.

From the video I didn't see enough to determine whether he deserved the first taze or not. However, all subsequent tazes are wrong in mu opinion because there were enough officers there to carry him out. Perhaps US law forbids carrying out of prisoners due to Health and Safety of cops and their backs? I don't know.

Was protocol followed? I don't know. Either way, they need to seriously re-assess their protocols as to my mind from the second taze on was completely unjustified.

He thinks he was singled out for racial profiling? He will be now!

Manic Moran

Hobbes wrote:

3. Cops showed up. While campus cops they are sworn in actual police. For anyone who has never been to the US before they have cops for everything. Normally goes.
- State Trooper.
- State Police (same?)
- City Police
- Mall Police
- Campus Police
Or something like that.

In California, all sworn officers have jurisdiction throughout the entire state. A UCLA campus cop has all powers of law enforcement officers when up in San Francsico on holiday. The larger organisations such as CHP, LAPD, SFPD etc have their own academies. Smaller police departments have a joint academy or two, so the UCLA cop could go through with the Sonoma County Sheriff. (You forgot Sheriff's office in that list, usually county-based). The real difference is over who pays them, and where their beat is.

there were enough officers there to carry him out. Perhaps US law forbids carrying out of prisoners due to Health and Safety of cops and their backs?

I think your first bit there about being enough chaps to carry him out is the salient one. However, I would not be surprised if there are some policies in place saying 'Tasing is used in preference to sitting on the subject while you handcuff him because it's safer for the cop'

Any rate: Cue instructional video on "How to not get your ass beat by police"
www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPJh34UewHY&mode=related&search=

NTM

civdef

I'm not sure where people get the idea that a bunch of cops carrying/manhandling a struggling person doesn't involve the use of force. Anyone being so handles is likely to sustain bruising, grazing, possibly sprains, twists and worse.

RedPlanet

civdef wrote:

I'm not sure where people get the idea that a bunch of cops carrying/manhandling a struggling person doesn't involve the use of force. Anyone being so handles is likely to sustain bruising, grazing, possibly sprains, twists and worse.

who said anything about a struggling person?

r3nu4l

civdef wrote:

I'm not sure where people get the idea that a bunch of cops carrying/manhandling a struggling person doesn't involve the use of force. Anyone being so handles is likely to sustain bruising, grazing, possibly sprains, twists and worse.

A truly peaceful protester will go limp like a sack of spuds when being carried, not struggle, fight and resist. A peaceful, non-struggling prostestor is therefore far less likely to be injured. This has been demonstrated at many events where truly peaceful protestors have kept their dignity and been subsequently treated with dignity by police.

The attitude of a protestor can make a big difference to how the cops react. A 'F*ck you' attitude will probably result in getting hurt whereas a 'Okay, you're doing your job and I'm making my point' attitude is usually treated a bit better.

I've seen cops in England having a laugh with peaceful protestors. I remember a protestor once being lifted up and carried into a van and saying to the cops...'You might be right, maybe we are a bunch of lazy layabouts, I'm too lazy to even struggle'. The cops exchanged a bit of banter and the guy was out in the van and taken away having made his point.

Sparks

A truly peaceful protester

I'm curious. Where did it say he was a protester? Where did it say that he wasn't a student? Why are people thinking that this kid did anything more heinous than forgetting his student ID card?

tba

Hes able to say "here is you patriot act" so he was quite aware. His inital screaming suggests an attempt to make a point, one that he gleefully continued as he wriggled on the ground. I dare say he put up with it to prove a point.

RedPlanet

tba wrote:

Hes able to say "here is you patriot act" so he was quite aware. His inital screaming suggests an attempt to make a point, one that he gleefully continued as he wriggled on the ground. I dare say he put up with it to prove a point.

Doesn't anybody read links anymore?
According to his lawyers statement, he was screaming to attract attention.
Apparently believing that the cops would desist once enough members of the public witnessed the event.

Sparks

tba wrote:

an attempt to make a point, one that he gleefully continued as he wriggled on the ground

Might I humbly suggest that while the wriggling part is easy, there's not much glee in someone who is being repeatedly tasered in a manner that the manufacturer does not recommend on the grounds of medical safety?

And can I ask my question again, since you've not said he was doing anything more serious than forgetting his student ID card?

civdef

According to his lawyers statement, he was screaming to attract attention.

You have to admit his lawyers statement is going to spin the story one way for obvious reasons.

I struggle to see a cop Tazing someone who wasn't posing any risk just for the hell of it (the paperwork alone would make this a very work intensive proces). If a police officer did use it inappropriately, then they need to be held to account for this and it's unacceptable.

civdef

And can I ask my question again, since you've not said he was doing anything more serious than forgetting his student ID card?

It doesn't actually matter what the initial offence issue was, if the persons behaviour subsequently leads to a problem. I've seen people react to a simple enquiry from a police officer on a traffic related enquiry (ie not going to lead to arrest and probably not even a ticket) in a way that ended up with them being restrained, arrested and charged with assaulting a police officer.

probe

The incident underscores yet again, the lack of professionalism with which many people do their jobs – particularly in the English speaking world and the general bureaucratic obsession with ID documents – as if they prevent crime. The “9/11” highjackers all carried valid passports showing their true identities. ID didn’t stop them or provide a clue of their intentions.

This poor guy looks as if he wanted to study in a UCLA 24h library late at night and the whole event was allowed to get out of control due to the incompetence of university staff and “police”.

His only weapon was his mouth, which would probably have been relatively silent if he was treated in a professional manner.

The use of tasers – even once – was completely uncalled for in these circumstances. Depending on the victim’s state of health, they can cause heart failure, epileptic fits and strokes.

The university’s PR bots issued the following terse statement:

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=7513

Camera phones and sites such as youtube.com are the best weapons against people who misuse their position!

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyid=2006-11-16T171632Z_01_N15199968_RTRUKOC_0_US-RIGHTS-CAMERAPHONES.xml

.probe

lostexpectation

I hope the students are kicking up a stink. they run the cops offf the campus.



tazers are just to open to abuse to be allowed to be used. I don't know how tazrreing somebody is supposed to make them stop screaming and wriggling.

Manic Moran

probe wrote:

particularly in the English speaking world and the general bureaucratic obsession with ID documents – as if they prevent crime.

ID Cards do not prevent crime, but at least they can be used to ensure with a reasonable degree of satisfaction that people are only where they are authorised to be. I recall requiring an ID card to get into the UCD library, this is no different from the UCLA incident except the UCLA was a random check, not an at-the-door mandatory one.

The “9/11” highjackers all carried valid passports showing their true identities. ID didn’t stop them or provide a clue of their intentions.

In the case of a private library, however, it can show that he's not a person off the street using resources he is not entitled to use. UCLA bought for the books, for the maintainance of the facility, it is reasonable for them to want to restrict people to those who have a legitimate permission to be there. i.e. restricting access to those who are paying for the privilige of access in their college fees. A university ID card is a reasonable way of determining this.

This poor guy looks as if he wanted to study in a UCLA 24h library late at night and the whole event was allowed to get out of control due to the incompetence of university staff and “police”.

The "police" need not be in quotation marks. They are fully sworn police officers. Forget about the image of the UCD Services jeep with flashing yellow lights. These are real cops, gone through a real police academy, with real cop-authority. He may have wanted to be in the study late at night, but was unable to produce his ID card when a library worker asked for it. Upon his not being able to provide one, the worker asked him to leave. When he refused to leave, the police were called in.

His only weapon was his mouth, which would probably have been relatively silent if he was treated in a professional manner.

Had he complied with the request of the library staff in the first place, nothing else would have gone wrong.

The use of tasers – even once – was completely uncalled for in these circumstances. Depending on the victim’s state of health, they can cause heart failure, epileptic fits and strokes.

I can see how a physical scuffle involving fists or batons would be so much less detremental to his overall health. At least, once. The repeated tasings, I'm not so comfortable with. I'll wait for CHP or the FBI to release their report.

NTM

civdef

lostexpectation wrote:

I hope the students are kicking up a stink. they run the cops offf the campus.

Reclaim the campus from the man. That'll make the students and staff so much safer..

I don't know how tazrreing somebody is supposed to make them stop screaming and wriggling.

- The general principle is as follows:

Police Officer: "Stop wriggling and screaming or I'll zap you.

Peace Loving Freedom Fighter: Scream,scream,wriggle, wriggle. (seriously what sort of sissy screams for help in a library when the police ask for an ID card?)

BZZZZT

Peace Loving Freedom Fighter: "Ouch! That hurt like a female dog, I better stop screaming and wriggling or those angry people in blue uniforms will zap me again".

Once they up and die, they don't make so much noise and fuss.

RedPlanet

:rolleyes:
Oh is he a "Peace Loving Freedom Fighter" now?
I thought he was a suspected "terrorist".

What kind of sissy is that allows himself to be tassered?
Not a very good one i'd say.
A sissy would doubtless surrender his safety and liberty to the officer at the slightest threat.
It's good citizenry to question authority.

lostexpectation

civdef wrote:

Reclaim the campus from the man. That'll make the students and staff so much safer..





- The general principle is as follows:

Police Officer: "Stop wriggling and screaming or I'll zap you.

Peace Loving Freedom Fighter: Scream,scream,wriggle, wriggle. (seriously what sort of sissy screams for help in a library when the police ask for an ID card?)

BZZZZT

Peace Loving Freedom Fighter: "Ouch! That hurt like a female dog, I better stop screaming and wriggling or those angry people in blue uniforms will zap me again".

Once they up and die, they don't make so much noise and fuss.

Im sure it making you civdef and all you of baying for the rossporters blood real horney

probe

Manic Moran wrote:

ID Cards do not prevent crime, but at least they can be used to ensure with a reasonable degree of satisfaction that people are only where they are authorised to be. I recall requiring an ID card to get into the UCD library, this is no different from the UCLA incident except the UCLA was a random check, not an at-the-door mandatory one.

I don't think anybody would have a problem with a "library card" identification issue - you want to read books, borrow, show your card, or enter your PIN or whatever.

But if you go to a library (uni or city etc) and are asked for extra ID (because it is after 23h00 at night) and don't happen to have it, does that give them the right to shoot you not once but five times? With 50,000 health/life threatening volts? No matter how loud you shout or protest. Let them arrest him if the situation calls for it (there were several police, only one unarmed victim).

.probe

Manic Moran

probe wrote:

I don't think anybody would have a problem with a "library card" identification issue - you want to read books, borrow, show your card, or enter your PIN or whatever.

But if you go to a library (uni or city etc) and are asked for extra ID (because it is after 23h00 at night) and don't happen to have it, does that give them the right to shoot you not once but five times?

Not at all. It does give the library staff the right to ask the person to leave, however. If a competent authority instructs a person to leave a property, and that person refuses, it's trespassing. Cue calling in the police. Exactly what happened after that point remains subject to some dispute, depending on whose statement you're reading at that particular moment and time.

Suffice to say, he was not zapped for not having an ID card. He was zapped for some other offense (or perceived offense, at least). His 'punishment' for not having his ID card was to be instructed to leave.

NTM

aidan24326

The use of a taser in ANY situation is state-sponsored brutality imo. Granted there are times when muppets almost deserve to get tasered, but I disagree with their use outright. In this instance, the cops could have just dragged him out of there, he had no weapons and was no threat to anyone beyond making a nuisance of himself. He was being a bit of an ass by the looks of it, but since when did that warant the use of such force?

Manic Moran

The use of a taser in ANY situation is state-sponsored brutality imo

Bear in mind that the original introduction of the Taser was to provide a less lethal alternative to the .40 cal Smith-and-Wesson hollowpoint. The bit that concerns me (i.e. my 'crutch' comment) is that its use is devolving away from circumstances needing ranged firepower but could avoid use of a side-arm (eg knife or club-weilding opponent), and being turned into a general-purpose multi-tool.

NTM

civdef

The use of a taser in ANY situation is state-sponsored brutality imo.

This displays a lack of understanding of the realities of what life in the real world is like.

Do you consider that using a baton in any situation is state sponsored brutality? I've never been tasered myself, but I'll say for certain I'd prefer a couple of shocks from one as an alternative to a whack from a baton.

Like Manic says, there are plenty situations where Taser isn't needed, it's a couple of steps up use of force ladder, and it's main intent is to provide non-lethal force at greater than arms length (which didn't really exist up to it's introduction, CS spray is a bit indiscriminate and hasn't great range other alternatives such as baton rounds are a bit on the "maybe lethal" side).

"Hands-on" policing, as seen here and in the UK just doesn't happen as much in countries where police carry sidearms. If you get in close enough to start wrestling with a suspect, they are close enough to conteplate making a grab for the holstered pistol.

BlitzKrieg

Bear in mind that the original introduction of the Taser was to provide a less lethal alternative to the .40 cal Smith-and-Wesson hollowpoint.

The curious thing is there any evidence in the video or any of the reports that called for the use of any form of sidearm.

I mean seriously I'm not calling brutality on this but incompetance,

http://dailybruin.com/news/articles.asp?id=38960 wrote:

Young said the CSOs on duty in the library at the time went to get UCPD officers when Tabatabainejad did not immediately leave, and UCPD officers resorted to use of the Taser when Tabatabainejad did not do as he was told.

Thats the chief of the campus police giving the justification for resorting to a sidearm. Because someone did not do what they told the police used a weapon on them. This raises more question on the police ability to resolve situations without resorting to their weapons rather then police brutality.


Incompetant men who need to be sent back to training, there's a video on youtube showing a training practice situation a taser should be used in, and it wasnt when the civilian did not do as he was told, but when the person in question goes to attack an officer or another civilian, neither the police nor any of the witnessess state that there were any attempts at actually physically assaulting the police.

Hobbes

probe wrote:

With 50,000 health/life threatening volts? No matter how loud you shout or protest.

It's the amps that kill, not the volts.

Manic Moran

BlitzKrieg wrote:

The curious thing is there any evidence in the video or any of the reports that called for the use of any form of sidearm.

He said 'any situation'. I just pointed out an obvious one.

Incompetant men who need to be sent back to training, there's a video on youtube showing a training practice situation a taser should be used in, and it wasnt when the civilian did not do as he was told, but when the person in question goes to attack an officer or another civilian, neither the police nor any of the witnessess state that there were any attempts at actually physically assaulting the police.

Other situations where non-compliance has resulted in a tasing have not necessarily resulted in charges. There is a strong argument, and CivDef makes it above, that tasing is actually the safest route for all concerned as it doesn't result in the physical injuries to multiple parties (including the cop) that a scuffle could result in. Tasing is painful, yes. But only rarely life-threatening, and never to the cop.

NTM

BlitzKrieg

He said 'any situation'. I just pointed out an obvious one.

I understand what you mean, the taser is a safer alternative to the traditional sidearm, what I am saying was as someone who has been involved in the military yourself would you consider a verbal abusive person who is being moderatly difficult (he is not leaving) a situation that warrants using your sidearm in any form. Have you aimed a rifle at Civilians shouting abuse at soldiers?

Other situations where non-compliance has resulted in a tasing have not necessarily resulted in charges. There is a strong argument, and CivDef makes it above, that tasing is actually the safest route for all concerned as it doesn't result in the physical injuries to multiple parties (including the cop) that a scuffle could result in. Tasing is painful, yes. But only rarely life-threatening, and never to the cop.

???

you sort of lost me here?

Tasing maybe safest route for violent situations, but even the cops themselves have said that this was not a violent situation, the subject did not do what he was told, there is no record, on tape or in any of the articles I have read on this board of the person in question being violent, he was verbally abusive at some points and I feel that as a Cop one should be trained in how to approach verbal abusive parties without resorting to any physical action, and I believe many of them are trained to do as such, its just in this case they didnt act accordingly and jumped the gun up to tasering some student.

Manic Moran

BlitzKrieg wrote:

I understand what you mean, the taser is a safer alternative to the traditional sidearm, what I am saying was as someone who has been involved in the military yourself would you consider a verbal abusive person who is being moderatly difficult (he is not leaving) a situation that warrants using your sidearm in any form.

No, and neither do I believe this was the case here.

I feel that as a Cop one should be trained in how to approach verbal abusive parties without resorting to any physical action,

There is only a limit as to how long you can do that. You may not want to resort to physical force, but if you keep asking nicely, and the other guy doesn't acceed, what do you do? Say "Please move, or I will ask you to move again?" Ultimately, physical contact is going to result.

jumped the gun up to tasering some student.

There is no mandate for a graduated escalation wherein one must check every box: If the cop is of the belief that he needs to go from one stage to another, bypassing the one in the middle, he can do that. It is possible that there was indeed an unwarranted 'jump', but since no cameras were apparently there at this point, we don't know what exactly the situation was beyond some quotes from other students. I think it's another case of 'let's see what the report says.'

I'm certainly not going to acquit in my mind the constables of all malfeasance, but neither am I going to blindly accept that a chap who was disobedient enough not to follow requests from college staff and cops managed to not piss off a bunch said cops enough that they saw fit to taser the guy once, let alone five times. For all the distrust that many of us have for people who are given authority, something still must have happened to go through the cop's mind and say "Enough of this, it's time for the Taser"

NTM

lostexpectation

lostexpectation wrote:

Im sure it making you civdef and all you of baying for the rossporters blood real horney

Have a 2 week [STRIKE]holiday[/STRIKE] ban from here.

bk

Amnesty International claim that Taser is responsible for 150 deaths.

The problem is the more Taser is used in situations like this, where it really isn't needed, then the more likely more people will die from it's use.

This reminds me of the use of rubber and plastic bullets up North. Because these weapons were supposed to be non-lethal, they were very widely used, but they also lead to the deaths of over 30 people including many children.

IMO Taser is being over used as a technology crutch for badly trained police officers in situations where it doesn't need to be used.

civdef

The same can be said for the baton, handcuffs or indeed "empty hand skills" -i.e smacks.

If force doesn't need to be used, then it shouldn't -in any form, but taser does less harm than many more traditional methods of applying force, but people seem to miss that fact.

Re Amnesty's claims, if Taser was so dangerous, why do most police forces require everyone carrying it to esperience a jolt of it? Surely there would be dead cops all over the place.

Similar claims are made about CS spray, which I have experienced, very unpleasant, but no after effects.

probe

Hobbes wrote:

It's the amps that kill, not the volts.

Yes but the volts can cause heart attacks, strokes and fits. But that is a side issue. In a case that warrants it, the guy should have been arrested and made to go through due process. That is what the legal system is for. He didn't produce any weapon or threaten to use one. It is not for these "police" to punish him with electric shock treatment on the spot.

In any event I suspect that the entire problem could be avoided if the uni staff were professional and courteous in the way they dealt with their client. Something completely missing in my experience from the "education system" in Ireland, GB, USA and other English speaking countries.

I was shopping this morning in a gadget shop in France and had a DVD in my hand. A five year old on seeing his favourite video game in the distance ran towards it and accidentally knocked the DVD out of my hand en route to his target. His mother called him back and asked him to apologise - which he did in a gracious way. And I dutifully went through the formal response - Je vous en prie. I have never come across a parent doing this in an English speaking country.

Civilised behaviour is an important part of the education system and should be practiced in educational establishments such as UCLA as well as everywhere else!

.probe

civdef

In a case that warrants it, the guy should have been arrested and made to go through due process. That is what the legal system is for. He didn't produce any weapon or threaten to use one. It is not for these "police" to punish him with electric shock treatment on the spot.

Sometimes, on occasion people have been known to resist arrest, either passively or actively. Are you certain neither occurred in this case?

In any event I suspect that the entire problem could be avoided if the uni staff were professional and courteous in the way they dealt with their client.

By any chance could the same be said about the client in question? Like why the staff felt it necessary to call the police in the first place?

Victor

Just because one can control speech doesn't mean one can control motor functions. Different parts of the brain and spinal column.

civdef wrote:

Re Amnesty's claims, if Taser was so dangerous, why do most police forces require everyone carrying it to esperience a jolt of it? Surely there would be dead cops all over the place.

These police officers will generally have been through health checks beforehand.

CLADA

The TASER fires two probes that are connected to the device by wire, both probes have to make contact with the clothing or skin of an individual in order to be effective and the resulting current between the probes causes the involuntary contraction of skeletal muscle tissue.
It overrides the motor nervous system, which basically means the brain has no control during the automatic 5 second burst the device delivers.

Taser contracts skeletal muscle tissue and independent medical studies have shown it to have no effect on the heart or devices such as pacemakers. ECG's on subjects tasered have shown the same cardiac rhythym before and after the device was used.

This device has and will continue to prevent the deaths of both civilians and policemen who may otherwise have been killed by firearms or bladed weapons had taser not been available.

The problem is not the device but inappropriate use of it.

Sparks

independent medical studies have shown it to have no effect on the heart or devices such as pacemakers

Somewhat of a contrast to the studies that have shown they've killed over a hundred people in the US...

At any rate, this is devolving into a technical argument on the properties of tasers, the training of university security personnel and various people's thoughts on civil protest. The question still remains - did this student do anything that warranted any form of physical action by the police whatsoever? Did he throw the first punch? Or did he just mouth off and get assaulted for it? Because if the latter, what the bloody hell else do these people expect from students? If I tasered every student I ever had in TCD who was doing something they ought not to have been doing, I'd need a lot of batteries. In fact, I'd need a taser that plugged into the mains.