Talking about the Skull and Bones will get you tasered.

[ForksLaPush]

...asked police to escort him out of the auditorium, saying, "He had said enough,"

The organizer's view that "he had said enough" was sufficient to invoke the police to remove a speaker from a public forum, at a State University?

Never mind the fact that he behaved like a spoiled child, and that the police appeared to use the tazer for their own convenience rather than to stop a threat. Before that, at the point when they are asked to escort the guy out because of what he was saying, shouldn't the police have acted with a little less urgency? The guy was nowhere close to starting a riot, so what was the rush?

 

[snaptafar]

He was told if he didn't comply he would get tased. He didn't comply and guess what...

Stop or I'll shoot.

 

[hammer4nc]

Notice, this guy started with a perfect complement toward Kerry for speaking...the event organizers had no qualms wasting their valuable mic time as long as someone was sucking up and fawning on Kerry.

Only when the questions became embarrassing, did the authorities step in. Kill the mic and drag this guy away...Clearly, this is a question of stifling discussion based on CONTENT. The message is clear...please, softball questions only, any dissent must be confined to "free speech zones", out in the middle of a fenced in area, half a mile away from anyone. Sad, sad, SAD day for America!:barf:

The contention that this guy was "infringing on the event" by asking his questions is bizarre. Professional political campaigners like Kerry could have handled tough questions without missing a beat...and indeed, Kerry was in the process of answering when the handlers swooped in.

Can we agree, in the interests of equal protection under the law; we should adopt this force escalation model for the presidential debates? A line of troopers standing behind the candidates with their arms crossed...whenever a candidate exceeds his allotted time (red light violation), officers start pulling on his wrists, stage right.

The image of Joe Biden or John Edwards flopping like a fish after being tasered would help boost ratings in the debates, don't you think? QUIT RESISTING, HILLARY!!!

As usual, we have those who will justify .gov violence, whatever.

 

[Musketeer]

This is not a free speech issue. He had his say and was not satisfied with it. This was an open forum and when he decided to hog all the time to himself he then infringed on other's right to speak.

He refused to leave and it was obvious the only way he would go is by force. The police can either go to the ground with him fighting or taser him. I see no reason for a LEO to have to get into a physical confrontation with this moron. Taser him and collect his body.

 

[Musketeer]

This was a staged event. The expectation at any such event is you get to speak only so long as the organizers alot. If you don't like that stage your own event and invite Kerry, you can then rant at him all day. If you want to continue bad mouthing him go ahead but do it outside the event.

 

[applesanity]

The title of this thread is misleading.

Humor me. I read this on CNN, then saw it on the evening news, and my initial (and current) reaction was, "wow, this event is gonna stir up a whole lotta fuss over nothing."

This fuss is so ridiculous that as soon as I heard that guy screaming like a baby.... I burst out laughing. Are there going to be riots? Will the National Guard get called in? Will Korean store owners have to sit outside their businesses toting shotguns?

Sooner or later, (you know it) the consipiracy theorists are gonna start popping up everywhere. Just imagine the explosion of ranting and raving on blogs everywhere.

I'm just trying to stay one step ahead.

 

[Eghad]

He was on private property and asked to leave.

He refused to do so and resisted the officers in the performance of their duty.

The officers are legally allowed to use the appropriate level of force to get the subject to comply. He even assualted several officers in the process.

You have several officers holding him down and he still refuses to comply. I would imagine that after being subdued by several officers the next step up is the taser which was applied.

no great mystery involved.

 

[applesanity]

He was on private property and asked to leave.

Well... it was a hall at a public university.... does it still count?

 

[Eghad]

Not if you are aksed to leave which the university has the right to do.

 

[Eghad]

I suppose what most folks are saying that as long as free speech is involved anything goes.

I wonder how they would feel if some antigun neighbors showed up in their front yard with anti gun signs and yelling and screaming?

 

[4V50 Gary]

In determining the speech permitted, the court first determines the type of forum involved. The University is not a traditional public forum. It is a limited public forum. Absolute free speech does not apply.

The school was allowed to establish rules like time limits (or even # of questions). The student speaker's time was over. He exceeded his time and wanted to preface his question and was asked to leave. When he refused, he was escorted, resisted and then attempted to elude the officers. He continued resisting even while on the ground. He was given numerous verbal warnings. He did not heed those warnings. He was shown the taser and ordered to comply or be tasered. He did not comply. He was tasered.

Certainly it could have been done differently, but carrying out a resisting arrestee could result in even greater physical force used and injury to the student or the police.

Remember what the Court said. Police actions should not be judged from the hindsight of a Monday night quarterback. Rather, the standards by which it should be judged is the perspective of a like trained officer in like conditions. Thus, would a reasonable police officer given the same level of training and experience do what those officers had done?

 

[jfrey123]

The kid was trying to be a jerk from question one. He was trying to make a fool of Kerry by showing his hypocracy. There is quite a range of reasons this is wrong, and IMHO he was Disturbing the Peace and being a Public Nuisance. That is the reason he was removed by police.


He was resisting. When police ask you to do something, and you refuse, you are resisting. When they put hands on you and try to move you, and you push back against them, you are resisting. It doesn't matter how many times he screams, "I'M NOT RESISTING!", nor how many times he begs not to be tazed, HE WAS RESISTING.


I fully agree with the Rodney King comment back on page one. The tazer has become an effective tool for law enforcement to control a suspect. This device allows them to apply force without risking a whooping on themselves, and without having to give a perp a black eye. This tool levels the playing field when a 130lb female officer needs to put a 250lb drunk man down on his chest. And police are very clear when it comes out, "Stop resisting or YOU WILL GET TAZED!" This kid was trying to be his own political activist, and knew it was coming, but he still refused to comply.

When black political activists were fighting for equal rights through peaceful assembly and protests, they were arrested because they were breaking laws of the time. Same thing happened as women fought for equal rights and to end their sufferage. When people try to make a political stand, they need to accept the consequences for their actions, especially when said actions begin to violate the laws of our nation.


This guy was infringing on the rights of everyone else there: Freedom to Peacefully Assemble. He resisted police action. He got warned, then tazed. This is a good taze in my book, and I think we should be outraged that the police were placed on administrative leave.

 

[The Tourist]

This guy was infringing on the rights of everyone else there

If so, then you'd better come to Wisconsin and taser me immediately.

A free society is sloppy, ill-conceived and loud. Additionally, our right covers unpopular political speech. And I make those ideals available whenever I can.

Look at what I did this week. I wrote two letters, one of which I know our Governor Doyle personally. I don't like his politcal stand or his conduct. He places his hand on The Bible, taking a vow to protect me, and then does everything he can to neutralize my enumerated rights.

I make sport of him whenever I can. In fact, if Governor Doyle was to make a speech, I could be the personification of this kid.

Same with the helmet law. We came to Madison at least once per year, an ever growing sea of bikes so large that there was not enough room to park them around our Capitol Building. That building is the duplicate of The Washington D.C. Capitol building.

We rode in defiance of the law. We removed our helmets. We protested, we spoke in their very chambers. We voted.

In other words, we pulled every smarmy action out of the hat possible until the law was repealed.

I make no apologies for any action. Just because you are a national known politician on a podium does not mean you are free from criticism or action.

Would you like me to take off my leather jacket before you fire the electrodes?

 

[joab]

Sooner or later, (you know it) the consipiracy theorists are gonna start popping up everywhere. Just imagine the explosion of ranting and raving on blogs everywhere.

All you have to do is look in this thread

I used to think that if there were two ways to look at an incident then the government would get the short end
But this video shows clear violent resisting and non compliance, but still we have people who are trying to twist what is right before their eyes
I have a strong suspicion that some of these guys are not even bothering to watch the video before they comment

 

[jfrey123]

Responding with respect in my "indoor voice"

Additionally, our right covers unpopular political speech.

You can't shout fire in a movie theater, nor bomb on an airplane. There are thousands of places in our society where speech is restricted for the safety and civility of the population. This guy had his time to talk, and was removed for trying to cause a scene. Would we be defending his right to speak if he was shouting "Join me brothers! Execute Kerry!"??

Your letters did nothing to ruin a public forum, and were just in my opinion. Your right to life, liberty, and the persuit ends when it infringes on mine. Those people were congregated to listen to Kerry's speech, not this kid Tuesday Morning Quarterback election results that happened 3 years ago. Kid got removed. Tazering was the side effect of his resistance.

We all can say what we want, YES! But I don't expect to be able to stand in the road in front of a presidential motorcade with a hotdog vendor style sign that says "Death to BUSH! IRAQ was a MISTAKE!" without being detained for questioning by the secret service. Time and a place for everything.

We rode in defiance of the law. We removed our helmets.

That's awesome and I'm glad to see you got the job done getting that law repealed. However, it's different from this case. The only one affected by your lawless helmetless riding was yourself. You weren't infringing on anyone else's rights by doing so, even by setting a large event at the capitol building in your state. Now, if you were holding speeches, and a helmet law supporter in the crowd started shouting "Pro-Helmet" garbage, I would expect him to be removed if he caused enough of a scene. It's not his place to ruin your peaceful protest.

If you had recieved a ticket while riding there for violating the no helmet law, while that would certainly suck, I would say you are still responsible for said citation. When choosing to violate the law, you must accept the consequences. However, when a law is unjust or pointless, the population must band together, like your group did, and get the law changed.


Please, leave your leathers on friend. I see no reason for you to be tazed

 

[TwoXForr]

Personally I do not see the fuss of being "tazed" I had to do it to myself when working in corrections, and while being painful leaves no lasting harm or damage. Heck I would take a tazer any day of the week and twice on Sunday rather then being hit with a baton or Pepper Spray (hate the stuff).

Tazing is fast and easy and works on any part of the body, the agencies I have worked for considered it just slightly higher than the use of pressure points or pain compliance techniques. No hospital visit for this kid, no damage just the memory of the pain.

Would there have been an uproar at all if they had thrown a wrist lock or some other pain compliance technique on the individual, no, because it would not have been "sexy" enough for tv. But bring out that big bad electrical device that makes that terrrifying arc and clicking noise and it is front page news.

From watching some of the coverage it appears he went over the time limit, was asked to leave then he would not, and appropiate force was used to get him to comply with the legal orders of the cops.

 

[Musketeer]

If someone wants to ramble on they are free to do so, on there own dime! This was an organized forum, not a crowd of people on the street. This was hosted by someone and those who attended did so with the implied requirement that they conform to the rules of the event.

The kid got to make his statements, he had his time, the organizers said it was over and he was then told to leave. At that point, refusing to do so, he was trespassing. He then refused physically to comply with teh LEO's order to leave. He should be charged with tresspassing and resisting arrest and be thankfull the officers used a taser on him rather than tackling him to the ground and in the course of doings so possibly inflicting lasting physical injuries upon him (not intentionally but when people are going to be forced to comply there is a chance for injury).

 

[The Tourist]

what is right before their eyes

I also believe that this touches on one of my pet peeves. People believe that they have to "like" someone, that there is "a good fit," and we should all work toward 'consensus.'

You don't have to like someone to get valuable work done.

Let me also point out another aspect.

Clearly, people don't like this kid. He's whiny, he booby-trapped Kerry, he made a spectacle. I'm not sure I like this kid, myself.

But suppose Schwarzenegger was there. Suppose Arnie stood up, and said the very same things to Kerry. And in actually, the Govenator would have probably laid it on much thicker and much worse, and peppered Kerry with ego blasting humor.

Trust me, Arnie would not be tasered.

And if some foolish idiot would have jammed electrodes into Schwarzenegger for the exact same act, his job would be gone before Arnie hit the floor.

Unless you truly believe that we rule by oligarchy, the act violated The First.

 

[Musketeer]

Unless you truly believe that we rule by oligarchy, the act violated The First.

No it doesn't. He was forced to leave by LEOs when he became a tresspasser; there without permission. Just because you are in a public gatherring does not mean it is "free". This was an organized event. There were rules goverrning behaviour and attendence like at any such event. When your time is up it is up. If you refuse to leave you are now trespassing.

The whole Arnold argument is bogus. First, the governor of CA is not going to stand up in a crowd at a Kerry rally and bable on ad nauseum. Second, if orderred to leave by the police he would have. If he did the same level of force would have been justified. It probably would not have happenned for political reasons. This is the real world and he is the Gov. of CA. That does not mean that this kid's rights were trampled, only that the police would not have carried out their duties with Arnold.

The 1A applies to GOVERNMENTAL censure of free speech. That was not the case here. The managing entity of the event decided he had said enough, as was their right. When he refused to leave he then broke a law completely unrelated to the 1A and he was properly handled by the police.

 

[JuanCarlos]

The 1A applies to GOVERNMENTAL censure of free speech. That was not the case here. The managing entity of the event decided he had said enough, as was their right. When he refused to leave he then broke a law completely unrelated to the 1A and he was properly handled by the police.

Well, if the managing entity of the event was a public university, in my mind it starts to get a little fuzzy there. Though I'm sure the law clears it up one way or the other.

Regardless, even assuming a public university is determined to be a governmental agent, I'm pretty sure this wouldn't be a 1A issue; he was not being censured due to the content of his speech (at least in theory), but rather because he went over the time allotted him...which in a forum where limited time is available and others are to have a chance to speak is not unreasonable.