Why do police officers use tasers? Because they work. What does that mean? That means that the subject is subdued.

To tase the guy, then demand he get up when it is physically impossible, and then tase him again when he doesn't (cannot) comply, is torture.

If these cops had tased him once, cuffed him and then brought him in, like they've done for two hundred years before tasers were invented, no one would have said anything. But multiple tasings, in concert with threatening the bystanders with tasings, is police brutality, period.

If they couldn't have brought him in without tasing him, they aren't cops.

Remember: we were put on this earth to serve and protect. Not beat someone into submission.

TASER-Related Deaths Increasingly Frequent

NEW YORK - March 28 - "[It was] the most horrendous experience [of my life]. At one point I just pretended like I was dead because I thought ... then they would stop." -- Patricia Skelly, who has a mental illness, and was shocked with a TASER between nine and 15 times while in jail and later in a hospital.

Sixty-one people died in 2005 after being shocked by law enforcement agency TASERs, a 27 percent increase from 2004's tally of 48 deaths, finds an Amnesty International study released today. Including 10 TASER-related deaths through mid-February of this year, at least 152 people have died in the United States since June 2001 after being shocked with the weapons.

"Despite a lack of independent research on TASER safety, police officers are using these weapons as a routine force tool -- rather than as a weapon of last resort," said Dr. William F. Schulz, Executive Director of Amnesty International USA (AIUSA). "These weapons have a record that's growing longer each week -- and it's not a good one. The increasingly frequent TASER-related deaths underscore the need for an independent, rigorous and impartial inquiry into their use."

link

NEW YORK - March 28 - "[It was] the most horrendous experience [of my life]. At one point I just pretended like I was dead because I thought ... then they would stop." -- Patricia Skelly, who has a mental illness, and was shocked with a TASER between nine and 15 times while in jail and later in a hospital.

Sixty-one people died in 2005 after being shocked by law enforcement agency TASERs, a 27 percent increase from 2004's tally of 48 deaths, finds an Amnesty International study released today. Including 10 TASER-related deaths through mid-February of this year, at least 152 people have died in the United States since June 2001 after being shocked with the weapons.

"Despite a lack of independent research on TASER safety, police officers are using these weapons as a routine force tool -- rather than as a weapon of last resort," said Dr. William F. Schulz, Executive Director of Amnesty International USA (AIUSA). "These weapons have a record that's growing longer each week -- and it's not a good one. The increasingly frequent TASER-related deaths underscore the need for an independent, rigorous and impartial inquiry into their use."

link

As for the movie scenario, it was in response to the posters stating that the original offense was a non-violent crime and therefore should be ignore. The movie scenario just illustrated how stupid that argument is. The police would have not only the right to use physical and/or nonphysical means including the taser to remove me but an obligation to do so. Again, the taser is considered by many to be less violent than physical force.

“If you refuse to cooperate, you can be charged with resisting arrest and ignoring the lawful orders of a police officer. If you continue to resist, the police can forcible remove you.”

Which is precisely what many of us have been arguing in this UCLA case. It was the student’s refusals to cooperate that cause the commotion. I suspect that if they manhandle the student then the same people would argue that they should have use the taser especially if the student received injuries during the process.

I guess the next time I go to the movie; I walk in without paying then refuse to leave when the police show up. Then according to the posters, the police should just leave me alone or write me a ticket, which I won’t pay since I didn’t show my I.D. and it in itself is a non-violent crime.
Posted by: Wayne at November 20, 2006 15:16 Permalink

The police can arrest you, handcuff you and escort you to the police station.

If you threaten them physically, they can subdue you.

If you do not threaten the police physically, they cannot assault you with their person, their gun or their taser.

If you refuse to cooperate, you can be charged with resisting arrest and ignoring the lawful orders of a police officer. If you continue to resist, the police can forcible remove you. Still, they cannot strike you or shock you or shoot you to compel you to leave the building or take whatever action they require of you.

Your straw man movie theatre scenario fails to address the issue sin play in the ICLA library case.

Try screwing around with the German Polizei and you will find out real fast what a B.S. statement that is.

Many post keep stating that this was a non-violent crime and the police shouldn’t enforce it if it means escalating the situation. If you not going enforce non-violent crimes then why have the laws on the book in the first place. I guess the next time I go to the movie; I walk in without paying then refuse to leave when the police show up. Then according to the posters, the police should just leave me alone or write me a ticket, which I won’t pay since I didn’t show my I.D. and it in itself is a non-violent crime.

The kid didn’t get taser because he didn’t show I.D. but because he physically resisted. Passive resistance but resistance no less.

Ahh, the typical liberal response: If you don’t agree with me, you must be a moron.
Posted by: Todd at November 18, 2006

Since when is it "liberal" or "conservative" to expect campus police to use force responsibly?

The police are responsible for the civil rights of suspects (in this case a suspect of tresspassing of which he is not guilty.) The suspect was handcuffed. He was not a danger to himself, to bystanders or to the police. The police repeated use of a taser weapon aginst the suspect amounts to unjustified battery. The police have no reasonable claim to self sefense.

Todd, I don't think you're a moron. I think you're wrong. I could care less whether you're a liberal, conservative or Bush loving hating neo-con.

Th embassy won't care. Write the President of UCLA.

Reconsider your travel plans. Come to cradle of Liberty, Boston, MA. We still take civil liberties seriously.

whether or not the kid himself deserved to be tased, the cops proved themselves to be bad guys when they threatened to tase bystanders.

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/11/aclu-says-ucla-taser-cops-are-guilty.html

Oh, that's a good one.

For all I know the guy left Iran to get away from all the tasering he was experiencing over there. Or maybe he’s just an asshole/clever opportunist ($$)?

The point these liberals/students/naysayers/American citizens are making is that their perceived boundaries of police force had been crossed - into brutality - and not whether the cops should have been doing their job or not. Were the cops too forceful? And better yet, why?