AsburySkinsFan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 This punk was wrong and deliberately provoked them (gauging only from the video). Even if this were the case and it seems it might be, the police should have risen above it, instead of allowing themselves to be provoked into violence against the student. Makes one kinda wonder if the police felt free to do this sort of thing in a library on the campus of UCLA, then what do they feel free to do on the streets at night.:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
project myu Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 The cops have a legal right to ask for the ID. They do so to make sure people are authorized to be where they are at a late hour. Not showing them the ID under those circumstances can be a criminal act, depending upon the laws in force, not complying with legal directions by the officer could also be a criminal act. Sorry, no matter how you put it, not showing an ID in this scenario is not a criminal act. A criminal act is defined as what... Committing a crime? This fellow is not going to be a charged for a felony or a misdemeanor for not showing his ID. Yes they do, but when the suspect starts with the non-compliance ad discourtesies, it's pretty much all we can ask that the cops show any restraint at all. If they cross the line first, that's a completely different issue, and as an earlier respondent suggested, comply and then sue them afterwards is a better bet. This punk was wrong and deliberately provoked them (gauging only from the video). Read the article. Read the witness accounts. The student in question was already leaving when the cops decided to user a taser on him. The cops didn't show any restraint. The student was leaving and they used a taser on him. When another student asked for their badge numbers, they threatened to use a taser on her, too. Whether the punk was wrong or provoked them is not the question. The question is did any of it warrant the use of a taser. The answer is no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
project myu Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Even if this were the case and it seems it might be, the police should have risen above it, instead of allowing themselves to be provoked into violence against the student. Makes one kinda wonder if the police felt free to do this sort of thing in a library on the campus of UCLA, then what do they feel free to do on the streets at night.:doh: I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
project myu Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Furthermore, I don't see any student witness accounts supporting any of the actions that the cops did. Meanwhile, I only see them talking about how disgusting the whole scene was and how it was a disgrace what the cops did. I wonder why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 http://michellemalkin.com/ I watched the taped you had posted on your blog about the UCLA officer. I am a police officer, as well as a trainer in situations similar to this. What the officer did wrong was continue to ask the subject for compliance. I can tell by his (the officer’s) actions and his words that he is so afraid of doing the “wrong” thing that he has let the safety and well being of both himself and the others in the area become secondary. Police officers across the country are taught to take action quickly and most importantly “don’t’ do it like they do in California.” In other places without the PC police, that guy would have been jacked up and carried out in under 30 seconds, without tasers, noise, or video. It is a very simple principle: 1+1… if a person uses one type of resistance, a police officer (even in California) is justified in using a force GREATER than that of the offender. If you say NO, then I can lay hands on you! If you fight, I can pepper spray, taser, even hit with a stick! If you have a knife or a club, I can shoot you. Police officers that attempt to match a person’s resistance with the same amount of force all to often end up in litigation or dead. I always ask new recruits, “Would you rather hit a person with your nightclub one time as hard as you can in the leg and gain control, OR hit him softly (the pc version) over and over until he gives up. Inevitably, new recruits are afraid to answer until I add…” don’t forget a TV camera is recording.” One solid strike is usually all it takes to gain compliance from someone like the offender in the video, and by the time that is over the folks with the cameras don’t even have time to push record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Furthermore, I don't see any student witness accounts supporting any of the actions that the cops did. Meanwhile, I only see them talking about how disgusting the whole scene was and how it was a disgrace what the cops did. I wonder why. http://michellemalkin.com/ I have been a long-time fan of your blog and am presently a freshman at UCLA. Clearly, the recent use of a Tazer by UCPD officers to subdue a student refusing to leave the library has caused quite a stir, and I thought I might provide you with a bit more information on the incident, as well as the zeitgeist of the campus. First and foremost, I wish to clarify that, regardless of what some might attempt to claim, it is absurd to believe that Mr. Tabatabainejad was targeted based on his race or ethnicity. Random ID card checks are standard procedure in Powell Library after 11 PM, to ensure the safety of students. Furthermore, these checks were performed by Community Service Officers (CSOs), not UCPD officers. CSOs are UCLA students hired by UCPD to aide in security and service activities, and to support UCPD. Thus, Mr. Tabatabainejad was the subject of a very ordinary, very standard ID card check by his own, fellow students. He failed to produce an ID, so the CSOs requested he leave (as they would of anyone without an ID). Of course, the situation deteriorated from there and the chain of events from there is detailed (albeit in a rather biased manner) by the Daily Bruin. It appear to me that the facts of this case speak for themselves in justifying the UCPD’s actions. In any case, I simply wished to stress that it is wholly fallacious to claim the Mr. Tabatabainejad was the target of racism or some kind of profiling. The attitude towards the incident on campus is frankly difficult to judge. Clearly, my evaluation of the situation is somewhat biased, simply because I am a conservative Republican, and a large portion of my friends are as well. However, I believe that a substantial minority of students believe that the UCPD acted justly and that Mr. Tabatabainejad was so utterly unreasonable, and frankly dangerous, that the use of a Tazer was fully justified. Many of the students I have spoken to follow this line of reasoning and frankly have similar sentiments, in regards to supporting the UCPD officers. Regrettably, we have a decided liberal bent here at UCLA, as most colleges nowadays do. This accompanies popular and common anti-authority beliefs which, in some of the more extreme cases, manifests as a bizarre anti-police attitude. Thankfully, these more extremist beliefs are not as commonly held as one might think, and there has not been a violently anti-authority reaction to the incident on campus. Nonetheless, a large portion of students (likely a majority) believes that the officers acted with "unreasonable or disproportionate force," and I have already seen posters and ads for civil rights protests and other associated anti-police nonsense (I'm frankly unsure which civil rights they plan to protest in support of. The right to resist arrest, perhaps?). In any case, although a majority of students appear on the face of things to support Mr. Tabatabainejad, I do want the word to get out that most of these students are not frothing lunatic anarchists (though we certainly do have a few of those). Moreover, I want you and your readers to know that there is a very good sized minority of students here at UCLA who support the police in these matters and who support the rule of law. Despite the best efforts of a few of our professors, we're not all ultra-liberals here in college. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuckinphilly1 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 I'm starting to wonder what the he** what this Country is coming to. I surely agree that the given the hour and from what I know of the circumstance that the Patriot Act should have allowed the "cops" to find out the identity of the kid getting tasered. Does that mean he should've been tasered, HE** NO!!! Three "cops" should've easily been able to remove the kid/student, find out his identity and then fine him for whatever they fined him for. I have started to wonder lately why this Country was founded with so many of our freedoms being taken away. Comparing this to Nazi Germany is a little far fetched but the English Rule maybe..... I will admit to not knowing much about history though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 I'm starting to wonder what the he** what this Country is coming to. I surely agree that the given the hour and from what I know of the circumstance that the Patriot Act should have allowed the "cops" to find out the identity of the kid getting tasered. Does that mean he should've been tasered, HE** NO!!! Three "cops" should've easily been able to remove the kid/student, find out his identity and then fine him for whatever they fined him for. I have started to wonder lately why this Country was founded with so many of our freedoms being taken away. Comparing this to Nazi Germany is a little far fetched but the English Rule maybe..... I will admit to not knowing much about history though. Then how are you making your comparision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuckinphilly1 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Sarge.....you have me confused, I'm guessing the post of "being a freshman at UCLA" was a cut and paste? The post above says you're a Police Officer????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Mass, you are either insane or full of it. Poll? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuckinphilly1 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Then how are you making your comparision? Not to be confrontation Sarge but....I don't know, our NATIONAL ATHEM, Land of the FREE Home of the BRAVE???? The fact that from what I know about history is that the Revolutionary War was a group of great people standing up to a suppressive Government???? Listen, I know we need law but IMO, if something harms me and nobody else then there doesn't need a law against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuckinphilly1 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Sarge?????? Waiting on answers to both posts????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Sarge.....you have me confused, I'm guessing the post of "being a freshman at UCLA" was a cut and paste? The post above says you're a Police Officer????? They were cut and paste off the site I linked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Sorry, no matter how you put it, not showing an ID in this scenario is not a criminal act. A criminal act is defined as what... Committing a crime? This fellow is not going to be a charged for a felony or a misdemeanor for not showing his ID. You are incorrect. After 11:00 PM, merely being in the library without University ID is trespass. Those officers certainly have a right to determine if someone is or is not committing a crime. Now, the punishment for trespass is either to be escorted outside, or to be arrested pending the filing of charges. It's not assault. But yes, those officers had not only the right, but the duty, to check IDs of everybody in that library. It's part of the job they were hired for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuckinphilly1 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 They were cut and paste off the site I linked Both??? So you're not a Police Officer??? I didn't go to the links.... I have read your Sig many times and have to both agree and disagree with it. Going to war over our freedom is something worth fighting for, in today's age it seems as though we're fighting over God's word-------I typed a lot more in this post about it but think religion doesn't really belong in this topic. IMO, this kid/student thought his Freedom was being violated and stood up to the "cops." Because of the Patriot Act and in today's world I feel the "cops" deserved to take some sort of action but went WAY OVER THE LINE with what they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Poll? I'd be more than happy to, but my thread creation privledges have been revoked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuckinphilly1 Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 I'd be more than happy to, but my thread creation privledges have been revoked. What type of poll???? excessive force/or not......or if that one guy's an idiot??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 What type of poll???? excessive force/or not......or if that one guy's an idiot??? Considering that I am the "idiot" in question... The poll Larry was suggesting would question whether I'm insane of full of ****. Personally, I get the feeling I know how the poll results would turn out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
project myu Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 http://michellemalkin.com/ Not a witness account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
project myu Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 You are incorrect. After 11:00 PM, merely being in the library without University ID is trespass. Those officers certainly have a right to determine if someone is or is not committing a crime. Now, the punishment for trespass is either to be escorted outside, or to be arrested pending the filing of charges. It's not assault. But yes, those officers had not only the right, but the duty, to check IDs of everybody in that library. It's part of the job they were hired for. Are you saying that he is guilty of trespassing and would be charged with a misdemeanor or felony? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
project myu Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Sorry, but I just watched the video again and laughed my butt off. It's that ridiculous. Could you imagine? Officer: STAND UP. Rosa Parks: ... Officer: STAND UP. Rosa Parks: ... *BZZZT* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Sorry, but I just watched the video again and laughed my butt off. It's that ridiculous. Could you imagine?Officer: STAND UP. Rosa Parks: ... Officer: STAND UP. Rosa Parks: ... *BZZZT* Would that be better or worse than... Officer: Sorry ma'am but you can't get into the clinic. Pregnant Woman: Why Not? Officer: Well these protestors have blocked the entry and won't leave. Pregnant Woman: Well, move them. Officer: Sorry, ma'am we're not allowed to use that sort of force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
project myu Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Would that be better or worse than...Officer: Sorry ma'am but you can't get into the clinic. Pregnant Woman: Why Not? Officer: Well these protestors have blocked the entry and won't leave. Pregnant Woman: Well, move them. Officer: Sorry, ma'am we're not allowed to use that sort of force. Worse. The pregnant woman is not in any hurry, LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 Sorry, but I just watched the video again and laughed my butt off. It's that ridiculous. Could you imagine?Officer: STAND UP. Rosa Parks: ... Officer: STAND UP. Rosa Parks: ... *BZZZT* Wow, that would have changed the Civil Rights movement for sure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted November 17, 2006 Share Posted November 17, 2006 As usual, we are just talking past each other. Some of us want to talk about whether people can refuse to cooperate with the police. Others want to talk about whether handcuffed people should be tazered over and over while lying on the ground. If anyone mentions the first item, their ideological opponents jump to item 2. If anyone mentions the second item, their ideological opponents jump to item 1. This is the Tailgate in an nutshell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.