Thread: Why did that guy get tased?

Originally Posted by Alric

As for it being a public forum. A forum implies discussion, not a lecture. So when you open the floor to questions, you put yourself at risk for people asking questions you may not like, and possibly even ranting.

He said it himself that he broke the rules. I don't know specifically which ones, because I don't know what the rules of a forum usually are. Nonetheless, I imagine it was related to him ranting and never listening to anything Kerry says in response. I would assume this because the people there were interested in hearing from Kerry, not a random student's lecture.

And as for the police going too far... what would've been better? Talking to him got nowhere. Cutting his mic and escorting him caused him to get physical. They tried for a while to just pull him out, but with him resisting, he ended up on the ground and still resisting. At which point, what else should they have done, honestly? Should they have pulled out batons? Guns? Pepper spray?

I have a hard time seeing the police's actions as over-reactive, when Andrew was the one who started pushing, shoving, jumping, and yelling; not the police.

They should have escorted him from the building obviously. How bloody hard can it be, there were at least 5 cops there.

Quite clearly an extremely painful device intended for decapacitating dangerous individuals in extremely dangerous circumstances is not warranted here, and if you think otherwise you should be hanging your head in shame really, for having a very warped view of how a police force should be allowed to operate, and the reasons for that.

Originally Posted by Xei

They should have escorted him from the building obviously. How bloody hard can it be, there were at least 5 cops there.

Quite clearly an extremely painful device intended for decapacitating dangerous individuals in extremely dangerous circumstances is not warranted here, and if you think otherwise you should be hanging your head in shame really, for having a very warped view of how a police force should be allowed to operate, and the reasons for that.

They tried and he resisted too much. The video cuts around 2:13, so you don't see how he goes from being escorted out to on the floor. However, it's obvious that they weren't intending to subdue him further until they couldn't take him out, even in handcuffs.

EDIT: Actually, the second video I posted shows that he tried to break away from the police right by the door and they grabbed him, ending up on the floor.

Look at it from the police officers' point of view it kinda goes like this:

Phase 1: Guy is thanking Kerry before asking a question.

Phase 2: Guy is taking a little long to get to his question. Ask him to get to the point.

Phase 3: Guy is ranting, not getting to his questions, and clearly not listening to Kerry's replies. Cut his mic, let's just take him outside and have the forum continue normally.

Phase 4: Guy is resisting, violently, from being escorted outside. Continue to pull him out, arrest if necessary.

Phase 5: Guy is inciting a riot by calling out for help, encouraging people to fight the police. Get him out quickly by any means.

Phase 6: Guy is on ground, resisting arrest. He won't turn over. All he's doing is calling out for help and resisting more.

Phase 7: Guy is handcuffed and still resisting arrest. Use taser to subdue him.

Phase 8: Guy is subdued and we can now take him outside.


So I must ask: where did they go wrong, and what would have been the better alternative?

Originally Posted by Xei

They should have escorted him from the building obviously. How bloody hard can it be, there were at least 5 cops there.

Quite clearly an extremely painful device intended for decapacitating dangerous individuals in extremely dangerous circumstances is not warranted here, and if you think otherwise you should be hanging your head in shame really, for having a very warped view of how a police force should be allowed to operate, and the reasons for that.

I believe it was warranted. They did attempt to simply escort him at first, but he resisted heavily, kicking and swinging trying to get away. He continued to resist even when they told him they'd tase him.

It can in fact be difficult for even five people to subdue one. Do you know why police use tasers? Because they use the tool of pain to incapacitate the individual without causing any long-term effects. They do their job efficiently, the guy didn't resist at all after he was tased. If they hadn't tased him, he would have continued on to resist. What were they supposed to do? Hit him in the side of the head with their ASP batons?

Perhaps a misconception is that he was arrested for ranting and taking too long to ask his question, which isn't the case. He was escorted out of the forum for that. However, he started pushing, resisting, and calling out for help which is inciting a riot. That is why he was arrested.

If he had simply cooperated, they probably would've gone outside and they would've said something like "This is a public forum, not your time to preach. If you want to lecture people about your ideas, then hold your own forum." Then they'd probably just let him go. If they intended to arrest him from the start, they probably would've had cuffs out when they first started escorting him away. The cuffs didn't come out until he was on the floor though.

Originally Posted by Vampyre

However, he started pushing, resisting, and calling out for help which is inciting a riot. That is why he was arrested.

That's considered 'inciting a riot'?

Originally Posted by Vampyre

If he had simply cooperated, they probably would've gone outside and they would've said something like "This is a public forum, not your time to preach. If you want to lecture people about your ideas, then hold your own forum." Then they'd probably just let him go. If they intended to arrest him from the start, they probably would've had cuffs out when they first started escorting him away. The cuffs didn't come out until he was on the floor though.

He definitely should have cooperated with the officers, but still, tasering a guy on the ground encircled by 4-5 officers is a bit ridiculous.


Edit: Fuck, I didn't mean for this too be a separate post. If someone could merge this and my previous post that would be way cool.

Originally Posted by Catbus

but still, tasering a guy on the ground circled by 4-5 officers is a bit ridiculous.

Maybe they thought he was a Ron Paul supporter lol [/joke]

Originally Posted by Catbus

That's considered 'inciting a riot'?

He definitely should have cooperated with the officers, but still, tasering a guy on the ground encircled by 4-5 officers is a bit ridiculous.

Yes, inciting a riot is encouraging others to riot or otherwise violently oppose police. Him pushing and shoving and jumping around shows that he felt the need to aggressively oppose police, and by calling out for help, he was encouraging other people to do the same. The only thing worse he could've done, would be to actually attack the officers.

Just imagine what would've happened if someone responded to his cries for help and started attacking the police. Then the police would have to retaliate against that person as well, and it would just snowball into a riot scenario.

Whether or not you think it's easy to handle someone from resisting arrest shouldn't matter. I can assure you, it's not as easy as it sounds, even with 5 people. Nonetheless, the officers tried and it failed so they proceeded to other methods. After being tased, he stopped resisting as much, and he didn't suffer any long-term injuries. Thus, the taser was effective in doing exactly what it's meant for.

Once again I must ask: "What would have been the better solution?" If you're only response is: "They should've carried him. There was 5 of them." That's insufficient, because (regardless of your opinion about how easy it should be) they tried that and it failed.

Originally Posted by Vampyre

Once again I must ask: "What would have been the better solution?" If you're only response is: "They should've carried him. There was 5 of them." That's insufficient, because (regardless of your opinion about how easy it should be) they tried that and it failed.

I'm not wholly convinced that they fully tried to simply grab his arms, cuff him, and carry him out, as all the video shows is him encircled by officers. The fact that they 'failed' to cuff him (which I'm not convinced that they did) could also be attributed to the fact that one officer had his taser pointed 'at his chest,' instead of putting his effort into securing his arms.

I dunno, the kid definitely had it coming for resisting, but I still think they could have subdued him without the taser.