UCLA Cops Taser Student Repeatedly... Outragous Actions.

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed;6984 wrote:

Have you ever been tazered? I think I would be screaming too.:wtf:

How would the students actions pose a threat?

Only when I stuck a knife in a electrical outlet when I was two.. and yes i DO still remember it..lol

I already answered the second question in the above post... and with that, Im done on the subject.. well.. other than laughing about it. Very Happy

1 Reply

@GoodBoy,

I see the student as a nucience but not a threat. I'm not sure of the rules for tazering people but I would think it would be used as a last resort or if the person getting tazered was a threat to someone.

In this case it seemed like the prefered method. All they had to do was carry him out like they ended up doing anyway. They were looking for an excuse to blast him.

2 Replies

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed;6986 wrote:

I see the student as a nucience but not a threat. I'm not sure of the rules for tazering people but I would think it would be used as a last resort or if the person getting tazered was a threat to someone.

In this case it seemed like the prefered method. All they had to do was carry him out like they ended up doing anyway. They were looking for an excuse to blast him.

Deadly force is the last resort. Tazers, beanbags, and CAPSTUN (pepper spray) are considered a non-lethal method of controlling a uncooperative person. It's the officers discretion as to what level of force to use. It is acceptable to use non-lethal force on somebody they perceive to be a threat to the officers, bystanders, or the person themselves.

They all hurt, but somebody who is stupid enough to question the actions of law enforcement deserves it. I have received two of three (beanbags and CAPSTUN) as part of some required training for my job.

1 Reply

@ANAV,

I guees we will have to see how stupid he was. He might have just found a way to pay for his education. Very Happy

How dare he question the actions of law enforcement . Yea, right.:wtf:

1 Reply

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed;6974 wrote:

I'm wondering why he was tazered in the first place. He wasn't a threat to the public.As far as I could tell from the video, the only threat the student posed was a threat to the officers ego.

The student was tazered because of frustration, not because he posed a threat to anyone.

From what i gather, he was tazed after two officers tried to escort him out by the arms. He screamed "don't touch me" "get off me", at that point he was in no position to bargain. He was resisting. IMO you don't have to be a threat to be tazed. Just non complyant. Had i considered him a real threat i wouldn't of tazed him, i would of shot him.

0 Replies

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed;6984 wrote:

Have you ever been tazered? I think I would be screaming too.:wtf:

How would the students actions pose a threat?

I have, i didn't scream. Just convolst a bit.
It was his lack of action the posed the first problem. He became a threat to the officers when he didn't comply the first, second, third, fouth, fifth time, you get my meaning.

0 Replies

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed;6986 wrote:

I see the student as a nucience but not a threat. I'm not sure of the rules for tazering people but I would think it would be used as a last resort or if the person getting tazered was a threat to someone.

In this case it seemed like the prefered method. All they had to do was carry him out like they ended up doing anyway. They were looking for an excuse to blast him.

There excuse was his noncompliance. That fact won't change. To first security then to the officers.

0 Replies

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed;6993 wrote:

I guees we will have to see how stupid he was. He might have just found a way to pay for his education.

How dare he question the actions of law enforcement . Yea, right.:wtf:

You can question all you like but you'd better obey there commands first.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

They can go to hell for all I care. Very Happy

0 Replies

@Brent cv,

You can say that until you need them. Then the story might change.

0 Replies

@Brent cv,

From what I can tell, he took them asking for his ID as a racial profiling incident. In order to show his disapproval he refused to show his ID, which is required in the building when you are asked to present it. By refusing to show his ID upon request, he was asking them to throw him out. By refusing to leave and I'm sure telling them his mind, they were forced to call the Police.
The Police showed up to a uncooperative person who was in the wrong (refusing to show an ID) and was refusing to leave under his own power. If the Police felt they were in any danger from the individual as far as escorting him off the premises, they had every right to use nonlethal means to subdue the individual. After using nonlethal techniques, he was probably more than willing to leave the premises, hence the Police accomplished what they were there to do without causing any permanent damage to the individual.

I believe the Police used the force necessary to subdue an uncooperative individual and remove him from the premises. The question people are concerned with is what force was necessary, well apparently whatever force they used did the job.

Reason number 1 you don't argue with a Police officer, they had every right to do what they did.

1 Reply

@lowflyn,

What about after he is subdued and after he poses no threat? Thats a gray area at best.

The student has a legal team chomping at the bit to take this lawsuit. The press eats this stuff up. Eventually they will get sued everytime they use it. It's an important tool, but it can be used to extremes. Overkill.

They carried him out to remove him from the building, something they could have done, the moment the student
laided down.

Unnessary use of force IMO.

1 Reply

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed;7032 wrote:

What about after he is subdued and after he poses no threat? Thats a gray area at best.

The student has a legal team chomping at the bit to take this lawsuit. The press eats this stuff up. Eventually they will get sued everytime they use it. It's an important tool, but it can be used to extremes. Overkill.

They carried him out to remove him from the building, something they could have done, the moment the student
laided down.

Unnessary use of force IMO.

True, it could have been handled differently knowing what they know now. Think in their shoes however, uncooperative individual, no knowledge of his history, weapons he may have on him, etc. They were simply protecting themselves. I'm not per se approving of the actions taken, but, under the circumstances they got the job done.
Reminds me of a time my uncle, a retired officer, was called to a disruptive complaint. When the subject began to fight him, and ultimately begin to choke him my uncle used his flashlight to subdue the subject. At court, he was asked how much force he used on the subject. His response was simply that he used the force necessary to unchoke himself.

We don't know all the grounds behind this incident, the video certainly wasn't the clearest and didn't start from the beginning of the incident as well. As with all these cases, we are merely stipulating the known facts after the fact with what we believe to be the truth in the incident.

1 Reply

@lowflyn,

It's just the way they went about subduing him that I don't agree with. They felt they were provoked, but these were college students. The students at the scene could have vouched for him. Why make a big deal out of the ID?
There are exceptions to campus rules. Maybe the school forgot who was paying the bills. Would they have treated a star athlete that way? Very Happy

From what I gather, they had him handcuffed. At that point they should have removed him the same way they remove protesters. The same way they eventually did. They over-reacted.

There was a better way to handle it, but the officers chose the most confrontational method.IMO

1 Reply

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed;7034 wrote:

It's just the way they went about subduing him that I don't agree with. They felt they were provoked, but these were college students. The students at the scene could have vouched for him. Why make a big deal out of the ID?
There are exceptions to campus rules. Maybe the school forgot who was paying the bills. Would they have treated a star athlete that way?

From what I gather, they had him handcuffed. At that point they should have removed him the same way they remove protesters. The same way they eventually did. They over-reacted.

There was a better way to handle it, but the officers chose the most confrontational method.IMO

Quote:

It's just the way they went about subduing him that I don't agree with. They felt they were provoked, but these were college students.

They didn't feel anything, there were provoked!

Quote:

The students at the scene could have vouched for him.

Vouching for some one is not an ID, to be there you must present an ID when asked. What if no one in there new him? What next, phone a friend?

Quote:

Why make a big deal out of the ID?

You should ask the tazed kid, why did he make a big deal our of presenting his ID? Security didn't make a big deal he did. your losing site of who made the first mistake.

Quote:

There are exceptions to campus rules.

Yeah, maybe if he had co-operated in the first place. But that is not how it went was it?

Quote:

Maybe the school forgot who was paying the bills.

Maybe you prefer security didn't do its job?

Quote:

Would they have treated a star athlete that way?

Depends on if he refused to show his ID. Would he chance not playing for such a minor infraction getting blownout of proportion? I think not.

Quote:

From what I gather, they had him handcuffed. At that point they should have removed him the same way they remove protesters. The same way they eventually did. They over-reacted.

I've seen them remove protester with teargas, battons, high pressure hoses, cops in full riot gear. Did you see how many other students were willing to get involved? Yet you saw no threat, strange? Cause and effect falls squarely on the offender which was not the cops.

Quote:

There was a better way to handle it, but the officers chose the most confrontational method.IMO

No the offender chose by defying security in the first place. It's not an opinion, it's a fact.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Cool. We have an in-house lawyer.:cool:

1 Reply

@tumbleweed cv,

tumbleweed;7036 wrote:

Cool. We have an in-house lawyer.:cool:

No, just some one who understand logic and the law.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

It's your interpretation of the law. It's an opinion.Just like everyone else stated theirs.

0 Replies

@Brent cv,

When emotion is left out of it there is only one story told. Your emotion says it is excessive force. My logic says different. You forgive the kids transgressions and go straight to the cops. Logical, i think not.

1 Reply

@Drnaline,

Drnaline;7040 wrote:

When emotion is left out of it there is only one story told. Your emotion says it is excessive force. My logic says different. You forgive the kids transgressions and go straight to the cops. Logical, i think not.

Your logic is based on opinion.

You need to post case laws to prove your point is anything other than your opinion of the event.

My opinion isn't based on emotion or forgivness.

A jailhouse law degree isn't very convincing. It certainally isn't proof of anything.

1 Reply

UCLA Cops Taser Student Repeatedly... Outragous Actions.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know